Reaching peace with insurgent groups demonstrates to be a very difficult task; it seems that previous peace negotiations have failed because of the Taliban´s lack of interest in ending the war that stemmed from their deep involvement in the proxy war and illegal economy, which made them one of the richest guerrillas in the world. They, for example, have often used peace negotiations as a political tactic to rebuild and recollect themselves instead of as a serious attempt to achieve peace.
Taliban use peace negotiations as a tactic to receive compromises, not to end the war in Afghanistan. They do not believe that the opponent can neither be tricked, nor coerced. As a result, both sides shall settle down to negotiate in good faith, each seeking the best bargain possible under the circumstances.
In general, conflict is in the social sciences understood as inherent of human nature. What is not a “normal” feature however, is the escalation of such conflict into severe violence. Social scientists mention that rivalry and conflict are not reactions to objective conditions but that they rather arise from the definition of the situation. In other words, only when people feel oppressed they act against the oppressor, and this is exactly what the Taliban has tried to do after Bonn Conference in 2001: they saw themselves as oppressed by the political exclusion of Afghanistan
Taliban’s extreme religious Ideology
A close look at the Taliban today suggests that their leaders remain committed to an extreme religious ideology, an authoritarian political system, and the continuation of relations with militant groups that will not likely be acceptable to the current Afghan government and Afghan people, many Afghans, and many foreign governments. In addition, the United States announced on … it will drawdown all its troops by September 11, 2021. These realities make a lasting peace agreement with the Afghan government unlikely in the near future. In this author’s view, a precipitous U.S. withdrawal without a peace agreement between the Taliban and Afghan government would highly destabilize and would ultimately undermine U.S. national security interests and compromise Afghanistan’s achievements.
Does ideology matter in armed conflict?
Although, a glance at the most influential theories of conflict suggests not, since few accord ideologies much significance. However, in recent years, a growing wave of research has begun to link ideology with demonstrable effects on multiple forms of organized violence, including interstate conflict. The role of Ideology can certainly be overstated, since superficial ideological cleavages sometimes bear little resemblance to the underlying drivers of violence. But contentions that ‘ideologies are an important basis of conflict, and that neglecting ideology would leave major war-related phenomena unexplained are increasingly common. Ideology remains, however, a relative theoretical newcomer in recent conflict research.
Recent research has identified numerous effects that ideologies have on conflict processes. For example, ideologies influence actors threat perceptions. Actors appear more likely to see each other as threatening as ideological distances between them increase and extreme ideological constructions of certain groups as irreconcilably hostile provide critical rationales for mass violence or genocide.
The stance of Taliban’s negotiators in peace talks show that Taliban leaders generally support the establishment of a government by sharia and the creation of an Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan. They elevate the role of Islamic scholars that issue legal rulings on all aspects of daily life. The ulema play a particularly important role in monitoring society’s conformity with their view of the prescriptions of Islam and in conservatively interpreting religious doctrine.
The extreme interpretation of Islam by Taliban makes it tough for the group to align itself with the current realities of Afghanistan. According to the Taliban elections is against Islam; because Amirul Mumenin should be elected by the Ulema and not people. They have a different view about human rights and women rights; they consider the current women rights based on Afghanistan constitution against Islam. Taliban as a terrorist group whose ideology deeply distances them from other group of people and having an extreme ideological constructions of certain groups have provided them in the past critical rational for mass violence and genocide as they committed in Mazar e Sharif and parts of Afghanistan from south to north of the country. According to this mind set Taliban pursue war and overrunning Afghanistan. They are ready to kill many more to impose their extreme and terrorism ideology on other groups of people.
However, most important, ending the conflict could give way to a new political dimension in Afghanistan in which the opposition is not killed, but fought through political competition.  Finally, it presents a real chance at ending the violent legacy of Afghanistan and finally establishing the idea that politics is not inherently a bloody, violent ordeal. However, Extreme religious ideology of Taliban is a strong barrier against peace making and peace building in Afghanistan.