Aspen Institute Brings Together the anti-Taliban Leaders

Afghanistan is going through a very critical juncture, as both international community and Afghans are concerned about the reversal of the whole achievements made over the last ten years of joint struggle and international assistance. Both Afghan and international actors are engaged in a process of exchanges of views in different fashions on how to maintain the progresses made and in the meanwhile move forward the democratic process in Afghanistan in order to make sure that the country does not descend into another cycle of chaos and ethnic conflicts .

As part of this effort, early this week, the Aspen Institute brought together anti-Taliban leaders in Berlin, Germany to discuss Afghanistan 2014: Opportunities and Challenges. This is part of the broader process of exchange of views that is going on at different state and not-state, regional and international levels on ways out of the ongoing stalemate in the war against terrorists and insurgent groups and how to reduce the potential for outbreak of further conflicts.

For instance, Germany hosted Bonn 2 conference last month and international community is looking forward to the Chicago Conference in May. These are the forums where ways and solutions for democratically stabilizing Afghan future are discussed.

The whole aim is to ensure that people in Afghanistan will have a secure and prosperous future through good governance and a representative power structure grounded in the popular will and votes. This is because we know that good governance is the art of modern sciences and consolidates the popular legitimacy of the government.

But unfortunately there are some circles that take these discussions and opinion sharing wrongly. For instance, the discussion on Afghanistan 2014: Opportunities and Challenges held by the Aspen Institute is being construed and interpreted by some circles and groups as separatist effort launched by the participating leaders, who really back in home represent a substantial constituency each.

What is known from this summit is that the leaders have discussed and shared their perspectives on the suggestion for opting for parliamentary democracy, decentralization of power and change in the electoral law.

Wisdom tells us that any country that opts for devolving power, amending electoral system to make it more effective and political party-oriented will further strengthen the pillars of democracy, at the heart of which lies popular sovereignty.

So Afghanistan is no exception. It will not be disintegrated by debates and discussions on systems and structures that have led to centralization of power in the hand of few and exclusion of people from the decision-making process.

It should be said that those who exaggerate in their reaction to an exchange of view forum are, in fact, sticking to a dictatorial attitude to shape all the political developments in their favor by hook or crook. In addition, having a different view does not make someone a traitor or separatist.

It is an unwise reaction and a dictatorial attitude towards a different view that can carry the potential for outbreak of a conflict and possibly a subsequent territorial fragmentation. If the leaders that have participated in the conference organized by the Aspen Institute were for disintegration, they would have disintegrated Afghanistan long back when they were ruling over different regions with political and military power.

So it is time to put aside conspiracy theories and dictatorial treatment of a different view and begin to subscribe to alternatives that can serve the purposes of persuading insurgents to come to the fold as well as ensure the country's permanent democratic political stability.