Afghanistan is a victim of terrorism and lost thousands of lives during the past decade. Government of Afghanistan continuously tries negotiating with the insurgents who show no mercy in killing innocent lives. Releasing Bagram prisoners is an another step to please the insurgents. The major question that arises in the minds of unarmed civilians is, “Is it possible to negotiate with extremist groups like Taliban?” What is the outcome of past efforts? More killings, more suicide attacks and more destruction!

Terrorism is seen as one of the major threats to security in 21st century. Finding a way-out or end to these acts is the prime concern of major actors at national and international political arena. Negotiating with terrorists has its implication on me and you as individuals and states and other actors.

Politicians and Scholars’ Point of Views

In the year 2003, US President George W. Bush declared that “You have got to be strong, not weak. The only way to deal with these people (terrorists) is to bring them to justice. You cannot talk to them. You cannot negotiate with them.”

Meanwhile, former NDS director, Mr. Amrullah Saleh believes that negotiating with Taliban gives the group legitimacy: “Negotiating with the Taliban after more than 10 years of fighting means giving legitimacy and space to militant extremism. It is also against NATO’s objective to starve militant extremism by defeating nexus of al Qaeda and Pakistan-backed Taliban.”

Paul Wilkinson, a leading scholar in the field of terrorism studies, wrote that it would be “totally unacceptable” for talks to be opened with the assailants who killed 58 tourists in Luxor, Egypt in 1997.

Scholars like Wilkinson and others argue that negotiating with terrorists will not resolve the conflict; on the contrary, it will incite more terrorism. The main argument used to reject negotiations with terrorists is that such an action would legitimize the terrorists and terrorism more broadly. Legitimacy is seen as the biggest obstacle against negotiating with terrorists.

Moreover, one of the main arguments put forward by scholars against engaging with terrorists is that negotiating with terrorists would mean legitimizing terrorist activities, goals and more importantly their means. Legitimizing terrorist groups and their actions would weaken the democratic quality of states and only serve to provoke more violence.

At the same time, Negotiations with terrorists can undermine the political system. Because it undermines other actors who use peaceful means in the political process and change which could be very dangerous for the society.

In a democratic society, there is space for participation and achieving political goals through legal and peaceful means. Democracies never give space for violent acts. Terrorists must never be rewarded for using violent means and negotiations with terrorists would give legitimacy to their act.

Evidence:

Based on the statistics from National Counterterrorism Center, US Department of State on Afghanistan from 2007 to 2011 shows the number of attacks has increased from 1,122 attacks to 2,872. Meantime, number of people killed, injured or kidnapped as a result of terrorism have doubled from 4,647 to 9,171.

It is evident that negotiating with Taliban is not successful. The Afghan government has been calling for negotiations with the insurgent Taliban. Since then, there is no development or improvement between the government and Taliban. Taliban have become stronger, become more lethal, increased number of attacks and suicides and there is a tremendous increase in the number of deaths and injuries. To my belief, releasing Taliban fighters from Bagram prison will lead to strengthen the group and prepare for more attacks.

References:

1.  Bush, George W., 2003. ‘President Bush, President Arroyo Hold Joint Press Conference’, White House press release
2. AmrullahSaleh, Why Negotiate With the Taliban? The Wall Street Journal
3. Harmonie, Toros, August 2008. ‘We Don’t Negotiate with Terrorists!’: Legitimacy and Complexity in Terrorist Conflicts, Security Dialogue vol. 39, no. 4
4. Wilkinson, Paul, 2001.  Terrorism versus Democracy: The Liberal State Response.  London:Frank Cass.
5. Neumann, Peter R., 2007. ‘Negotiating with Terrorists’, Foreign Affairs86(1): 128–139

Cited links:

National Counterterrorism Center: Annex of Statistical Information Country Reports on Terrorism 2011 - http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2011/195555.htm