Taliban

Imagine if correspondents in late 1944 had reported the Battle of the Bulge, but without explaining that it was a turning point in the second world war. Or what if finance reporters had told the story of the AIG meltdown in 2008 without adding that it raised questions about derivatives and sub-prime mortgages that could augur a vast financial implosion? Most people would say that journalists had failed to provide the proper context to understand the news. Yet that’s routinely what media outlets do when it comes to outbreaks of anti-Christian persecution around the world, which is why the global war on Christians remains the greatest story never told of the early 21st century.

For the better part of a decade, Nato forces fought a bitter war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, which claimed the lives of thousands of troops - including 453 members of Britain’s Armed Forces – and left thousands more seriously maimed by roadside bombs and other devilish devices. So it is perfectly understandable that anyone who has had the least dealings with this ugly conflict, from politicians to the families and friends of those who participated, should recoil in horror at reports that senior members of the Taliban are now actively participating in negotiations that could ultimately see them become members of the Afghan government.

‘The NATO Commander in Eastern Afghanistan has said that this year 54 foreign bases have already been closed...’ Last December Channel 4 aired a documentary entitled Billion Dollar Base: Deconstructing Camp Bastion, the predominating ‘takeaways’ from which were a) what phenomenal amounts of money we’d spent on our eight-year operation in and around Helmand Province, and b) how unimpressed the Afghan brass were by what ‘little’ we were leaving behind. I found myself watching most of it through gritted teeth; but it was hard, nevertheless, not to have some sympathy for the incoming Afghan soldiery. A new documentary film has now taken up that very story. Tell Spring Not to Come This Year (dir.

We all need stories 'to help us make sense of the complexity of reality', intones the sensible sounding voice of Adam Curtis at the start of his new documentary about Afghanistan, Bitter Lake. But stories told by 'those in power' are 'increasingly unconvincing and hollow'. What a relief then that Curtis has raided the archives of BBC News on our behalf for footage of the west’s 13 year engagement in Afghanistan to construct his own more than two hour long story. His conclusion: the crisis in Afghanistan is all the fault of the witless Americans! The problem all began on a US warship parked in the Suez Canal in 1945 (cue newsreel). It was there that President Franklin D. Roosevelt met with King Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia and agreed to buy all of his oil.

Britain has ended combat operations in Afghanistan. The war did topple the Taleban, but it hasn’t got rid of them. It has improved some things in Afghanistan – better roads, better education, better newspapers – but the country is still corrupt, bankrupt and dangerous. When Britain and America decided to go into Afghanistan in 2001, The Spectator ran an editorial entitled Why We Must Win. This is not a war against Islam, but against terrorists who espouse a virulent strain of that religion, a fundamentalism that most moderate Arabs themselves regard as a menace. This is not even a war against Afghanistan, but an attempt to topple a vile regime. The Taleban deserve to be expelled simply by virtue of their inhuman behaviour towards women and dissenters.

Media freedom is under attack in Pakistan, declared Hamid Mir, one of Pakistan’s most prominent journalists. He had six bullets pumped into him by bike riders in Karachi on 19 April. TV anchor, Raza Rumi, was similarly attacked in Lahore in late March. In May 2011, investigative reporter Saleem Shahzad was murdered following his allegations of links between the Pakistani military and al-Qaeda. These are just three of the many Pakistani journalists who’ve been victims of a wave of threats and violence in recent months and years.

Before a mob turns up at my house and someone starts dragging up that unfortunate picture of my grandfather with Hitler, the headline is a joke, but I do wonder if the media has given a rather misleading idea of Malala Yousafzai. For example, the Pakistani International Marxist Tendency claim that the schoolgirl sent a message to their 32nd congress stating: ‘I am convinced Socialism is the only answer and I urge all comrades to take this struggle to a victorious conclusion. Only this will free us from the chains of bigotry and exploitation.

How go those talks with the Taliban in Doha? Quietly, that's how — although there's a report in yesterday's The Hindu that could reveal some of what's being said, and is worth the time reading because of it. According to the paper's diplomatic sources, the Taliban want Mullah Mohammed Omar installed as ‘supreme religious and political leader’ of Afghanistan. And, yes, that is the Mullah Omar who sheltered Al Qaeda when he actually was in charge of Afghanistan, and whose policy agenda included the death penalty for those converting to another religion, as well as the general subjugation of women, gay people, individuality, etc. He's currently wanted to the tune of $10 million by the US State Department.

Today’s leaked NATO report on ‘the state of the Taliban’ has generated the predictable responses: excessive attempts by the media to hype it up, and excessive attempts by NATO and the Pakistani government to play it down. What is its true significance? It’s a good scoop, but there is little or nothing in it which really counts as ‘news’ to anyone who has been following the debate. The report is the latest in a series going back several years (I remember reading earlier versions during my time in government), which summarises thousands of interviews with captured insurgents and others, in an attempt to build up a picture of the state of the insurgency to inform strategic and operational decision-making.

‘Taliban’ and ‘peace mission’ — the words sure don't fit very well together. But they're the words that you'll see in tomorrow's papers, given that the Taliban have today revealed their intention to open a peace mission in Qatar. The idea is that foreign diplomats can stop by, share a cup of tea and some Ferrero Rocher, and talk about ending the insurgency in Afghanistan. The news ought to treated with caution for now. After all, the Taliban haven't given a date for when their Qatar office will be open, and they're making noises about prisoners being released from Guantanamo Bay in return. But it's a still a significant moment, whatever happens. For the first time in public, the Taliban appear to be broaching the possibility of peace talks.

The UN has lifted sanctions on 14 Taliban leaders, the strongest indication yet that the international community is opening a negotiated settlement with elements of the Afghan insurgency. Indeed, Germany’s UN ambassador said the move “sends a strong signal: the Security Council and the international community support the efforts of the Afghan government to engage reconciled Taliban in a political dialogue in order to achieve peace and security in Afghanistan.” There are serious concerns about engaging with the insurgency, which, though amorphous, shares common ground in its unreconstructed religious extremism. Renowned war correspondent Dexter Filkins has written of the resilient Taliban’s mounting aggression.

The half-brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai has just been murdered outside his fortified compound in Kandahar. Ahmed Wali Karzai was the political kingpin in Kandahar province, formally serving as head of the provincial council. I am told by officials that he was killed by one of his bodyguards at a checkpoint; the killer was then shot dead by other bodyguards. A senior FCO official has said that David Cameron would want to give his condolences on a “personal basis” to President Karzai for his loss. That said, many people in the British government will not be all that unhappy with the demise of Wali Karzai – or “AWK”, as he was known. AWK was certainly a controversial figure.