In his new book, Negotiating with Evil (2010), former U. S. diplomat named Mitchell Reiss praises the Obama administration for opening up channels of communication with the Taliban in 2009. However Reiss is critical of the Obama team for fumbling those interactions.
. . . . . .The president appeared to recognize that the United States could not kill or capture every Taliban member. Some would have to be co-opted, accommodated, or bargained with in order for Washington to accomplish its mission. . . . .
. . . . .The United States has numerous examples of leaders engaging with terrorists and rogue regimes. . . . .
. . . . .American presidents have negotiated with terrorists and rogue regimes to secure the release of hostages, to arrange temporary ceasefires, and to explore whether a more permanent truce might be possible, although they have sometimes gone to great lengths to disguise their direct involvement. . . . .
. . . . The most powerful reason not to engage with certain enemies is the judgment that no amount of concessions will pacify their hostile behavior. Attempts to do so are usually termed ‘appeasement' and may result in disaster. . . .
Reiss argues that the Taliban is not a monolithic adversary, and that it does not have territorial ambitions that extend beyond Afghanistan.
I'm sure if Romney is elected, he will summarily reverse course and make peace with the Taliban, much like Nixon went to China after Vietnam. Not a reason to vote for the preppy, of course.....
ReplyDeleteRomney could pull a Nixon and recognize the State of Palestine?
DeleteI highly doubt it. Bebe and Mittens are good friends and Bebe wants war.
DeleteMost of Romney's advisors are neo-neocons. The best advice on foreign policy comes from Rand Paul who says:
ReplyDeleteRomney chose to criticize President Obama for seeking to cut a bloated Defense Department and for not being bellicose enough in the Middle East, two assertions with which I cannot agree . . . . we are in too many places, too often, and we don't seem to even know the reason - or where we will end up when we're done . . . . This foreign policy has created more enemies than it has vanquished . . . . rush[ing] headlong into more places they don't understand . . . . [better] to step back and think of whether we really need to be involved in these countries in the way we have been . . . . . If debt is our gravest threat, adding to the debt by expanding military spending further threatens our national security . . . .