"The idea of a secret summit with enemy combatants astonished even those close to the process.... Trump had hoped to broker an Afghan peace before the Presidential campaign heats up—to convince voters that he knows the art of diplomatic deals.... 'We are committed to continuing negotiations till the end if political settlement is chosen instead of war,' the Taliban said. Trump has also dramatically abandoned other diplomatic initiatives only to resume them in short order. In May, 2018, Trump abruptly called off his summit with the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Singapore, citing 'anger and open hostility' in North Korea’s statements. Less than three weeks later, in an about-face, Trump flew to Singapore. At their first meeting, Trump and Kim pledged a new era in relations between countries still technically at war since 1953.'"
From "Trump’s Stunt with the Taliban Was Not About Negotiating Peace" by Robin Wright (in The New Yorker).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
100 comments:
I don't know if this meeting would have been wise and I don't know if his meetings with North Korea helped in the long run. But I don't think it's tied to the campaign. That's an easy excuse.
I do think people generally feel better about the situation with North Korea. Whether that's justified or not I don't know.
Trump had hoped to broker an Afghan peace
...
Trump’s Stunt with the Taliban Was Not About Negotiating Peace
IOW Trump's stunt was about brokering peace, not negotiating peace. There are important differences.
And oh yeah, Orange Man Bad!
Of course a very cynical and silly anti-Trump analysis. It's not like it was the first time the United States has tried to broker peace with people who wanted to kill us. To me it feels like the very thing lefties would be demanding if Trump wasn't doing it. They hate us because we attack them. If we leave them alone, treat them with respect, and airlift them pallets US $100 bills they will stop attacking us. Why doesn't he understand?
Did that magazine ever once use the pejorative “stunt” - in a headline no less - in reference to Obama?
Words like that scream “ignore my opinions”.
See, you need someone with a Nobel Peace Prize for being black to negotiate peace. You can't get a Nobel Peace Prize for being Orange. So you can't negotiate peace. It's simple, really.
One of the oddities of the left is its insistence that all actions should be guided by an over-arching, consistent ideology or plan.
I voted for Trump because he's a pragmatist. He does what needs to be done when it needs to be done.
wow - another negative hit piece from someone in New York.
You can't get a Nobel Peace Prize for being Orange.
What about David Trimble, Leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, which from the beginning had a strong association with the Orange Order?
I saw some pundit on tv complaining that Trump's reckless rhetoric had inflamed the situation in Kashmir. There should be some kind of journalistic award for the most biased reporting on an unfolding event. I know everyone going to say that there's the Pulitzer, but I mean for an event that's current and not past.
What about David Trimble?
He only got 1/2 a Nobel Peace prize due to his Orangeness.
Another mind reading stunt in The New Yorker. They should take their show to Vegas.
Does anyone read The New Yorker anymore?
The New Yorker sucks.
Trump cures cancer: Headline reads; "THOUSANDS of DOCTORS PUT OUT OF WORK by TRUMP"
Trump Walks on Water: Headline reads; "Trump Can't SWIM! HE is pulling a stunt"
I'm constantly amazed at the number of leftist "pundits" who are firmly convinced that they can read Donald Trump's mind.
It was never about peace. The agreement didn’t include a ceasefire. The Taliban , which is despised by a large majority of afghans, would be free to continue the civil war and take over more territory. In what universe is that peace?
When trump set a deadline for troop withdraw we lost all leverage.
Does anyone read The New Yorker anymore?
Beat me to it.
Robin wright got iran and hezbollah wrong from the beginning, so day ending in y.
Trump Cancels Taliban Meeting After Learning It's THAT Taliban
So “The New Yorker” is an unacceptable source of information and reporting, to the devoted fans of Trump. Okay. It’s a free country.
I just wonder what is/are acceptable source(s) of information on this subject? Acceptable to Trump devotees.
Fernandistein said...
You can't get a Nobel Peace Prize for being Orange.
What about David Trimble, Leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, which from the beginning had a strong association with the Orange Order?
He wasn't truly Orange, he was a mix of red and yellow.
The New Yorker has a circulation of 1.1 million, or about 0.5% of the U.S. population.
Answered my own question.
It's ranked #71 in U.S. circulation, right behind Birds and Blooms.
How is it "face-saving" to tell us about the cancellation of a secret meeting? Imagine how embarrassed Trump would be if we didn't know about this!
Chuck confusedly asks...
I just wonder what is/are acceptable source(s) of information on this subject? Acceptable to Trump devotees.
I JUST linked to one, Oh, you Poor Chuck :(
Since it's a given among intellectuals that Afghanistan is unconquerable, how exactly did the Taliban control it in the past? Why didn't the fascists that destroyed centuries-old religious monuments face a massive counterinsurgency in the 90s?
What wright leaves out:
https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/290884/north-korean-israeli-shadow-war
The journal got rid of him, because he gave the game away about irans shoddy deal.
Fortunately we don't have to critique Hillary's decision to send John Kerry and James Taylor to 'heal' relations with the Taliban.
Jersey — is there some reason you aren’t counting the 15-20 million unique viewers who view the New Yorker website each month?
""The idea of a secret summit with enemy combatants astonished even those close to the process.... "
Righttt...Much better to tell the journalists
"Trump had hoped to broker an Afghan peace before the Presidential campaign heats up—"
I'm shocked a President wanted to end a war before an election.
How long has Afghanistan had to get their shit together? 18 years? One has to conclude at this point it's never going to happen.
The french took 18 years to secure algiers, they sent de tocqueville there at the half way ooint to find out what the hold up was.
Anybody see Molly Hemingway’s takedown of A. B. Stoddard on Bret Baier’s Panel last night? Brutal. Hemingway had just spoken about these hair-on-fire critics of Trump’s gambit of how they were more upset about Trump’s process than the 18-year long war that drags on indefinitely. Stoddard immediately then begins on how outrageous Trump’s process was ... so Molly let’s her have it: “This is exactly what I was talking about.”
It got very tense, Stoddard was shocked at the pushback, and she kept looking to Baier to rescue her. Baier finally ends it with, “She’s [Stoddard]talking about process and she’s [Hemingway] talking about war but the real issue is where do we go from here.” Seriously, he said that.
I haven’t given it justice at all here. Find it and watch it.
steve uhr: "Jersey — is there some reason you aren’t counting the 15-20 million unique viewers who view the New Yorker website each month?"
These stats are rife with fraud and there is no way for you to know with any degree of certainty whether or not they are true.
Trump lover and conspiracy nut Jack Posibiec, getting the bitch-slapping of a lifetime on Twitter after suggesting that Reagan met with the Taliban, and so why shouldn’t Trump?
https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1170521792215212032
steve uhr said...
Jersey — is there some reason you aren’t counting the 15-20 million unique viewers who view the New Yorker website each month?
Jersey said "read".
It’s only a stunt because their side didn’t take a chance.
That was the peshawar seven, hekmatyar khalis raisul sayyaf, rabbani et al, maybe two did not end up supplying al queda or taliban
Isn't anybody else sick of these perpetual wars? First they call the guy a war monger, then they bitch the he's trying to get us out of a never ending waste of time conflict. The USSR probably wishes it had pulled out Afghanistan sooner.
Aren't we tired of the death for our soldiers and Afgan civilians?
I wish Trump would just pull our troops out of Afghanistan, Korea, and lets put Germany on the list while we're at it. Take our ball and go home!
Red lines ! Red lines were crossed!
I cannot think of a situation less conducive to plans and consistency than negotiating with an enemy.
It’s a thrust and parry situation. You respond on a minute to minute basis to the actions of the enemy.
You folks suggesting that Trump should be consistent in these negotiations are idiots.
The isi and saudi general intelligence including one of ubls fmr teachers at al thaghir selected who would receive the weapoms
If youve read kaplan girardet you would know this.
In short, negotiations were going on for awhile, and either the Taliban thought they could get away with it or someones went rogue.
Trump gives them the pomp sticks out his hand in good faith and he gets stabbed in the back again.
This started with Macron. I think Macron was the first full state dinner. Got the visit, got the full state dinner, got the pomp and he turns around and stabs Trump in the back.
Trump lover and conspiracy nut Jack Posibiec, getting the bitch-slapping of a lifetime on Twitter after suggesting that Reagan met with the Taliban, and so why shouldn’t Trump?
While that is a bit over the top, Reagan did support the Muhajideen in Afghanistan, out of which both the Taliban and Al Qaeda were born.
So north korea from the solomon piece has made consistent allies with egypt with iran with syria, all those who have sought to destroy israel and needless to say with the castro bros. I covered part of that triangle in a blog atemming from the myers spy takedown
I still read the The New Yorker. Not every article is politicized. If political bias rubs you the wrong way, you have to avoid movies, music, tv and newspapers which I do to some extent but not completely. Modern music is easy to completely abstain from, but the other branches of media less so.
No not always but robin wright has been spectacularly wrong re diagnosing and recommending solutions for 35 years, at least.
It began with sacred rage, when she portrayed hezbollah as a totally organic thing, and not a artefact of iranian tradecraft, the dark arts.
Blogger Chuck said...
Trump lover and conspiracy nut Jack Posibiec, getting the bitch-slapping of a lifetime on Twitter after suggesting that Reagan met with the Taliban, and so why shouldn’t Trump?
https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1170521792215212032
Chuck lies again-
Jack Posobiec
����
Verified account @JackPosobiec
Sep 8
Reagan was earnest in his policy of supporting the Afghan mujahideen against the Soviets
That policy also led to the birth of the Taliban
Conservatives who refuse to admit this historic fact are simply dishonest
Drop the party politics and tell the truth
So someone fed sciutto a tidbit now everyone is trying to unravel the identity of this supposed super defector, the reason he was exfilled in the first place.
It was because of this other detail i mentioned, and the same practices obtained thirty years later when it came to supplying rebels in libya and syria with mit and qatari filling the isi role
"Robyn Wright doesn't even know his name: Sgt. 1st Class Elis Barreto Ortiz, 34, from Morovis, Puerto Rico."
You're wrong. The name is in the article. Why make assertions without checking?
Really, Fen, your commenting needs improvement. I'm going to start deleting you a lot more, beginning with this comment in half an hour. You may copy what you've written and attempt to rewrite it. If you don't want to go to the link and read or you need and don't want to get a subscription, you need to be circumspect about what you say is in the article.
Practice Tip. The huge support for Afghanistan to remain under USA Military governance no matter how many cannon fodder American troops die will not cease until Heroin Poppy fields making the Deep State wealthy have been eliminated.
Trump already upset the balance of power and stalemate when he finally got the Navy to obey his orders and bomb all 27 Heroin Drug Labs owned and operated by the CIA in Afghanistan. That was a true American civil war.
But today most of the Senate GOP crooks on the take to allow this insanity have resigned. The loud complaints now are directly from CIA owned and operated Media.
Stop the boring repetitious back and forth where you name a particular commenter. Drago, I'm going to delete every comment you write with the word "Chuck" in it. Respond on the substance. You may quote things without naming the person and respond on the merits. I'm sick of reading the same names over and over totally out of proportion to interestingness and significance.
First of all they arent students, they are ghazi self proclaimed warriors for god, in the kingdom they are the muttawa the religious police.
As you wish Your Grace
I am not going to waste my time reading an article whose only point is, I can interpret anything Donald Trump does in as negative a way as possible.
They were much more honest in the 19th century, conan doyle, kipling haggard, about who they wete fighting
They know that if Trump can negotiate any type of end to the Afghanistan war and bring all the troops home; then there is no chance to defeat Trump in 2020.
I suppose the know nothings on this blog think that nothing could be more appropriate than to invited the Taliban to Camp David during 9/11 to see how affective their attack was on American culture? But you are right, Reagan helped create the Taliban, and as a result the blowback terrorism, so why shouldn't we negotiate with terrorist?
Drago, I'm going to delete every comment you write with the word "Chuck" in it.
Hear, hear!
Can we next delete every comment Chuck writes with the word "Trump" in it?
Because most of them are in threads that have nothing to do with Trump.
Just the libyan rebels who would kidnap and choke ambassador stevens, the ring leader was captured last june in benghazi, no american paper has touched the story.
r/v: "But you are right, Reagan helped create the Taliban, and as a result the blowback terrorism, so why shouldn't we negotiate with terrorist?"
LOL
Reagan did not give the mujahadeen their philosophy. He gave them weapons to oppose the invasion by Bernie Sanders beloved Soviet Union with the goal being to make Afghanistan the Soviet "Vietnam".
And it worked. Completely.
The fact that elements of the mujahadeen then continued in their endeavors and evolved into part of a larger islamic effort against the west was inevitable as the islamic effort going global was just that, a global phenomenon.
The syrian rebels who were given 500 million, yet they defected at first chance and handed the weapons to the nusra front.
"That I did not ever believe there would be proof of actionable “collusion.” "
Weasel phrasing which shows that you do believe it (as you've demonstrated repeatedly) but its been covered up effectively or not fully exposed. Which is precisely what you pulled 48 hours ago when you claimed a new conspiracy theory involving shady and dark russian investor financing of Trump properties.
And since we are onto the latest Deep State/Lefty Media hoax lie (advanced by r/v in this thread) that a Russian asset was exfiltrated because of Trump, obama-ite and fake "journalist" Jim Sciutto has admitted in a tweet that the asset had been targeted for extraction DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION!!
But once again, all stories are recycled to blame Trump.
It seems like only yesterday the lefties and their LLR allies were blaming Trump for obumblers Red Line and also blaming modern conservatives for Jim Crow era democrat racism and some of these hacks even attempted to say the KKK was part of the republican party and had to be driven out by Buckley!!
A new day but the same old tactics.
So weve been wrongfooting for at least 35 of the last forty years of policy in part because one eyed guides like friedman and wright have informed the guidance of pillar and scheuer to use two recent examples.
Maybe there was never a meeting scheduled. Maybe there's a whole bunch of Taliban guys saying "I didn't hear nothing about that. Am I being thrown under the bus?".
Stranger things have happened.
If you go back another 35 years, lattimore carter vincent and co, got china wrong about the consequences of maos victory harriman and co read vietnam wrong thanks to halberstam hence the diem coup
Moyar on vietnam disastrous misjudgement, halberstam of course followed carter vincent ams co, into a cul de sac, andrew scott uneartbed the black legend about the shah.
"Trump's Stunt"
Orange Man Bad.
Anyway, Donald, just leave. The left will bitch, but in bad faith as always -- when W went in and improved Afghan lives, no lefty cared, and the Michael Moores whined about our imperialism. Forget them. We'll forgive you, even us neoconnish deplorables, and so will most Americans: we've done enough, keeping troops there won't do anything more. Just leave.
Now scott in fall of heaven pointed out bani sadr, dejected mossadeq supporter as the one whi poisoned the wars for the shah in the west, focusing particular on randall in the post and rouleau in le monde.
Allen Dulles was meeting with the Japanese in Switzerland while we were still grinding it out in Okinawa. Nothing new, just a lack of historical perspective on the part of the press.https://www.jstor.org/stable/20672371?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Oh contraire to the likes of talbott and schinzer (sic) dulles is the reason for why stalin couldnt be our friend any more,
So you see how much conventional wisdom is wrong about vietnam iran pre maoist china, and it grows like kudzu infectimg the next generation of policy makers.
Drago yes your right Raegan did not give them their philosophy. And yes the spread of fundamentalism started long before, at the point when the Arab socialism movements of the 1950's and 60s failed. But we were very mistaken to channel all weapons through Pakistan's intelligence agency, and we had no development plan after the Russians left--just another example of our many failures in spreading democracy. And Trump's recent efforts are just another example of this poorly thought out approach.
In May, 2018, Trump abruptly called off his summit with the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Singapore, citing 'anger and open hostility' in North Korea’s statements. Less than three weeks later, in an about-face, Trump flew to Singapore.
Like nothing could have happened in those three weeks to cause the change.
Secret meetings to negotiate with the enemy? Outrageous!!
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/kissinger-begins-secret-negotiations-with-north-vietnamese
Now we had cut off contact with zia in 1979, that was jimmys version of smart diplomacy after bhuttos toppling, so we didnt have a good grasp of what was going on, plus turner probably fired the only native urdu speakers in the company,
I'm sick of reading the same names over and over totally out of proportion to interestingness and significance.
Exactly. Predictable commenters are predictable. Why address them or call them out by name? Everyone knows how they'll respond.
But mawdudis salafism probably spread like wild fire through the pakistani officer corps, including future godfather of the taliban hamid gul (hes the one that later blamed 9/11 on the jews) and milt bearden couldnt figure out what was going on.
If it's an omniscient author piece, did she use "Little did he know.."
The New Yorker analyzing Trump's foreign policy is like a blind man analyzing the Taj Mahal.
President Trump came into office and listened to the DC experts. He wanted out of Afghanistan. President Trump was told, he had to go through channels. Allow the the DoD and State, to do their job. "President Trump, you must have the experts, those that know and understand all the nuance, work with the proper officials and arrive at the goal you seek" President Trump says "fine, you have 12 months, make it so"
Now 2.5 years later, the experts haven't moved the ball an inch. President Trump is acting because all the experts, are experts at looking busy. Not experts achieving results.
Results matter. President Trump has exposed State, as an agency that is an expert in style, and devoid of any results.
President Trump demands results.
Explain to me what President Trump has done wrong? I'm willing to learn.
The issue isn't whether Trump should or should not negotiate with the Taliban. That's just process. The Left will criticize him whichever way he goes.
The issue is, What to do our about our troops in Afghanistan? That is a tough question. Most sensible people want them out, because 18 years is long enough. But, there is real concern as to what happens to the place and the courageous innocent folks who remain, if we bug out.
Invade the world, invite the world. That's our policy in a nutshell. People that live in shitholes are, according to the duopolist consensus, entitled as a matter of course to US help in improving their homes, or adandoning them entirely to come here.
Treaties. Every member nation of the UN is a signatory to the UDHR. How's that working out? Seems to be an enforcement problem . . .
If we should have learned nothing else from Communists, it's that every treaty merely reflects the power-balance between the parties at a particular time--when that changes, bye-bye treaty.
If we should have learned anything from studying Islam, it's that lying to infidels is not only commendable, it's even in some circumstances required.
Trump, I hope, understands these realities on an instinctive level, and will proceed accordingly in his slapdash way.
Narr
He could get the vote of this straight white male atheist libertarian, yet
President Trump says "fine, you have 12 months, make it so"
Now 2.5 years later, the experts haven't moved the ball an inch.
Yup. Exactly my opinion.
Out now. We will never get our gear out so put the troops on C5s and go.
And Trump's recent efforts are just another example of this poorly thought out approach.
I was agreeing with you R/V but, as usual, you then stepped in it. Try to control your TDS.
I know. You can't.
r/v: "and we had no development plan after the Russians left--just another example of our many failures in spreading democracy."
LOL
There you go again!
There is no such thing as a "development plan" that will change anything in that area of the world. None. Nada. Zip. The "experts" that you wish for everyone to defer to, under both Bush and Obama, failed because they believe they could....or they were lying to us because government contracts to entities that profit from extended deployments are a very lucrative eco-system for govt bureaucrats and lobbyists.
Here's a little thought experiment: You have the benefit of 18 years of perfect hindsight: describe for us the "development plan" that would have "worked".....(of course, before you do that you'll have to describe your end state "goals" for achieving "success", which no one has ever done nor can they.)
r/v:" But we were very mistaken to channel all weapons through Pakistan's intelligence agency,"
What were the other options and what were the pros and cons for each of them?
I am not going to waste my time reading an article whose only point is, I can interpret anything Donald Trump does in as negative a way as possible.
@MikeR, +1
Scary thought, what if Althouse foolishly believes that Wright has a point?
Does anyone remember that Islam was unleashed when Jimmy Carter abandoned the Shah of Iran? His feckless response to the hostage situation gave heart to the extremists who saw the U.S. as no longer the strong horse in the Middle East.
And let's thank Hillary Clinton for deposing Quadaffi after he agreed to drop the nukes. Nothing like your allies realizing they can't rely on America to keep its promises.
Remember when the U.S. had to have a declaration of war before sending its men into battle? Thank Harry Truman for doing that in Korea. Made it easier to turn the U.S. military into a mercenary force willing the sacrifice blood for whoever pays the most.
UPDATE: Bolton is out!
Wright knows that JFK negotiated during the Cuban missile crisis, right? That Lincoln talked with a southern delegation during the civil war?
I am not saying I approve of meeting with the Taliban, but it’s hardly unprecedented for combatants to negotiate.
Now 2.5 years later, the experts haven't moved the ball an inch. President Trump is acting because all the experts, are experts at looking busy. Not experts achieving results.
Results matter. President Trump has exposed State, as an agency that is an expert in style, and devoid of any results.
@iowan2, +1 to you, too. I’ve lived among these bureaucrats for almost a half century. They are good at looking good and sounding good, and especially they are good at not rocking the boat. Actually accomplishing something, well, that’s not in their job description. The facade they put up is sufficient to fool classical liberals like Althouse, not to mention dim-witted millennial progs, but the best argument for limited government anyone can make s to watch these people in action.
And let's thank Hillary Clinton for deposing Quadaffi after he agreed to drop the nukes. Nothing like your allies realizing they can't rely on America to keep its promises.
North Korea will never for get that bit of duplicity. She set diplomacy back 50 years.
Bolton was not a good fit for Trump. I like him but this is not a time for him. He would be a good second opinion guy for Trump.
If Flynn gets the plea deal revoked, I'd like to see him back at NSC. Cyber war is on the menu and is right up his best role.
Someone once wrote that you only negotiate peace with enemies. The Taliban are probably an enemy it is pointless to negotiate with, but they are all you have in Afghanistan. In the end, Trump will either negotiate a "peace agreement" with the Taliban and leave, leave without an agreement, or stay. Which are the best options? I personally think either of the first two is far better than the third, but then I never supported the attempt at nation building in the country in the first place, and I thought both Bush and Obama made a mistake not pulling out. It increasingly looks like Trump is going to make the same mistake.
well he didn't outright surrender or pay the jizdah, (ransom) like with the framework, or kennedy pulling the Jupiter missiles out of turkey and Italy,
Really? Sitting down with the Taliban equates to sitting down with people responsible for 9-11, but negotiating an unenforceable treaty while illegally bribing “death to America” Iran is A-okay?
Imbecilic leftmediaswine telling their imbecilic followers what to think!
Reagan helped create the Taliban
I just love how people like you make these statements is if the situation occurred in a vacuum. Like there was absolutely nothing else going on in Afghanistan at the time.
Post a Comment