The latest round of US talks with the Taliban is being hailed as a breakthrough in terms of a possible blueprint to move the stalled peace process forward. In reality, however, nothing could be further from the truth. And it is Washington that risks departing from the Afghan quagmire with its tails firmly between its legs; if leaves at all. The UAE moot was a little different than previous interactions. For one thing, these were not bilateral in nature. For in attendance were Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the Emiratis. That is, the three countries who came under global fire for recognising the Taliban regime of the 1990s that had earned international pariah status due its hardline interpretation of Islam and subjugation of women; the question of Caspian Sea oil and gas reserves notwithstanding. Yet 17 years on and the Americans are back where they started. Except that this time around they are courting the very actors that they had vowed to destroy back in 2001; ostensibly to prevent the country from ever again becoming a terrorist sanctuary. The biggest fallout of which was the fleeing of Al Qaeda to this side of the border. What came next was the convenient scapegoating of Pakistan for American failures next door; something that continues to this day. There has been much talk from all sides of the need for an Afghan-led and -owned peace process. Indeed, this prompted President Ghani to take the extremely bold step of offering the Taliban a comprehensive peace package that included amnesty for those willing to down arms. But this never got off the ground due to the militants’ refusal to deal directly with Kabul; preferring to seek assurances from the US regarding a timetable for a military exit. That being said, Ghani’s detractors contend that his subsequent stubbornness in terms of participating in multilateral dialogue is entirely misplaced. Not least because the peace deal put on the table back in February was unconditional. Meaning that it did not call for a halt in Taliban violence. This, argue pundits, unwittingly afforded the latter undue diplomatic privilege that emboldened it to hold talks with nation states on near equal footing. And as a result, the militant outfit presently enjoys a certain degree of international legitimacy. The extent of which may be seen in the list of Taliban counter-demands that are now in the offing. Washington is calling for a six-month ceasefire; itself a departure from Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad’s recent urging to seal the deal on Afghan peace ahead of the presidential elections scheduled for April. The Taliban have indicated that they are open to considering this on the condition that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are nominated as guarantors. In addition, the group is also pushing for the setting up of a caretaker government headed by a figure of its own choosing; as a ceasefire precondition. All of which underscores how the Taliban are proving themselves more sophisticated negotiators than Kabul. For after having tabled the most comprehensive peace package possible — Ghani left himself with no leverage with which to bargain. And the Taliban have capitalised on this. Thus while some experts believe the best case scenario may be for the government to at least entertain the possibility of a caretaker set-up — absent from the picture is the citizenry. That is, ordinary Afghans. For a lasting and meaningful peace will be impossible without at least trying to reach out to civil society for consensus. But any commitment on this front will necessarily require putting the hand-break on the upcoming presidential polls and investing in listening to what the people of the country want. If not by way of a referendum then at least through exhaustive consultation. For elections alone can never a democracy make. In short, this is the first step on the path to self-determination in the truest sense. Pakistan must play whatever positive role it can. After all, its security is largely linked to that of Afghanistan. And only when the latter is free of militant safe-havens that threaten Islamabad can both sides of the Durand Line know peace. As far as the Americans go, demonstrating sincere commitment to a negotiated settlement could easily be reinforced by having Donald Trump visit both Islamabad and Kabul. This would dispel prevailing perceptions of the US fighting a war by remote control in every sense of the term. Moreover, it would remind the administration that this remains a US war. Regardless of who started it. * Published in Daily Times, December 20th2018.