In recent months, the peace talks with the Taliban have severely affected all major national agendas including elections and other developmental priorities in the country. Peace negotiations with Taliban, without considering the political and social realities of the country, were overconfidently exaggerated possible and accessible. However, the optimistic and imaginative look at peace has impelled many politicians to take advantage of the peace talk opportunity to be involved in the process and unintentionally gets some deeper understanding from the current Taliban views and political tactic. From one hand, they try to gain its legitimacy in the international arena; on the other hand, they persist in dogmatic positions, killing and destruction in the country.
It is said that in the third round of Afghan intra peace talks in Qatar, Taliban demanded establishment of Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan but when they faced quick reactions and uneasiness by the meeting participants avoided to raise it directly with the details. Given this dogmatic position and unchangeable mentality from Taliban, some Afghan experts come to think that Afghanistan has only a military solution to impose the peace and political structure by force. Accordingly, the use of force has been prescribed by some political scholars in corrupt social and political environment. For example, Machiavelli a famous realistic political scholar believes that democracy is a like poison for corrupt society.   
The second round of Afghan intra talks in Moscow, which caused the humiliation and failure of some politicians, was not only a positive step in the course of peace process but made the leaders of the Taliban feel overwhelming and victorious and became more active in the military arena.The escalation of military and suicide attacks in different parts of Afghanistan is either due to the Taliban’s unrealistic sense of the political and security realities of Afghanistan or everything is steered by outsiders. As aforementioned, the issue of peace with the Taliban was so highlighted that affected everything, especially the electoral process. Some domestic and foreign politicians even hoped to sign a peace agreement before the election.
But the political reality in Afghanistan was not what some analysts believed. After a few rounds of talks, it became clear that the Taliban were never ready to enter into serious negotiations with the Afghan government. This group is pursuing peace talks only for their political intentions. On the one hand, the Taliban show themselves to the world’s public opinion as a peaceful group that wants to negotiate and peacefully resolve the problems of Afghanistan; on the other hand, with delay tactic and intensification of violence and killings in Afghanistan, they want to win greater privileges or impose Islamic Emirate at the peace negotiating table.
Given the Taliban expression in the third round of peace talks, there are still big differences between the Taliban and the Afghan people demand. They cannot convince the people of Afghanistan to accept Islamic Emirate with just expressing few tolerant words, but avoid to accurately expressing their position about the conditional freedom of citizens, especially the women’s right to education or the limitation. During the third round of peace talks, they avoided to provide detailed responses when they were asked about women’s rights and freedom.  From one hand, they accept women’s rights and education; on the other hand, they limit everything within the boundary of Hanafi jurisprudence with the extreme interpretation they have from Islam.
undoubtedly, sitting around a single table with national and international people and getting ready for interviewing with foreign women journalists can be considered a minor change in the Taliban’s approach, but these minor changes in situations where the Afghan people have spent about two decades in freedom and democracy is not considered satisfactory.Therefore, talking about a peace process which fulfill the demand and freedom of Afghan people are not a realistic optimism.
Therefore, the government and the Afghan people should not postpone any national process including social, economic and political processes under the pretext of possible peace. With running the national process, including election in accordance with the calendar announced by the election commission, the government can also consider the peace and negotiation with the Taliban in accordance with the political conditions and political flexibility of Taliban leaders. Given the dogmatic mentality of Taliban any kinds of expediency is considered surrender to Taliban which will have irreparable consequences in the future.
Elections are a foreseeable and legal process. The election should have been held this spring, but the issues of peace with Taliban and shortcoming of IEC management delayed the process. Fortunately, the government is now making every effort to hold elections in accordance with the election commission’s schedule. Recently, the chief executive officer, Abddullah Abdullah emphasized on timely election in the country. Linking the election to the peace issue will never be in the interest of the country and the people, and the elections and other national processes must be run properly and the path of development and democracy should be pursued with patience and political rationality.
Lastly, another major problem in peace talks is that a negotiation with Taliban is widespread under interference of foreign countries in the opposite direction of the general will of the people. Any process or decision which does not ensure the demand of Afghan people and just imposed upon the people by foreign countries will not be sustainable sooner or later its walls will collapse, and from under its soil and ash will flame a another fire and conflicts that would destroy all the past achievements.