On Saturday Afghan President along with a delegation set off for Qatar to discuss Taliban militants opening an office in the Gulf state for peace talks, as part of desperate effort to put an end to more than a decade of war. The photo released by some newspapers with the report of his travel show him sad and worried. He is accompanied with foreign Minister, Mr. Zalmai Rasoul and Chief of High Peace Council, Salahuddin Rabbani. Before the travel of President Karzai, His spokesman, Aimal Faizi said, “We will discuss the peace process, of course, and the opening of an office for the Taliban in Qatar”. “If we want to have talks to bring peace to Afghanistan, the main side must be the Afghan government's representatives -- the High Peace Council, which has members from all the country's ethnic and

political backgrounds," he added.

It should be noticed that earlier President Karzai was against opening any office for militants, wary of possible setting aside of his government from mainstream. After his serious efforts and arguments,

the international community agreed to accept that process should be an Afghan-led. In spite of such promise and commitment, just early this month, he pointed the edge of his sharp criticism toward the United States, claiming that it was engaged in clandestine meeting with Taliban militants, the remarks which sparked the strong reaction of the United States.

Kabul pay high importance to talks with militants as foreign security forces are about to withdraw by the fall of 2014. While on the other hand, militants continue resisting on its inflexible policy—no talks with the government which Taliban call as puppet of the United States.

No doubt, any possible peace talks still face numerous hurdles before they begin, including confusion over who would represent the Taliban and Karzai's insistence that his appointees are at the center of

negotiations. Clearly, during past years Taliban did never have serious talks with Afghan government or perhaps the United States. Last year when Taliban announced that it called off talks with the United States over what they called to be doubtful policies of the United States. While some news agencies, quoting high profile officials, put the reasons behind the failure of peace talks on transition of Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo prison as part of initial condition for serious peace talks.

The moves of Kabul doomed similar condition. The High Peace Council tried its best to open a single door of negotiation with representatives of Taliban, but finally ended up with suicide bombers.

The most obvious example is with assassination of former President, Prof. Rabbani, who was killed by a suicide bomber who claimed to be the representative of Taliban.

Meanwhile, Kabul has never become disappointed.  President Karzai has left no stone unturned. Taliban defectors were strongly welcomed by him and hold key posts within the current political establishment. No one can dare to open mouth in opposition and ask former Taliban high ranking officials about tens of thousands of people killed during the regime.

After the very collapse of the Taliban regime in 2001, through foreign military intervention, Kabul officials clearly explained for all militants that they could join government without fear of persecution

and, more importantly, they would be appointed in key administrative posts. There are a lot of examples about Taliban defectors who are still suspicious of maintaining linkage with former colleagues, but work in quite seductive positions. They are holding mouthwatering posts and no institution dares to question their dark profile.

Let’s put it this way. Taliban militants have had no problem in joining the democratic process. Elements that have showed interest have been highly welcomed. But one striking turn occurred in late 2009, and that was disappointment of foreign allies for success of military strategies.

Indeed, years of engagement without clear prospective about victory made many foreign allies to reassess their military strategies and search for alternatives. One of those alternatives was of course the

so-called Afghanization of the mission, which was generally interpreted as transferring responsibilities to Afghan people and giving them authority to take their destiny in their own hands. This process provided President Karzai to stamp on a policy which he maintained and pushed for, perhaps, from the very start of anti-insurgency struggle in 2001.

Thereafter, he has held bold steps to make deal with Taliban militants. He publicly calls them as ‘angry brothers’ and even the circle around him philosophizes that Taliban have changed dramatically from

what they used to be. It is not a very unfamiliar statement in domestic press that if Taliban recaptures power and ends current ruling establishment, they would not rule the country as they did.

Probably, they would allow girls to go to school and observe human rights, specifically, women rights to some extent. These claims are made with such certainty that leads to false assumption among common civilians.

I do not know why such bogus claims are made. Is it due to efforts made by circles within and out of the government in order to draw a more acceptable picture of Taliban militants? I leave the answer for you, but there is one thing that I can assure you about: that is “Talibanism and Human Rights” are contradictory that wouldn’t comply with each other at all.

 Definitely, officials and civilians alike prefer political settlement. And it is also definite that till Taliban leaders do not reach to calculation they only waste their strength fighting Kabul without any hope for its collapse; they would ultimately stretch hand for peace. The only thing President Karzai should notice is close cooperation with foreign allies and empowerment of his government, particularly security forces.