Peace for Afghanistan is possible

A fundamental change in the attitude of the foreign power players is essential.
A new dialogue with all parties involved and causally responsible is necessary to find a sustainable solution.


Acceptance and Inclusivity

The recognition of the situation is an urgent prerequisite. This includes considering the Taliban as a significant player in the current Afghan conflict.



The classification of people into “Good Guys” and “Bad Guys” must be generally refrained from, it is pure polemics and propaganda and has so far prevented sustainable peace worldwide. In the same way, it makes no sense to call people terrorists. This condemnation depends on the perspective and the time in which it takes place[i].
The labeling of the Taliban as a terrorist group illustrates the Eurocentric view. This prevailing attitude generates incomprehension and resistance. Dialogue is hereby prevented and the path to sustainable peace is blocked.


What is it that makes it so hard to achieve the necessary change in perspective?

The change of perspective is demanded by the other side, but is refused by oneself, because everyone believes himself to be on the side of the ” good guys. Here there is a lack of willingness to self-reflect on one’s own attitude and limited thought patterns. The denial of responsibility for past wrongs in order to avoid possible resulting compensation claims, leads to the hindering of any peace efforts. The escalation of violence continues on both sides. This is blamed on the other, because one sees oneself as the defender and protector of the “Good”.
   This leads to an escalation of violence in the weaker party, characterized by powerlessness.
Recognizing this logic is not an endorsement or legitimization. This process will not stop by itself if no one takes the first step and interrupts the system with a change of perspective. Without the beginning, the way of peace does not exist. It makes sense for the potentially more powerful one to make the first move, even if this seems to create disadvantages from his perspective at first.


What must be done?

The imperialist and Eurocentric interference and attitude has led to the present state of affairs. The guiding principle of cooperation must replace the pursuit of self-interest and bring to the fore the goal of peace affecting global security. Clear and authentic declarations of a change of attitude are needed. This can happen in a step-by-step dealing with the past.
A change of consciousness to the ability of a change of perspective must be promoted and developed. An equal continuous dialogue of all acting and affected parties is the fundamental part of the process. The current situation shows that the previous approach and the prevailing attitude have not brought peace.  so this way must be changed. A change of heart is long overdue.


Concrete Options for Action

The options do not claim to be exhaustive, but they do point the way.

  • Transparent reflection of responsibility
  • Cease all hostilities and other uses of force
  • Respect for human rights on all sides
  • Enable humanitarian aid
  • Immediately stop foreign power interference
  • Abandon paternalistic attitude of major international powers
  • Public statements of responsibility
  • Offer support with the following boundary conditions Inclusivity
    • Respect and equality
    • Focus on nonviolence
    • No self-interest
    • Process support in “Dealing with the Past
  • Launch dialog process supported by NGOs
  • Designation of the necessary actors. These include, in arbitrary order:
    UK, Russia, Afghan government, Taliban, Northern Alliance, Afghan NGOs and civil society representatives, former Soviet states if involved, US, Saudi Arabia, Qatar….


[i] The Scholl siblings had been sentenced to death as terrorists under the Nazi regime and were assigned to the “non-violent resistance movement (Wikipedia)” after the Nazi era.

In 1942 Churchill determined the “Area Bombing Directive”, according to which, among other cities, the civilian population of the city of Dresden was bombed in February 1945, although the end of the war was already foreseeable. In August 1945, two atomic bombs were dropped on the civilian population of Japan. In this context, Truman and Churchill are not called terrorists, nor were they held accountable in an international court.

The UK and the US are not designated as terror-supporting countries from a Eurocentric perspective.

The difference between “resistance fighter” and “terrorist” depends only on perspective. However, the term resistance fighter suggests legitimacy because he rebels against supposed injustice and fights for the “Good”.

The terrorist, on the other hand, has a negative connotation and is assigned to “evil.” This attitude is particularly illustrated and manifested with the term “Axis of Evil” by George W. Bush in February 2002.