The deputy chief of the Pakistani Taliban announced on Saturday that the militant group was in peace talks with the government and an agreement to end its brutal four-year insurgency was within striking distance.
The statement by Malvi Faqir Mohammad, which appeared timed to exploit tensions between the Pakistan army and the US, will likely stoke further concerns in Washington over Pakistan’s reliability as a long-term partner in the fight against extremists.
It represented the first time a named Taliban commander has confirmed that the group is negotiating with the Pakistani government. Still, it was unclear whether Mohammad speaks for the entirety of the increasingly factionalized network, especially its leader, Hakimullah Mehsud.
Asked about the alleged negotiations, Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said that his government has followed a policy of “dialogue, deterrence and development” to tackle militants who are based in the lawless, Afghan border region.
“That is a continuing process,” he told a local television station.
Pakistani officials have previously stated that they do not talk to militants unless they surrender.
Despite pushing for peace talks to end the related insurgency in Afghanistan, Washington is unlikely to support similar efforts to strike a deal in Pakistan. Ties between the two countries have been on a downward trend all year, and were dealt a massive blow by an airstrike by US-led forces in Afghanistan two weeks ago that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers. The attack triggered fresh anti-US sentiment in the country, including within the army ranks.
US forces and their NATO and Afghan allies regularly come under attack from Afghan militants and al-Qaeda operatives, who live alongside Pakistani Taliban militants in the border region. Previous peace deals in the northwest didn’t last long and gave militants time to rest and regroup, as well as space for foreign extremists to prosper.
Mohammad said his men had held “peace talks with relevant government officials.”
“They are progressing well, and we may soon sign a formal peace agreement with the government,” he said in a telephone conversation.
He didn’t specify the terms being discussed, but past deals have essentially been nonaggression pacts: The militants get to live unmolested by the army in the border regions, which the state has long been content to leave as an ungoverned space for strategic reasons, so long as they do not attack inside Pakistan. The army is accused of tolerating or supporting militants there who strike into Afghanistan.
After heavy US pressure and billions in aid, the army pummeled militants in the northwest over the past four years, helped greatly by US-fired drone strikes, killing hundreds, but falling well short of victory. Nevertheless, the pressure may have helped put the insurgents into talks, or led factions to suggest a truce.
Mohammad’s main area of strength is the Bajur tribal region, where the army claims to have decimated the militants.
Mohammad said any deal in Bajur could be a “role model” for the rest of the border region.
The Pakistani Taliban, closely allied with al-Qaeda, have been behind much of the violence tearing apart Pakistan over the last four-and-a-half years. At least 35,000 people have been killed in suicide bombings, other insurgent attacks and army offensives.
Despite the Taliban’s record of indiscriminate violence, much of it directed at civilians, there is political and public support for talks. In September, the weak civilian government announced it was prepared to “give peace a chance” with militants, pandering to right-wing Islamist parties and their supporters.
Many Pakistanis share the hard-line religious and anti-US views of the Taliban.
They believe the militants could be brought into the fold if only Islamabad severed its alliance with Washington, which they blame for sparking the insurgency by invading Afghanistan following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the US.
That narrative has gained strength over the last year, during which a CIA contractor killed two Pakistanis, a unilateral US raid killed Osama bin Laden and the deadly border attacks on Nov 26. Following each incident, the army whipped up anti-US sentiment among the public.
The army maintains the border strike was a deliberate attack by the US-led coalition. US officials deny that, saying it was tragic mistake. The army response has helped popularize further the narrative that the US — not the Taliban — is the country’s enemy, giving militants and their supporters who have long argued along those lines fresh legitimacy.