So apparently, if they are willing to abandon violence and pursue their goal of implementing Islamic law by other means, that is just fine with her. Here is yet another demonstration of the danger of misdiagnosis of the global jihad threat: the problem is not the means the Taliban use, the problem is their goal. The Taliban are not bad because they are violent — after all, so are the forces that oppose them. However, as far as the President and the Secretary of State are concerned, that is the only problem with them. If they try to accomplish their goals at the ballot box rather than with guns and bombs, Obama and Clinton would welcome them as partners. The fact that the Taliban want to impose a law upon Afghanistan that would subjugate women and non-Muslims as inferiors, denied equality of rights with Muslim men, and extinguish freedom of speech and freedom of conscience, means nothing to them.
And why should it? Karzai’s Afghanistan is already a Sharia state, according to the Afghan Constitution.
“US backs reconciliation with non-violent Taliban,” from AFP, March 31 (thanks to JE):
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday backed Afghanistan’s plans to hold reconciliation talks with members of the Taliban or past Al-Qaeda supporters who reject violence.
“We must … support efforts by the government of Afghanistan to separate the extremists of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban from those who joined their ranks not out of conviction, but out of desperation,” she said.
“They should be offered an honourable form of reconciliation and reintegration into a peaceful society, if they are willing to abandon violence, break with Al-Qaeda, and support the constitution.”…
Why not? The Afghan Constitution declares that Sharia is the highest law of the land.