The U.S. should keep talking with the Taliban

It’s been nearly a year since President Donald Trump dispatched more troops to Afghanistan and announced his “new strategy” for the 17-year-old conflict there. Last weekend’s attempt by the Taliban to seize the key city of Ghazni is a reminder that Trump’s approach, like that of both his predecessors, has produced, at best, a stalemate.

There’s little reason to think that more time or more U.S. troops will materially change the situation. But a diplomatic strategy, including direct talks with the Taliban, might—if the administration can conceive it broadly enough.

To its credit, the U.S. seems to have broached this possibility, by sending a top State Department diplomat to meet with Taliban officials in Qatar last month.

To buy time for gradual progress, and to set the stage for deeper talks, the U.S. will have to address frictions with other regional powers that have better ties with the Taliban—and reason to use them against the United States. Iran, for one, is fighting the Trump administration’s efforts to isolate its economy. Russia is unhappy with new U.S. sanctions. And Pakistan is absorbing deep cuts in U.S. military aid

Nevertheless, there should be room for some cooperation. China, in particular, has reason to promote stability in Afghanistan, where it’s looking to build a railroad with India that would connect its Belt and Road network to the Iranian port of Chabahar. Pakistan, given its dire economic problems, could use a reset in relations with the United States. And all the neighbors—even the Taliban—share the U.S. interest in eliminating a growing Islamic State movement in Afghanistan.

The Taliban has yet to show any willingness to accept the Afghan government and constitution, renounce violence, or respect the rights of women and minorities—all of which would be necessary for any agreement to hold. That’s all the more reason for the Trump administration to ensure Afghanistan’s neighbors support its fledgling efforts toward peace.