Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
I would take the position that it is for the Government, the Counterinsurgent, to make the first move. To bring leadership into government (and not just anyone, the fact is that some are simply too dirty by their deeds and they will have to settle by sending in a Lieutenant who has less blood on his hands to move forward as an official in the new government) first, and then require the leadership of the movement to use their influence to stop the illegal use of the populaces weapons.
The problem with this formulation, to me, is that when a movement has its own army the government no longer has the capacity to require or compel them to do anything they don't want to do. I very much doubt that Hizballah, Hamas, or the Taliban see their arms as "the populace's weapons", or that they have they any intention of placing their armed forces under the command of any government they cannot control. Why should they?

Sure, the Karzai government can offer participation to the Taliban. The predictable response is that this can only be discussed when the foreigners leave. The situation on the ground doesn't change, and the Taliban reinforce the perception that they are not an insurgency fighting Karzai, but a resistance movement fighting a foreign occupier. Of course if the foreigners leave the Taliban won't be joining the Karzai government, they'll be trying to replace it.

I can't see any reason why Hizballah would voluntarily turn over command of their armed forces to the Lebanese government, or why Hamas would turn over theirs to the PA? What would they gain? What's the point of making offers that will surely be seen as completely pointless, and will surely be refused?