Terrorists Offer Obama a Truce; Publicity Move or Legalization?

Today, on the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the U.S., al Qaida, in the words of its leader’s brother, offered a truce to Western countries. A similar proposal was made earlier by the Taliban’s representatives. As if by agreement, the U.S.’ worst enemies have decided to present a generous gift to Barack Obama on the eve of the presidential elections. Will he accept their offer?

The brother of al Qaida’s current leader, Ayman Mohammed Rabie al-Zawahiri, suggested that [involved parties] bury the hatchet. He has volunteered to take on the role of mediator in the negotiations, and even made a plan. The plan is six pages long and contains information about how to completely resolve all disputes with the U.S. in ten years. According to CNN, the mediator is asking the U.S. to stop invasion of Muslim countries, to free imprisoned Muslims and to not interfere with implementing Sharia. In return, the radicals are promising to end terror and support the interests of the U.S. and the West in their countries.

Let’s face it, these conditions are quite acceptable for the U.S. The cost of continuous wars are hitting the U.S. budget ever more painfully, to release convicted terrorists is not a problem and the U.S. no longer interferes with the implementation of Sharia.

The Taliban presented an almost identical proposal to the U.S. Recently, it became known that some of their leaders are offering the U.S. peaceful negotiations and are ready to cease fire. Taliban demands that the U.S. not interfere in the political and religious life of Afghanistan. In return, they are ready to cooperate in all other areas, to the point that they are even willing to leave all the major U.S. military bases on their territory. There is one more condition, however: They absolutely refuse to deal with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

It seems that on the eve of the presidential elections, U.S. President Barack Obama would be happy to receive these offers just in time to go down in history as the winner of two wars: the war in Afghanistan and the war on terrorism. However, that did not happen. First, Obama simply does not have time to solve global issues before Nov. 6. Secondly, it is absolutely unnecessary for him. It suffices to say that this is not the first attempt to negotiate. For some reason, as soon as negotiations get started, something always happens that makes further developments impossible: Either Bin Laden starts bombing or the U.S. marines urinate on the Taliban’s corpses and burn the Koran on camera.

Anyway, the true intentions of the terrorists are highly questionable. For example, in the case of the Taliban, the Western media refers to some “moderate members of the movement,” which no one knows about. Even the personality of al-Zawahiri is doubtful; there is no evidence of his impact on his brother. In addition, he spent 14 years in Egyptian prisons, from which he was only recently released, after the overthrow of Mubarak. It is possible that he had contacts with the Western intelligence agencies.

Thus, the whole story of the “solutions which you cannot refuse” is more likely a pre-election publicity move on the part of Obama, with no real basis. Its purpose is to demonstrate Obama’s success in the fight against international terrorism: Its leaders are, literally, on their knees, begging for peace. However, if the talks would actually bring the West and the Islamic world to desirable peace, it will be a very disturbing fact for us.