In recent we have heard statements like "We do not negotiate with terrorist", "we don't talk to terrorist". This is especially advocated by the previous US governments in their "war of terror".

But what happend if the the terrorist are from your country? Do you continue killing your own citizens? After a prolong war with IRA, the British government negotiated with them to bring and end to their suicide and bombings. I remember in the growing up in the 80s and 90s in UK, being given lectures in schools with regard to security. After negotiation, the IRA is gone, Northern Ireland is relatively peaceful and calm.

We are also witnessing something happening in Nigeria, the government have negotiated with our militants and it seems peace is gradualy returning to the Niger Delta

Why should the US government push Pakistan to continue waging war with its people? The tribal areas in Pakistan have been semi-autonomous for a long time, direct military assualt results in them feeling like the Pakistanis are wagin a genocide war against the Pastun and the Baluchis. This is akin to the feelings of Niger Deltans towards the Yoruba and Hausa controlled government of Nigeria.

I do believe there is need to change this attitude of eradicating terrorist by killing them all. The American foreign policy mades feels like, only Americans life is sacred, others, no matter how many, can be eliminated to save few Americans.

Isn't the Amnesty in Nigeria proven to be a success? Shouldn't other countries emulate that?

Militants can be totally suppressed! Google out how the sri lankan government dealt with the militant tamil tigers!

Google

Is that the best you can produce?

@post,

Negotiation is a powerful tool and I truly wish that it is taught in Nigerian schools. As a society faced with many barriers, either across tribal identities or just within an individual family unit, we are achieving below par and our collective commitment for unity is largely unrealized because for most part the process has become an extension of our ego, collectively and individually.

In any war, the two sides engaged in battle serve as an essential balance to one another. There will be no gallantry in battlefield unless your enemy proved formidable and gave you a good and hell of a fight. As you pin medals of honor to the chest of your sons and daughters and glorify their victory. . .the pride and dignity of the opponent must not be dishonored in passing. You owe it to your enemy to uphold their morale and bring them to the realization for a new beginning in relations. . .just as they owe you the honor of surrender and concession.

. . . if I may add, there is nothing worth the grain of a modelled behavior or leadership in Nigeria or Britain that Pakistan need to reference.

Pakistan played a role and was US proxy in the effort to defeat and push USSR out of Afghanistan in the 80s. Same warlords and tribal chiefs that US is now accusing of destabilizing that region were the foot soldiers trained, equipped and funded by US to make Kabul the graveyard of Russian soldiers. What has changed?

If we have sense in Nigeria, we should be exploiting the security advantages demonstrated by MEND, instead of labelling them a terrorist group. We, Nigeria, should reference Pakistan as "lessons learnt". . . and not the other way round.