Afghanistan does not need Western-style democracy – its needs a national consensus and reconciliation. And this will only happen when the foreign occupation of Afghanistan ends. As long as NATO forces remain in Afghanistan -- fighting against an insurgency that it will never defeat - Karzai’s demand that the Taliban disarm itself and sit at the negotiating table is mere folly. Thus, if Karzai is truly serious about convening a “Loya Jirga,” then he should do the following if reelected (which of course he will be!):

His first decision after being inaugurated should be to call for a national assembly, and then to resign. This would allow Afghan institutions and traditions to determine the fate of Afghanistan and its people.

Should the Taliban (presumably armed) be allowed to be part of the “Loya Jirga?” The answer is, of course, yes. This needs to happen, as the Taliban is a political fact on the ground. Any consensus that can be found among Afghans will have legitimacy at home and turn the Taliban into a shareholder supporting a national consensus.

What could be expected from an Afghan national assembly? First of all, expect the majority Pashtuns to want a greater say in Afghan politics. Karzai, himself a Pashtun, has discredited his own ethnic group due to his close relations with Washington and the other occupying forces. And, not surprisingly, many Pashtuns support the Taliban as a result.

Second, a new and legitimate Afghan government would probably not be friendly to the West. However, this does not necessarily mean Afghanistan will fall into the orbit of any of its neighbors. History has shown the Afghans prize their independence and have demonstrated this by taking on any occupier, be they Russian, British or American. Also, it should be expected that Afghanistan will be some kind of Islamic state. Alas, this is a trend.

If Arab Muslims are really given a choice, many of them -- maybe a majority of them -- prefer to live in a Muslim-ruled state. If that is their democratic choice, we should respect this. (I am often told by my neocon “friends” that “democracies don’t fight each other.” Ok, I say to them, let’s test this proposition if democracy is to truly be respected - and if not, then maybe democracy has nothing to do with conflicts at all.)

Third, will the (old) Taliban simply return to power again? This is unlikely. Today’s Taliban is motivated by and gets popular support due to foreign occupation. Once the occupiers leave, then the reason for the current form of the Taliban to exist will be put into question. And let’s remember that it was Al Qaeda that attacked the U.S. on 9/ll - not Afghanistan or its people.

It is naïve to believe and hope that NATO’s occupation of Afghanistan will end the day a “Loya Jirga” convenes. But there is a way out: NATO and Afghanistan’s neighbors, including Russia, can and should be willing to play a constructive role in allowing the Afghan national assembly to be held and honor its results (even if NATO and Afghanistan’s neighbors don’t like the results). What is most important now is to see an end to the occupation of Afghanistan and finally to the country’s many civil wars. Afghans and the world have very little to lose at this point - the upside is enormous.

Western ideas about democracy have failed Afghanistan and its people. Exporting democracy to the Arab and Muslim world is a fool’s errand and full of senseless violence. Democracy does not build nations, but a nation with consensus and reconciliation after decades of conflict can build something approaching a democracy that suits them best.

(And, by the way, once Karzai resigns after his “democratic election,” as he should, I suppose there are plenty of Unocal folks willing to take back their former employee - and just maybe that nutcase Zalmay Khalilzad, too.)