Talk the talk

Never has there been so much talk about talking. First Hillary Clinton came to talk to us about not talking to the Haqqanis. Then our government, the US and Afghanistan agreed to talk about talking to the Taliban. All of which is a relief because for a while there we were worried that the US would stop talking to us, even about talking. But not only are we all talking about everything we need to talk about but we are also planning future talks about laying the groundwork for more talking. There will be bilateral talks and trilateral talks, both of which are better than the unilateral talks we were talking about earlier. Unilateral talks is basically when you talk to yourself. We’re glad we aren’t doing that anymore, other countries look at you like you’re crazy when you talk to yourself. The only way all this talking could go mute though, is if the Taliban refuse to join in the talks. It’s a bit redundant talking about someone if they won’t talk to you, then it just becomes gossiping and no one wants to do that. The Haqqanis have already talked about their refusal to talk, which means we will have to talk at them, not to them. Which is fine with America because they prefer to let their drones do the talking. The Taliban, however, are being invited to come and talk but only if they will talk about the things America wants to talk about, which is a bit unfortunate when you don’t know which America is doing the talking. Is it Hillary Clinton who recently talked at and to Pakistan before pointing out that she doesn’t talk for America, and is giving just her point of view? Is it the CIA that talks in whispers and has apparently already been in talks with the Taliban all along? Or maybe it is the America that is represented by their Congress, which loves to talk but hardly ever manages to say anything that isn’t easily reduced to an unintelligent sound bite.

For that matter, even in Pakistan we never know who is doing the talking. Were the assurances given to Hillary Clinton by General Kayani, who talks in a voice so soft that no one is ever quite sure what he is saying? Or were they given by the civilian government, which is capable of talking all day and night at every conceivable volume without ever saying anything you can take as a surety? The media, when they were talking about the talks, seemed to think that America always speaks with a forked tongue. It’s a valid point but then you have to take our own inability to talk straight into account as well. In which case the transcript of the talks will read less like a linear dialogue and more like a Wikipedia entry where every word is hyperlinked to lead to the meaning of the word ‘lies’.

As far as the rest of us go, the masses that everyone is talking about without actually really talking about us at all, we are just tired of all the talk. Talk about talks or talk about talking about talks, for us the end result is the same. We are tired of listening to it. In all the talking, there is nothing we haven’t heard before nor is there anything we won’t be listening to again. With an election in America next year, we figure it’s only a matter of time before everything that was talked about is forgotten there. And we are girding our ears for the onslaught of talking that is to come when our own elections begin. Meanwhile, the militants have continued to let their explosions talk for them. All of which means we really want someone to stop talking and do something instead. Let’s talk about it.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 27^th, 2011.