My first reaction when I heard that a group of people were seeking a meeting with Crown Prince Abdullah to discuss a solution to terrorism through dialogue was to ask if that was a mediation effort or just an attempt by these people to raise their profile.
Political organizations fighting for certain causes often have two wings, a political and a military one. But the individuals who have been committing the bombings and killings have never made any public demands or made clear the kind of future they want to see for the country. They have no political wing worth speaking of. All they do is strike in the middle of the night and terrorize innocent people.
Information available to analysts and experts is sketchy and is mostly based on guesswork. It is thus almost impossible to imagine what kind of formula those who asked for a dialogue with the terrorists could put forward.
The word dialogue implies two parties sitting together to arrive at an acceptable formula through negotiation. This requires that each party should compromise so that they can meet somewhere in the middle. It also requires a mediator who must be fully aware of the demands of each side and who must recognize the legitimacy of their demands. The mediator must also show a high degree of impartiality to win the trust and confidence of both parties. Lastly, there has to be a channel linking the mediator with the two parties.
I am not sure whether all these qualifications are available with the people who have asked to meet the crown prince. If not, this disqualifies them from leading any dialogue. Some have reportedly already nominated themselves as mediators. I hope that is not true because I don’t want them to appear sympathetic to the criminals.
