Hospitality for Taliban talks

The BBC reports that the Pentagon wanted to pay for Taliban representatives while they were at peace talks.

This turns out to be forbidden, thanks to a clause inserted by Rep Visclosky:

None of the funds made available by the bill may be used "to pay for the expenses of any member of the Taliban to participate in any meeting that does not include the participation of members of the Government of Afghanistan or that restricts the participation of women", the legislation said.

"Mr Visclosky included the provision because the request for funding would violate laws concerning material support for terrorist groups, said Mr Spicer."

"Steve Ellis, of Taxpayers for Common Sense, said it was like "life imitating The Onion"."

I agree, but not for the reason Ellis thinks. I can see worrying that we might give up on the GofA and cut them out of the negotiating loop--and Visclosky might be worried about that. After watching the GoA for some years now I don't share that concern for the GoA. But "restricts the participation of women?" This is the Taliban you're trying to talk to. We're not in a position to dictate surrender terms.

Straight out of the Onion...