So these days you see tons of islamic countries trying to make peace with terrorists. Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and even other countries like India. These countries have been trying to get terrorist groups to sign peace agreements but in all reality as long as the terrorist organization exists can you ever actually have peace?

I have never heard of a terrorist group that signed a peace agreement with a government then maintained its existence without going back on that agreement. Their are a few cases of terrorist organizations giving up violence and their weapons dissolving their military assets and going into politics. That appears to work sometimes!

However can you ever make peace with a terrorist organization that remains active? Example Pakistan wanting to sign peace deals with the Taliban and other terrorist organizations. They insist each time they sign one that this is the one that the Taliban will respect. But every single time the Taliban re-groups and then resumes attacking.

It seems the only times these terrorist organizations try to sign peace deals is when they are beat and they know the Government will wipe them out if they don't come to a peace deal. They use this time of peace to regroup before they go back on the offensive.

A perfect example is Al Shabab in Somalia. The President just stated he wants Kenya and the AU to stop their advancements on Al Shabab. he didn't give an official reason however insiders and analysts have suggested that he is seeking peace deals and that elements of Al Shabab want to sign a cease fire agreement.

What will result if Somlia's Government signs a cease fire agreement and does not actually disarm the insurgents and disolve the organisation? Will there actually be peace? Or will Al Shabab wait for Kenya to retreat and then resume attacking the Government?

So many agreements have been signed in Pakistan, Palestine, Somalia , Afghanistan and not once to my knowledge has a terrorist organization kept its word while functional!

So can you actually make peace with a terrorist organization without shutting it down?

hell to the MF'N no

yes, by destroying all of them

of course you can make peace with them, they just won't make peace with you

sure... "we dont hit you, you dont hit us" and everybody goes and does their own thing. they only need to be not attacking you for their to be peace.

Of course you can negotiate, we see this happening all the time. Terrorist organisations are also often taken off terrorist lists often as well which helps to make the talks more acceptable politically.

Terrorism is a complex issue and it is often portrayed as being very black and white, especially in the media. Though I do not condone terrorism I understand why it is used. When one side is too militarily weak and it cannot gain its political objectives through negotiations and traditional use of force they often resort to terrorism as a means of last resort.

A case in point are the Palestinians. I'm sure they would rather be using modern sophisticated weapons to fight Israel but as they are lacking in such weapons and stand no chance militarily they resort to terrorism in order to achieve political objectives. Having said that I don't believe it is a strategy that works but it's a reason why I see it being used.
It also helps when they renounce the use of violence and are willing to negotiate. A good example is the IRA in northern Ireland and more recently ETA in Spain.

Britain made peace with the IRA in the Good Friday Agreement
Spain seems to have got ETA to give up its weapons

The number of terrorists in an organization that are irreconcilable is generally smaller than you may think, and also we're using way too broad a designation of "terrorist organization" as compared to a nonstate military entity that may employ terror tactics. Al Shabab and Hamas are such entities, as were the IRA (as noted above)

As noted with the IRA, there were splinter groups that rejected the agreement, but they are marginalized on all sides, but the point is that while extremist organizations tend to attract people who buy into the ideology totally and who thus will accept only unconditional victory or death as peaceful outcomes, most of them are just trying to resolve a grievance they have or to achieve a desired goal. The use of terrorism comes only when these groups feel they have to act, but lack the capacity for conventional military or guerilla warfare

For the longest time, the Taliban knew they were winning, or at least gaining momentum, which is why they violated deals they entered into, since they did not give the Taliban what they wanted relative to what they understood their position to be. If they were indeed properly beaten militarily, or beaten in such a way that they still had some bargaining power but not enough, then they would be partners for negotiation, but while they have momentum (which according to a downturn in attack numbers, they are currently losing), they will not want to negotiate

The point of this overly-long rambling is that negotiation only works at the right balance of power. Just like how we refused to negotiate with Japan at the beginning of 1945 in World War II. The allies had the advantage so totally that there was nothing to be gained by not just finishing off Japan

Edit: also, why the hell would anyone sign a peace agreement that dictated their disarmament, unless the consequence for not signing was total annihilation? Your guns are your only bartering power, unless your negotiating partner can guarantee that they will be equitable to you once you disarm. That's why negotiation works better with, once again, the IRA in Britain, because the long history of rule of law in Britain meant that the IRA could disarm without fear that it would just turn into a full-on pogrom against them, or that the British would turn around and arrest every single one of them. Can Somalia or Afghanistan guarantee such things to Al Shabab or the Taliban? I certainly wouldn't trust Karzai as a negotiation partner, but then again i as an American don't trust him as an ally either

Why not? You can even start sponsoring and using them.

They haven't given up their weapons, they said that they won't kill anymore, as they said in 1998 and 2006.