Is the Afghan 'peace deal' a defeat for the United States?

Any news of peace in Afghanistan brings relief and hope to the world. But such optimism has repeatedly stumbled in the past. As a result, everyone is watching this news with a very sceptical mind. 

News of any peace deal between the Taliban and the United States forces at least eight questions to be answered.
Is the Afghan 'peace deal' a defeat for the United States?

US-Taliban peace deal

In terms of content, the upcoming deal is the same as the one that was supposed to take place last September. It is not a traditional peace agreement. 

Rather, it is only a part of a multi-level agreement. With the forthcoming agreement, U.S. troops will not leave the country immediately. The Taliban are also unable to build their "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan" right now.

Both will be very time-consuming issues. It is clear that the United States and the Taliban still do not trust anyone. They are not optimistic about the future. 

However, if the agreement was reached that the USA would remove all of their troops in next 14 months. The Taliban prisoners must be released step by step.

 In return, the Taliban will ensure that they do not cooperate with Al-Qaeda, IS, the Haqqani network or similar armed forces. In the meantime, according to the agreement, the Taliban will start talks with the current government of Afghanistan.

 The agreement is like- While everyone has a gun, nobody will put his finger on the trigger.
Is the Afghan 'peace deal' a defeat for the United States?

Is it a defeat for the United States?

It is estimated that the United States currently has about 13,000 troops in Afghanistan. Besides, they lost more than 2500 soldiers of their army. 

The United States spends about 1 million a year on each of its soldiers in Afghanistan.

 According to research from Brown University, Washington's war in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2019 cost about 975 billion; Which still continues.  This cost is in addition to the aid given to Pakistan to help in the Afghan war.

It is the longest war in US history. At one time, the United States had more than 100,000 troops in Afghanistan (2011). 

The United States has not been able to completely overthrow the Taliban. Gradually they realized that victory in this war was impossible. As a result, it has gradually shrunk and now the country has to go through the hands of the opponent. 

This visit to the United States is not in the guise of a winner. On the contrary, after leaving, the US will have to face the question - what did they come to Afghanistan to achieve?

Is the Afghan 'peace deal' a defeat for the United States?

Is this a victory for the Taliban?

It will take a long time for the last US soldier to leave Afghanistan. But the Taliban will certainly see any of its schedules as a military victory. In previous years they controlled a large area of ​​the country.

 They did not face any severe shortage of arms, manpower and public support. Already a kind of shadow government has been formed. As a result, as the peace talks continue, the country will gradually come under their control in the coming days. 

However, their real victory or defeat will be determined in the coming days. To lead the country, the whole of Afghanistan must be united.

 If the Pashtun leadership cannot build the confidence to run the country along with other nationalities, then today's 'victory' of the Taliban will be in vain.

What will happen to the Afghan government, built by NATO?

The current Afghan government is dependent on NATO aid, both financially and militarily. His responsibility will be to gradually hand over the governance of the country to the persons representing the people. 

The work will begin soon, and it would be good if the government could take over before the last US soldier leaves. 

Given the nature of the compromises that have already been reached, it is clear that the current government will have to decide two issues in negotiations with the Taliban. 

One is a permanent ceasefire agreement and the other is a power-sharing agreement. Both are difficult, time-consuming.

This NATO-backed government is almost divided at the moment. Abdullah Abdullah, the chief executive of the government, is reluctant to accept President Ashraf Ghani.

 Former president Hamid Karzai, another influential leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, and Batur Dostum, the son of Uzbek leader Rashid Dostum, are helping Abdullah.

 Though they have made a deal in 17th May to share power between them. In such a scenario, it will be difficult for the government to decide who will negotiate with the Taliban.

The country's latest election and the electeds have no legitimacy on the part of the Taliban. As a result, the government's infighting and divisiveness is a good opportunity for the Taliban. 

This could lead to a rift into the pro-government guards, which would put the Taliban in a better position in terms of strategy and bargaining.

Many of the country's elites who were against the Taliban during the NATO aggression are widely corrupt. It is expected that some of them will leave the country to avoid retaliation. 

As a result, the current NATO-backed government is likely to weaken soon. Its added weakness means the fear of civil war, which no party other than IS or al-Qaeda wants at the moment.

Exactly this time why this deal?

At this time, after 18 months of negotiations, the sound of peace seemed to be the future. Many are saying that the US election is the big background of the current agreement. 

Trump would like to see it directly as a success. The point is ruthless and ironic that the rulers need both war and peace. 

An agreement is more important to Trump than peace in Afghanistan. No matter how symbolic it is. He must be called successful.

Washington is now desperate to implement the agreement which has reached with the Taliban three months ago. 

For two reasons, the United States is now trying to broker a truce between the Afghan government and the Taliban. One is an attempt to allow Afghanistan to succeed in its quest to end a 19-year futile war.

 Another is the United States' own politics. This is an election year in the United States. The Trump administration has pledged to withdraw all US troops from Afghanistan this year. 

He wants to remove the army in such a way that it feels like a dignified withdrawal.

"You need to make peace and we need to return to our homeland," to follow this rules, the United States is not asking the Taliban to back down, even after one attack after another. 

They want the Afghan government to do this from now on. It is noteworthy that the agreement with the Taliban, excluding Kabul, did not provide any conditions for the Taliban to reduce violence. 

The United States is now trying to turn the Taliban issue into an internal Afghan issue.

The deal is a win-win for Trump, given US interests. NATO troops will not have to leave Afghanistan immediately after the agreement. Rather, they received some assurances that they would protect themselves from Taliban attacks. 

Another benefit is that they are now able to push the Taliban towards the current Afghan government. As a result, Washington could blame both sides for any future violence.

But China and Pakistan have encouraged the Taliban to make the latest deal possible. The two countries are keen to quickly connect Afghanistan with their economic corridors. 

And Moscow is eager to be one of the most enthusiastic viewers of any scene of the US bowing out of Afghanistan.

 Because once they had to go in the same way.

What do neighbour countries want?

Neighbouring countries will play a key role in Afghanistan after the departure of the United States. The establishment of peace depends a lot on their positive role. 

However, in this case, the expectation will stumble again and again. There will be fierce competition between Pakistan and India to establish authority in Kabul in the coming days.

 Russia and Iran also have specific geopolitical interests there. Iran would like to see a strong position in the Shiite Hazara government. 

They will not want a situation like the one in 1996 when nine diplomats of Iran had to lose their lives at the hands of the Taliban in Mazar-e-Sharif.

Russia would want something similar using Tajiks and Uzbeks. On the other hand, China is desperately trying to get the jobs to build the economic infrastructure of the new Afghanistan. 

To get that, he also has to find ‘his own people’ at the highest level of government. China also wants the Taliban to prevent any Uighurs from entering Xinjiang from Afghanistan. 

Russia similarly does not want to see Chechen and Uzbek guerrillas return to their country. For this aspiration, they have been silently cooperating with the Taliban for the last few years.

New Delhi's demand is two-pronged. They are keen to maintain the current influence in Kabul in the future under the Taliban. They also want to see to it that the Afghan Mujahideen do not turn to Kashmir after the war.
Is the Afghan 'peace deal' a defeat for the United States?

Once peace is established, Iran will want to repatriate refugees from its territory. Pakistan has the same goal. 

There are about 3 million Afghan refugees in both countries. Many refugees fear they will be forced to return in uncertainty.

Will peace come?

It will be 19 years of the last Afghan war. In the latest 2019, 14,000 rounds of ammunition were fired in this war. About 10,000 civilians were injured and killed. 

The country has fought wars with Soviet and British troops before. The Afghans had long been embroiled in a civil war among themselves in the war with foreign powers.

 Afghan soil is now ruthlessly tired of these wars. The Taliban, who have ties to the grassroots, know this very well.

Will the agreement bring peace there?

The answer to this question depends a lot on ‘if’ and ‘then’. The Taliban or the United States is not the only "parties" to Afghanistan.

 In addition to the Taliban, there are IS and al-Qaeda inside the country. They could continue the violence. IS is also a big opponent of the Taliban. 

IS is waiting to pull the members of the Taliban who are disgruntled due to the deal with the United States.
Is the Afghan 'peace deal' a defeat for the United States?

In addition to ethnic Pashtuns, the Hazaras, Tajiks and Uzbeks are important regional forces in Afghan society. 

Everyone has weapons in their hands. Under no circumstances, any force will want to see themselves neglected.

Due to Afghanistan's geographical location, the next government will have to show the ability to satisfy at least five of its neighbours. Especially Pakistan and Iran. 

The two countries, including India, are eager to find their own interests in talks to form a future government.

It is not easy to create an administrative formula that satisfies all such parties. As a result, the prospect of peace will always be at stake. 

Rapid stability in the country cannot be expected without the cooperation of all forces at home and abroad. 

Ultimate stability and peace must be surrendered to all forces. Which is almost an incredible demand for social life in Afghanistan?

What will be the form of the future government?

In the interest of peace, Afghanistan needs a national government for many more days to come. 

At the moment, more important than the acceptable elections in the country is the reduction of militancy, the establishment of a civilian administration and the building of almost completely destroyed state institutions.

 No single team can do this job. Part of the current Afghan government is now willing to form an interim government with Taliban representatives.

But the Taliban do not appear to be willing to work with the current government. They do not have the habit of working jointly with any other political force. 

They may demand a fair election. Where they will participate through their debut as a political party.
Is the Afghan 'peace deal' a defeat for the United States?

But all these are conjectures. How the Taliban will be involved in Afghanistan's future is still uncertain.

 There is no possibility of cutting that uncertainty very recent. However, dramatic progress is not strange. 

Especially when the New York Times printed Sirajuddin Haqqani's writings before the agreement was signed. The United States has announced 5 million USD for information leading to the capture of this Taliban leader.

 Many newspaper readers in the United States were shocked to see his writing on the country's main paper on February 20. This is tragic revenge on the USA from Taliban.

Because, for the last 17 years, the tax money of these Americans has been poured to defeat Sirajuddin Haqqani and his companions on the battlefield of Afghanistan. 

Now the United States only wants to return back after completing Taliban's inauguration.

Post a Comment