Afghan Peace

Foot Notes
a. A balanced approach toward regional countries is needed
b. Not force but negotiation
c. Political Division and rigid attitude of government towards the
Taliban
d. “The basic assumption was that corruption is an Afghan problem.”
Even if so, he points out, it was the Americans who brought in the
money.
e. Hard cash was used in an unprecedented manner to purchase
loyalties and information from warlords, parliamentarians,
governors and even religious leaders.
f. The unholy trinity of warlords, drug barons and defense contractors
was tolerated… being US allies.
g. In a bizarre manner, US and NATO forces have been paying the
Taliban “rahdari” or fee for safe passage through Taliban areas.
h. Corruption-tired common Afghans, meanwhile, continue to flock
towards the Taliban, viewed as “brutal but efficient and devout”.
i. People of Afghanistan are exhausted of an unending war.
j. Ghani’s government will have to understand that US assistance is not
an all-time phenomenon and that President Trump has his own
political compulsions to bring American forces home and end the
long conflict."
k. While Washington has lost over 2,400 personnel and spent hundreds
of billions of dollars on the effort, there is not much to show for it as
the Afghan government and military are widely seen as incapable of
running and securing the country once their Western sponsors
depart.
l. The broad consensus is that if the US and other Western forces leave
without an agreement between Afghan stakeholders, the chaos that
ensued after the Soviet withdrawal may be repeated.
m. The Taliban, which currently controls 60 percent or more land in
Afghanistan, has enough legitimacy as well as justification for the
establishment of their conservative government in Kabul.
 n. The peace in Afghanistan does not merely depend upon the
withdrawal of forces, rather, until the interests of all major
stakeholders are met, peace is elusive.
o. Afghanistan has always been an epicenter of global powers’ proxies
and also the neighboring countries including India, Pakistan, and
Iran. Hence, the future of the country cannot be decided only by the
US and the Taliban. All major stakeholders have conflicting hidden
interests in Afghanistan which are impacting the peace process.
p. In the intra-Afghan dialogue, the thorniest issue would be the nature
of the state and the constitution.
q. The Taliban are already losing the support of some of their radical
factions who were not in favor of a deal with the US.
r. It is important to realise that the Taliban are not a static or
homogenous group. They are now comprised of several factions.
While the older guard (Mullah Baradar, Haibatullah, and Sirajuudin
Haqqani) are considered closer to Pakistan, newer factions have been
more conciliatory to other regional players.
s. For negotiations to move forward, it will be imperative for the two
sides to agree to a ceasefire and lower the level of hostilities.

Regional Factors:

 Pakistan playing the role of an ice-breaker

 China: It wants to exploit enormous Afghan’s mineral market and to
ensure the smooth running of its belt and road initiative related
projects. Moreover, it wants to keep extremists tendencies away from its
border areas as these could destabilize its already ethnically disturbed
province Xinxiang. Thus, peace in Afghanistan is as imperative for
China as it is for Afghanistan.
 Pakistan: having a 2200 kilometer porous border with Afghanistan,
Pakistan has always been apprehensive of its security and role of India
using Afghanistan against it. At present, Pakistan has two broader
interests: to stop cross border terrorism as it wants to mainstream its
border areas, the erstwhile FATA. Secondly, to keep India out of
Afghanistan as it has been using Afghan soil to create insurgency in
erstwhile FATA and Baluchistan. Hence, Pakistan’s interests are aligned
with a peaceful Afghanistan.
 Russia: Russia, once a bringer of catastrophes on Afghan soil, now, does
not have any hegemonic design in the country. It wants to protect its
backyard from extremism and terrorism to get maximum advantage of
the new Central Asian great game. Hence, peace in Afghanistan will also
serve Russian’s interests.
 US: the US signed the deal with the Taliban not to bring peace in the
country but to get a safe passage and to secure some domestic electoral
interests. Without a deal, the withdrawal would have been considered as
a debacle of the US imperious military might which would have also
depleted its global standing as a superpower. The US hasstill many
unfulfilled strategic objectives in Afghanistan and without achieving
them, it will not leave the country. Washington sees Chines rise as a
threat to its existence and will not let any effort in containing it.
Afghanistan is its base station from where it will derail belt and road
projects by creating insurgency in the region. The emergence of ISIK can
be seen in this perspective as it has been considerably gaining ground in
Afghanistan. The US can also use Afghani soil to hire and train fighters
for East Turkmenistan Islamic Movement to create insurgency in
Xinxiang. The withdrawal of forces does not mean that the US will leave
and peace would again come to the country. It is a part of the US new
retrenchment strategy which aimed to reduce unnecessary military
spending abroad. The US strategic interests in Afghanistan are the same
as they were when it invaded the country in 2001; by the recent peace
deal, it has just changed its tactics to secure those interests more
efficiently and cost-effectively and ISIK is its practical manifestation.
 India: It has many strategic interests in Afghanistan but the pivotal
among all is the encirclement of Pakistan. It has been using Afghan soil
to create insurgency in FATA, Baluchistan, and Karachi by providing
financial, technical, and logistic support to TTP, BLA, BLF, and many
other terrorist organizations. Moreover, India being a strategic US ally,
has also gone a step further in containing China in the region. The
recent Sino/Indian standoff in Doklam is being seen by many strategic
analysts as a part of a broader US strategy to contain China. Hence,
Indians’ interests are aligned with those of the US which can only be
served by flaring insurgency that could engulf Afghanistan in general
and Pakistan and China in particular.
  Indians had cultivated past few Afghan governments post 2001 US
invasion in a bid to destabilize Pakistan’s restive tribal areas bordering
Afghanistan.
 Since Indians could not openly challenge that peace process they
ramped up their subversion efforts to derail the peace process by arming
the Afghan National forces to the teeth and encouraging them to attack
Taliban with renewed vigour.
 India is the only country whose interests are not being served by the
impending peace.
 Now when the eyes of entire world community are fixed on intra Afghan
talks the odd man out is India bent upon playing the role of a spoiler.

Future Scenarios:

Scenario A—Peace attained through dialogue and a coalition is

formed between Taliban and current status quo. This scenario is only
applicable if Afghan Taliban display flexibility and get adjusted in the system
with major power share going to them. Taliban has already indicated that they
will review their standing on women’s rights and reconciliation with the rest of
the power brokers. The conservative and hardliner elements within the
Taliban may have to be motivated by the leadership for giving space for a
lasting peace. In this scenario it will become much easier for the US to accept
the new power structure and get some guarantees that her interests are
preserved in the region. Russia, Iran and China will have to be taken on board
with a central role assigned to Pakistan so that the process moves smoothly.
Can this scenario sustain peace in Afghanistan without a mini Marshall Plan
to make sure the Afghan people get some relief, and the state functions till the
time it becomes self-reliant? This is a major question.

Scenario B—Shattered peace after withdrawal of NATO forces—a

civil war-like situation with Afghans and power brokers left to sort
it out through the barrel of a gun. This is Something akin to post-Soviet
withdrawal from Afghanistan, when warring factions were left on their own.
This scenario is a possibility if no peace deal is reached. Keeping in view the
interest of the current regime and her backers and spoilers like India,
Afghanistan could plunge into a civil war, with more misery for the people of
Afghanistan. Hostile agencies like RAW could expand collusion with ISIS and
TTP and their proxies could push Afghanistan into another quagmire. Contest
for spaces would grow as more space occupied by a specific faction would give
it more leverage and strength. Attempts could be made to restart destabilising
Pakistan and keep Pak afghan border on fire.

Scenario C—The Taliban upholds the peace agreement, gets rid of

Indian influence and her proxies in the region and establishes a
powerful conservative system by defeating its opponents in
coalition militarily. So far, this is the most predictable outcome. Already,
many Delhi and Kabul based pundits have predicted the Taliban gaining
strength on their own. It is primarily to do with India supporting NDS, ISIS
and TTP who have been targeting the Taliban faction in Afghanistan since
2006. This scenario could have repercussions for the whole region and even
Occupied Kashmir, as India loses face in Afghanistan and is frustrated by
‘Ladakh Shame’ incurred on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China. A
major challenge for the Taliban would be to economically sustain their regime;
will Russia, China, Pakistan and their allies be able to help economically
sustain this arrangement, this is a million dollar question; especially when
India, Iran and the West try to fail the new regime.

Scenario D—Breakaway factions in the Taliban split and try to gain

power by colluding with other power factions. This is one of the most
dangerous scenarios because it would result in something similar to Scenario
‘B’. Pakistan, China and Russia could lose space and hostile agencies in
Afghanistan may try to woo these breakaway factions through incentives and
power-share promises. This scenario could actually allow many countries in
the region for power jockeying and use these factions in a turf war. The Iran-
Arab contest, the US-China contest, the US-Russia contest and the Indo-Pak
contest within Afghanistan could accentuate the Afghan quagmire and create a
situation like Yemen or Syria.
Issues

1. For example, would this mean that areas under Taliban control would
be ‘legally’ accepted by Kabul when such an arrangement is
implemented?
2. Agreement on a political settlement: the end state should be a republic
in an effort to pre-empt the Taliban’s expected demand for Afghanistan
to be declared a Sharia state or emirate.
3. Then there is the question of whether an interim government would be
needed to transition to the ‘new post-settlement Afghan Islamic
government’.
4. Even if both the Taliban and the Afghan government are willing to come
to the negotiating table, there are serious issues that need to be resolved,
including power-sharing, role of Islam within the state, and women’s
rights.
5. It’s not just about a power-sharing arrangement; it is also about a future
political system in the country and protection of fundamental rights of
all sections of the population. The outcome of the talks would largely
depend on whether or not the Taliban are willing to accept a pluralistic
political order.
6. Another cause of concern is the protection of women’s rights to
education and work.

Peace Deal:

a. Prisoners swap has been the key factor for smooth talks between Kabul
and the Taliban.

Past:
 Pakistan’s alliance with the Taliban was also seen to provide Pakistan an
element of strategic depth to buffer against Indian aggression. India
thus joined hands with Iran to back the Northern Alliance.

 India pumped in more than $2 billion into various development and

infrastructure projects for Afghanistan — the largest aid package India
has invested in any neighboring country.
Pakistan and Afghan Peace:

 For Pakistan, there are multiple benefits for facilitating peace in

Afghanistan.
 Islamabad also does not want there to be a slipshod withdrawal of US
presence in Afghanistan as there was post-Soviet war.
 It would also be detrimental for Pakistan were there to be a government
in Kabul that is friendlier with India than with Pakistan.
 Pak-Afghan relations have seen a lot of ups and downs; hence it is
essential for them to focus on their diplomacy and to facilitate this peace
process.
 Economic and social inroads need to be made into Afghanistan to
improve the image of Pakistan in the eyes of the younger generations.
 There is a huge opportunity for medical tourism between the two
countries.
 As the “Heart of Asia,” Afghanistan lets Pakistan and South Asia connect
with Central Asia, bring to life the Central Asia-South Asia (CASA)
electricity transmission line, Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India
Gas Pipeline (TAPI), and opens transit routes for Pakistani trucks to
carry goods to Central Asia.
 Exploiting the hydroelectricity and irrigation potential of the Kabul
River is another area of a possible mutual benefit.
 Pakistan has played a very positive and constructive role in facilitating
these talks and this role has been duly acknowledged by the United
States, United Kingdom and other stakeholders.

References:

1. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2220712/6-stakeholders-violence-
afghanistan/
2. https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/659656-afghanistan-war-and-
peace
3. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2225810/6-indian-interests-strategy-
afghan-peace/
4. https://dailytimes.com.pk/620389/the-anatomy-of-the-afghan-
imbroglio-a-way-forward/
5. https://pakobserver.net/prospects-for-peace-in-afghanistan/
6. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2244075/6-afghanistan-peace-offing/
7. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2244858/6-afghanistan-corruption-
trumps-violence/
8. https://www.dawn.com/news/1563390/strategic-shift
9. https://www.dawn.com/news/1567875/american-exit
10. https://nation.com.pk/10-Jul-2020/after-peace-in-afghanistan
11. https://www.dawn.com/news/1568711/uncertainty-clouds-afghan-talks
12. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2255028/delaying-peace-in-afghanistan
13. https://dailytimes.com.pk/644622/major-powers-interests-in-
afghanistan/
14. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2256403/afghanistan-india-and-pakistan
15. https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/693004-pakistan-and-afghan-
peace
16.No country will benefit more from Afghan peace than Pakistan
https://www.arabnews.pk/node/1712071
17. https://www.dawn.com/news/1573992/intra-afghan-peace-talks
18. https://www.dawn.com/news/1579612/afghan-peace-talks
19.https://dailytimes.com.pk/671591/india-the-afghan-peace-spoiler/