Last month, President Trump dumped the Afghan Peace Deal with Taliban, cancelling a meeting at Camp David presidential retreat to meet with the Taliban officials.
The gap that was visible during the last few rounds of talks with the Taliban was absence of a ceasefire leading to violence as the talks were on. Swapping prisoners is another benchmark for reaching at a peace deal. According to rumors, Taliban could give up an Australian and an American Professor they kidnapped in 2016. Both taught at the American University of Afghanistan. In lieu of the two prisoners, U.S may release Anas Haqqani, a very senior member of the Haqqani network. He is younger brother to Siraj Haqqani. These measures, aimed to build confidence between the two, can eventually result in a more realistic peace deal than envisaged before.
To revive the peace talks, Zalmay Khalilzad met Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the honcho boss of Taliban in Pakistan some time ago. If Taliban agree to a truce, leading to a ceasefire as a prelude to talks-it will give U.S the face-saving to restart the talks.
Mr Trump used a rally in Minnesota last week to signal he was still open to negotiation. He told supporters: “We’re pulling people out and we’re trying to make good deals and we’re going to bring our soldiers back home.” (The Telegraph, 13th Oct. 2019)
Taliban want the foreign footprints on Afghan soil gone. They are serious about reaching a settlement. It would therefore be a good decision to offer U.S the much desired truce so both parties can move forward from this point.
Lt. General ® Naeem Khalid Lodhi says, “US, given a choice would never have left Afghanistan. They are doing so under duress. They will definitely go for an alternative base in the region. The Afghan-US talks paused for three reasons: a) Camp David was a wrong choice for signing (tremendous internal pressure) b) Indians requested to delay so as to prevent shifting of Pakistani troops towards East and c) Outcome of Afghan Presidential elections to re asses ground situation. (10% turnout, actually could be even less)So the talks resume and thinning out of US forces likely by end of the year.”
Even if U.S withdraws from Afghanistan, it is a foregone conclusion that Afghanistan will continue to need both international support as well as international donor support
Can the alternative base as stated by General Naeem be the Occupied Indian Kashmir? This option makes a lot of sense. India needs investors. Given the current political landscape of U.S desire to control a rising China with India as a willing ally, what would be better base to occupy in the region without warfare, without killings and cutting the losses and gaining a new base sans all the trouble? The ambitious posture of China raises the fundamental question as to whether China or the United States will ultimately determine the rules for trade and investment. What the US is left with is a fear of China’s outreach. Leaving TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership); the pragmatic path of molding the economic game to its advantage, the US is now playing the smaller game by joining hands with India to mold a situation to serve her objectives.
Tillerson had stated that “the Indo-Pacific – including the entire Indian Ocean, the Western Pacific, and the nations that surround them – will be the most consequential part of the globe in the 21st century” and that “the greatest challenge to a stable, rules-based Indo-Pacific is a China that has taken to reworking the international system to its own benefit.” (Oct 21, 2017).
For U.S it makes a lot of sense to get out of a war it has been embroiled in for a very, very long time and start making her presence felt in the region on a positive footing and directed to achieve her geographical objectives. Also, “bringing the boys home” was one of Trump’s election promises. With the next elections getting closer, Trump would want to deliver on his promise.
An issue of failing to achieve peace so far has been a lack of understanding of what peace between the Taliban and State of Afghanistan may eventually turn out to be. This will have a direct impact on the promises U.S wants Taliban to deliver upon. A big part of it is that the Afghan soil must not be used by Al-Qaeda and other outfits to attack U.S directly or indirectly. The parties involved need a model for maintaining peace. Unfortunately in the peace talks that broke down recently, focus was on exacting promises from Taliban without determining upon the peace model that can ensure that end. U.S needs also to understand divisions within Taliban to move towards a workable peace model.
The Taliban are in a strong position to swing a deal. Even if U.S withdraws from Afghanistan, it is a foregone conclusion that Afghanistan will continue to need both international support as well as international donor support. Should U.S withdraw without an amicable peace deal, one that offers mutual benefits to both, Taliban, even if back in the driving seat will find it next to impossible to run the country. Taliban needs the support to gain political legitimacy. Therefore right now both Taliban and U.S need smart diplomacy to avoid ruffling feathers and moving forward realistically and building confidence as they go along.
The writer is a lawyer, academic and political analyst. She has authored a book titled A Comparative Analysis of Media & Media Laws in Pakistan