{"id":1417,"date":"2018-02-20T18:08:49","date_gmt":"2018-02-20T18:08:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/?p=1417"},"modified":"2018-02-20T18:08:49","modified_gmt":"2018-02-20T18:08:49","slug":"war-and-peace-strategies-leave-afghanistan-in-a-deadly-muddle","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/2018\/02\/20\/war-and-peace-strategies-leave-afghanistan-in-a-deadly-muddle\/","title":{"rendered":"War and peace strategies leave Afghanistan in a deadly muddle"},"content":{"rendered":"

France 24<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The war was not yet over when peace was given a chance in Afghanistan. But after a brutal start to the year, it\u2019s time for a strategic rethink.<\/h2>\n

Over the past 16 years,\u00a0Afghanistan<\/a>\u00a0has been a laboratory for a dizzying number of policy experiments to help secure the country. US troop levels have surged and ebbed,\u00a0Taliban<\/a>\u00a0militants have been bombed and wooed to the negotiating table,\u00a0Pakistan<\/a>\u00a0has been admonished and coddled to behave in its neighbouring state, and the international community has cooperated and competed in the desperate bid to find a lasting solution to the Afghan problem.<\/span><\/p>\n

None of them have worked and the situation on the ground for ordinary Afghans only gets worse.<\/span><\/p>\n

The policy muddle and its brutal consequences have been particularly stark this year, raising questions over whether US President\u00a0Donald Trump<\/a>\u2019s\u00a0new Afghanistan strategy<\/a>\u00a0can solve or worsen the problem \u2013 or not make any difference at all.<\/span><\/p>\n

On Wednesday, January 24, just days after Taliban fighters\u00a0killed more than 40 people<\/a>\u00a0in Kabul\u2019s\u00a0landmark Hotel Intercontinental<\/a>, the militant group issued a statement confirming a recent peace meeting between a Taliban delegation and Pakistani officials.<\/span><\/p>\n

The\u00a0statement<\/a>, issued in the local Pashto language, said a five-member Taliban team had travelled to the Pakistani capital of Islamabad to explain their position on a \u201cpolitical solution\u201d to the crisis. \u201cThe Islamic Emirate [the Taliban] wants to emphasise that it desires a durable solution to the Afghan problem so all causes of the fighting are ended and the people live in peace and stability.\u201d<\/p>\n

But peace was not in their sights three days later, when the Islamist militant group disguised a minivan as an\u00a0ambulance, packed it with explosives<\/a>, and detonated the vehicle at a busy thoroughfare in the Afghan capital, killing more than 100 people and wounding over 200 others.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Taliban \u201cpeace and stability\u201d announcement, issued as Afghans were reeling from the recent attacks, incensed a populace growing weary of the cycle of hypocrisy and violence in their country. On Twitter and other social media sites, Afghans slammed politicians and analysts who have, in the past, advocated negotiations with the Taliban.<\/span><\/p>\n

High Peace Council kicks off with an assassination<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The \u201ctalking to the Taliban\u201d solution surfaced shortly after Barack Obama took office, when the US president inherited two unfinished conflicts \u2013 in Afghanistan and Iraq \u2013 from his predecessor. As the Obama policy on Afghanistan lurched from troop drawbacks to surges, the message to the Taliban was unequivocal: Washington and its allies were losing the will to fight.<\/span><\/p>\n

Peace initiatives meanwhile were picking up pace, backed by international funding. But shortly after former Afghan President Hamid Karzai set up a High Peace Council (HPC), the Taliban\u00a0killed the council\u2019s chief<\/a>, former Afghan PM Burhanuddin Rabbani, in September 2011.<\/span><\/p>\n

Last week\u2019s brutal ambulance attack in Kabul was conducted barely 200 yards away from the HPC offices.<\/span><\/p>\n

Despite Rabbani\u2019s assassination and the lack of progress on the peace track, the Taliban were nevertheless granted a political office —\u00a0which they unsuccessfully tried to call \u201cthe embassy of the Islamic Emirate<\/a>\u201d \u2013 in the Qatari capital of Doha. From their luxury base in the Gulf, Taliban representatives have traveled to Norway and Pakistan for talks that have yielded no results, prompting the Afghan government to contemplate closing down the Qatar office last year. But\u00a0the closure was held off<\/a>\u00a0amid concerns that it would undermine peace efforts.<\/span><\/p>\n

Where guns, not flowers, bloom<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

In their message claiming the ambulance attack, the Taliban blamed Trump\u2019s decision to increase US troop levels and targeted strikes against militant commanders in Afghanistan. \u201cThe Islamic Emirate has a clear message for Trump and his hand kissers that if you go ahead with a policy of aggression and speak from the barrel of a gun, don\u2019t expect Afghans to grow flowers in response,\u201d said Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid in a statement.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Taliban are not the only ones speaking from the barrel of a gun. The\u00a0Islamic State (IS) group<\/a>\u00a0has also set up operations in Afghanistan, attracting disgruntled Taliban fighters and conducting increasingly audacious attacks such as the January 24\u00a0assault on the Save the Children offices<\/a>\u00a0in the southeastern city of Jalalabad.<\/span><\/p>\n

The new entrant is increasing the competition between jihadist groups and changing their modus operandi, according to some experts. \u201cThe Taliban and the Islamic State are shifting the battle from the rural areas to the cities, so we\u2019re seeing an urbanisation of the conflict,\u201d explained Bilal Sarwary, reporting for FRANCE 24 from Kabul. \u201cWe\u2019re also seeing the American military and the Afghan government go after mid and high level commanders and so, in some ways, this latest uptick in violence is a revenge for those attacks.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Taliban and Trump stage Twitter war<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

On August 21, when Trump announced his \u201cnew\u201d policy to boost the US troop presence in Afghanistan, it was widely viewed as a bid to convince the Taliban that they cannot win on the battlefield.<\/span><\/p>\n

While the new US troop figures have not been released, an estimated 8,400 American troops are currently stationed in Afghanistan, most assigned to an approximately 13,000-strong international force that is training and advising the Afghan military.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Taliban however has maintained that as long as there are international troops in Afghanistan, the group will not engage in peace negotiations, leading some experts, such as a Karim Pakzad from the Paris-based IRIS (Institut de Relations Internationales et Strat\u00e9giques), to conclude that, \u201cAs long as this country [Afghanistan] remains the staple of US foreign policy, I think Afghans will know no peace.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Others however believe that the prospect of a total US withdrawal will not spell peace either \u2013 especially for a populace living in fear of a Taliban return. \u201cWithout the engagement of the US, the conflict will continue,\u201d said Haroun Mir from the Kabul-based Afghanistan Center for Research and Policy Studies. \u201cOnly the international community has the capacity, the financial, and the military means necessary to put pressure on all actors to bring an end to the conflict.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Trump however has shown no interest in getting the different parties in the Afghan conflict to the negotiating table. \u201cWhen you see what they [the Taliban] are doing and the atrocities that they’re committing…it is horrible,” Trump told a UN Security Council briefing in the White House on Monday. “We don’t want to talk to the Taliban. We’re going to finish what we have to finish, what nobody else has been able to finish, we’re going to be able to do it,” he said.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

Taking a page from the Trump diplomatic book, the Taliban promptly tweeted its response; \u201cTo: @realDonaldTrump Let us know when you’re ready to talk to discuss your exit. Soon is better before it becomes very ugly for you in Afghanistan. You know how to reach us through our office in Doha.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018The Taliban is afraid of democracy\u2019<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Beyond the Twitter one-upmanship though, there has been little clarity on Trump\u2019s new strategy. A day after the US president said there would be no talks, US Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan was telling reporters in Kabul that there was no change in Washington\u2019s policy of forcing the Taliban through military pressure into talks.<\/span><\/p>\n

Sullivan\u2019s message echoed that of top US commander for the Middle East (CENTCOM) Gen. Jospeh Votel earlier this year, leaving journalists scrambling to decipher the implications of Washington\u2019s latest policy update. \u201cWTF? We just spent two nights in Afghanistan w @CENTCOM\u2019s Gen Votel this weekend where US commander after commander said they were GLAD they had a new S. Asia strategy SPECIFICALLY w the mission goal to pressure the Taliban to reconciliation talks,\u201d tweeted Kevin Baron, a Pentagon reporter and executive editor of Defense One.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

While the US has been providing mixed signals on its Afghanistan strategy, in many Afghan circles, particularly in Kabul, patience is running out for the militant negotiations track.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe strategy was to prove to the Taliban that they will not win militarily and that they should join the democratic process. But the Taliban is afraid of democracy. Right now, we have free speech, women\u2019s rights, civil society institutions and Afghans are not willing to give it all up. If the Taliban joins the political process, they don\u2019t have a message for the people. They know they will lose elections,\u201d explained Mir.<\/span><\/p>\n

War, not peace, is the answer<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

War then is the Taliban\u2019s best bet. But with every attempt to display their strength via brazen attacks in urban areas, the militant group is losing support among Afghans who are witnessing a flight of capital and international investments as the post-war recovery mission in their country slows to a crawl.<\/span><\/p>\n

For the US-led international coalition to defeat the Taliban though, policy framers have to take on an old bugbear: Pakistan\u2019s support for the Islamist group.<\/span><\/p>\n

Afghan and US authorities have long blamed parts of the Pakistani military intelligence establishment of aiding jihadist groups. Trump\u2019s recent decision to\u00a0suspend security aid to Pakistan<\/a>\u00a0reflects Washington\u2019s frustration over Islamabad\u2019s \u201clies & deceit,\u201d but most analysts believe it will do little to change Pakistan\u2019s behaviour.<\/span><\/p>\n

Given Islamabad\u2019s intransigence, some experts such as Mir says China \u2013 a key Pakistani ally which shares a 90-kilometer border with Afghanistan \u2013 “could play a major role in building a regional consensus\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n

But international and regional talks on Afghanistan have often been working at cross-purposes amid rivalries between key players. A Quadrilateral Coordinating Group (QCG) comprising Afghanistan, China, Pakistan and the US has failed to attract Taliban participation.<\/span><\/p>\n

Russia meanwhile has been opening a dialogue with the Taliban. But the US has skipped out on Russia-backed six party talks amid mounting suspicions between Moscow and Washington.<\/p>\n

With the peace track making no progress, some US policy makers are circling back to the old war plan \u2013 without Pakistan on board. Many experts note that the US staged a unilateral military assault against al Qaeda inside Pakistan with some success, including the 2011 US killing of Osama bin Laden. If Pakistan is unable or unwilling to crack down on jihadist groups, the US should undertake a unilateral military operation against the Taliban on Pakistani soil. If that\u2019s the case, the US strategy for Afghanistan would spin back to square one \u2013 16 years later and after a loss of thousands of Afghan and American lives.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

France 24   The war was not yet over when peace was given a chance in Afghanistan. But after a brutal start to the year, it\u2019s time for a strategic rethink. Over the past 16 years,\u00a0Afghanistan\u00a0has been a laboratory for a dizzying number of policy experiments to help secure the country. US troop levels have surged and ebbed,\u00a0Taliban\u00a0militants have been… Read more »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":51,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1417","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-post"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1417","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/51"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1417"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1417\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1418,"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1417\/revisions\/1418"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1417"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1417"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/baileyonlineclassroom.com\/southandcentralasiablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1417"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}