Content uploaded by Rahat Shah
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rahat Shah on Mar 02, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
/
0
Comments
Published 6 hours ago on March 1, 2020
By Rahat Shah
According to the theory of structural realism, when States believe that actions are legal,
they will use force outside their territory, and when they believe that current actions are
illegal, they will stop using force. Nearly 19 years later, the United States for the rst time
regarded the non-state actor as a legitimate stakeholder, which had previously been
called terrorists. These stakeholders will now have the legitimate right to govern
Afghanistan and will determine the future of Kabul. On February 29, 2020, the United
States signed a peace treaty with the Taliban in Doha, Qatar. According to the agreement,
if the Taliban do not violate the agreement, Washington will withdraw its troops within 14
months from the date of signing the treaty. Taliban leader Mullah Baradar signed the
treaty with US chief negotiator Zalmay Khalilzad, all credit goes to Pakistani government.
Previously, Trump was mentioned during his rst ocial meeting with Imran Khan in
Privacy & Cookies Policy
/
2019, that the Prime Minster Imran Khan has the “power” to resolve the Afghanistan issue,
which became now the reality.
Many international relations literatures have noted the peace process, but the most
famous is Charles W. Kegley’s “From War to Peace”. He mentioned that if both sides
believe that the cost of ghting is positive, the war between the two sides will continue
forever, and if both sides think that the cost is negative, it will stop. And both sides will
agree to a peace agreement, the same argument can be applied to the U.S.-Taliban peace
agreement. The questions now are how was the cost negative for both sides? What will
the future of Afghanistan look like? To answer these questions, rst we need to
understand the role of Pakistan and other stakeholders such as Iran, Russia and India, as
well as its importance to regional security, which is closely related to the future of
Afghanistan.
No one can deny that the Pakistani government has played an important role in bringing
the Taliban and the United States together for the peace and prosperity of the region. As
we mentioned in the previous article, the foreign policy of Pakistan under Imran Khan has
changed compared with previous administrations. Pakistan has now shifted from
unilateral interests to common interests, which is essential for regional peace and
security. For example, Pakistan was the rst country to diplomatically support the Taliban
government in Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. When the United States has decided to use
troops in Afghanistan where the Taliban were hosted al-Qaeda, almost all states formed
an anti-terrorism alliance to support and join the US-led “war on terror”. Where, Pakistan
was no choice but to sever diplomatic relations with the Taliban government, because it
was isolated in the world, and was threatened by Washington if not did so then the
consequences will be so bad. Pakistan cut o the diplomatic ties with the Taliban
government for which Islamabad paid a heavy cost in the decades after 9 / 11, as many
civilian and military were killed during terrorist attacks in Pakistan. Imran Khan is the rst
political leader who has raised voice from the beginning of the war that there is no
military solution to Afghanistan. Now, 19 years later, when the United States fails to
achieve its foreign policy goals and normalize the situation in Afghanistan, trying to nd a
political solution. All the major powers failed to nd a comprehensive solution for peace;
however, it is the new Government of Pakistan under Imran Khan that succeeded in
reaching what we now call the United States-Taliban Peace Agreement.
One can easily concludes that Pakistan has completely changed its previous policies
towards Afghanistan and is now focusing on regional peace and prosperity. As the
Pakistani Prime Minister said on Twitter after the agreement was signed “we welcome the
Privacy & Cookies Policy
/
Doha Accord signed between US & the Taliban. This is the start of a peace & reconciliation
process to end decades of war & suering of the Afghan people. I have always maintained
that a pol solution, no matter how complex, is the only meaningful path to peace.” It has
been conrmed that Pakistan now wants friendly and peaceful Afghanistan where
previously it always struggled for the “strategic depth” in Afghanistan to security their
security and strategic interests. However, now Pakistan is avoiding interference in
Afghanistan and for the rst time the Pakistan civilian government and the military are on
the same page. But what are about other stakeholders such as India, Russia and Iran? Do
we think that The India or other two stakeholders will allow the Taliban government?
According to my point of view the Russia and Iran interest can be converged with the
Taliban but India can never, as New Delhi will never allow a pro-Pakistani or the Taliban
government in Afghanistan. Surely if India did interfere in Afghanistan domestic politics,
then it will be disaster for the Afghan feature. It is time for the Afghan people to know who
their enemies are and who their friends are. I strongly recommend them that at least to
stop the negative thoughts about Pakistan and strive to normalize relations with
Islamabad on the basis of mutual benet and win-win cooperation. However, I know that
in the presence of India this could not be possible.
Now coming back to answer the two basic questions, that how the ghting was negative
cost for both sides. As since 9/11, America has spent more than $1 trillion on war and
reconstruction in the country; about 2,400 US soldiers have been killed. Moreover, the
greatest lost for Trump will be his defeat in the upcoming election as he is promised to
nish the “endless wars” and now if he failed to nish, then the consequences are very
clear. On the other hand, for the Taliban the negative cost was they were wasting the
opportunity to again rule on Afghanistan. Now Untied States have declared the Taliban
government as a legitimate actor, and have right to decide the future of Kabul. But if the
regional stakeholders such as India still looks for strategic and security interest in Kabul
and do not stop interfering then it will lead the peace deal to peace hell.
Related
Privacy & Cookies Policy
/
RELATED TOPICS:
Afghanistan peace talks: Main
reason for U-turning Donald
Trump
Starring role of Taliban peace
talks to bring stability in
Afghanistan
Central Asian Jihadi Groups
Joined Taliban's “Al-Fath Jihadi
Operations”
September 23, 2019
In "South Asia"
July 24, 2019
In "South Asia"
May 18, 2019
In "Intelligence"
AFGHANISTAN# TALIBAN# USA#
UP NEXT
DON'T MISS
Rahat Shah
Rahat Shah is currently a student of MAs in Jilin University’s department of International Relations at School of
International and Public Affairs (SIPA) Changchun, PR China. He can be reached via Emil: Rahatshah8[at]gmail.com
Privacy & Cookies Policy
/
The wreckage of one of its aircraft exhibited in enemy’s Air Headquarters; a pilot thrashed
by not so friendly mountain dwellers only to be detained by the enemy; a helicopter
downed owing to fratricide; an Air Marshal “retired” under mysterious circumstances; and
nally, an inadvertent confession from top echelons– though presumably aimed at
domestic opposition – about adversary’s superiority. These were the ultimate outcomes
of Indian PM Modi’s well-thought-out bid to capitalize at the opportunity created by
Pulwama attack for his electoral advantage. Astonished and undeniably taken by surprise,
he went even more desperate and almost pushed South to the brink of nuclear holocaust
–denitely a cataclysmic imminence that was averted just at the last moment.
It all triggered on February 14, 2019. A despaired Kashmiri youth – once humiliated by the
Indian occupied forces – sought revenge and rammed an explosive-laden vehicle into the
convoy of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). The outcome was the most gruesome and
Privacy & Cookies Policy
/
ferocious attack at Indian forces in the occupied valley since1947. As per local media
reports nearly 750pounds of explosive material was used that resulted in the death of
CONTINUE READING
Published 1 day ago on February 29, 2020
By Dr. Matthew Crosston
image credit: Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs via AP
Btw, the week-long cooling period ended today ‘successfully’, which means the US and
Taliban signed ANOTHER formal agreement in Doha today. Again, the Afghan government
Privacy & Cookies Policy
/
was not allowed to play a role but there was a delegation in Doha this time ‘observing’ the
proceedings, even though the Taliban almost literally ‘face-palmed’ the importance of the
delegation being there. Fascinatingly, the two parties concluding this 3-party deal (lol) are
doing so in order to set up a framework in which the Taliban and Afghan govt MIGHT be
able to nally sit down and talk to one another….so the Taliban still face-palming the
government should be relevant, even though no one in the West is making note of it. 🙂
The original criticisms I gave in an AsiaTimes interview last week still apply, in that
everyone in America is talking about today being a ‘giant’ step toward lasting peace in a
‘new’ Afghanistan…..however in REAL terms there is still no formal agreement to even
have the Taliban and Afghan government sit across from each other, no comments on
open free and equal participation in elections exist, and both sides reserve the right to
l h h f h h h h d l k h h
CONTINUE READING
Published 2 days ago on February 28, 2020
By M Waqas Jan
Privacy & Cookies Policy
/
Photo: Praveen Jain | ThePrint
The last few days saw India pulling out all the stops for President Trump’s rst ocial visit
to the country. High on optics and bollywoodesque fanfare, the trip despite serving as a
vital political boost to both leaders remained shy of any concrete agreements. At least
that is what the initial consensus amongst key analysts and media pundits seems to point
towards in this visit’s immediate aftermath.
This for instance was evident in the absence of a signed trade deal that would address the
contentious issue of taris that has dogged US-India relations particularly under the
Trump presidency. Similarly, while the signing of the $3bn arms deal comprising of US
attack helicopters and other US military equipment was also formalized, it still pales in
comparison to India’s arms deals with Russia – a country that accounts for more than half
of India’s defense imports worth $15bn just in the last three years. Thus, considering the
timing of Mr. Trump’s Presidential visit within the context of the looming US elections, as
well as the political fallout being faced by PM Modi following his violent crackdown in
Indian Occupied Kashmir and the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act, it is perhaps
CONTINUE READING
Privacy & Cookies Policy