Stratagem

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

Fahad Nabeel*

Abstract

For more than 16 years, Afghanistan remains embroiled in turmoil which has no end in sight. Despite suffering from huge human and economic losses, the US-led coalition has no framework in place to end the conflict. The US-led coalition and Tehreek-e-Taliban Afghanistan (TTA), the main parties of the conflict, remain engaged militarily without showing the willingness to accept defeat on the battleground. Thus, political settlement is the only way forward to end the conflict. The paper provides a detailed account of various peace initiatives that were taken in the past 17-year period and identifies the obstacles which contributed in failing to materialize the peace efforts. An overview of the interests of the Great Powers – China, Russia and the United States – in Afghanistan has been provided which helps in understanding that cooperation between these powers is necessary for the resolution of the conflict. The paper concludes by arguing that TTA should be brought to the negotiating table by dealing with the problems upon which the insurgent group thrives. With the support of regional countries, the great powers should formulate a political settlement that should be binding and deal with obstacles obstructing the settlement.

Keywords: Afghanistan, China, Insurgency, Pakistan, Russia, Taliban

*Fahad Nabeel is an M.Phil scholar at the National Defence University, Islamabad. He is a Research Associate at the Centre for Strategic and Contemporary Research.

66Vol. 1, No. 1, June 2018

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

Introduction

The Afghanistan conflict is now in its 17th year with no end in sight. Up until now, the US has spent more than US Dollars 1 trillion in the conflict.1 It has also lost more than 2,400 soldiers in what can be termed as its most prolonged and costliest external incursion in another country. In total, more than 3,500 foreign soldiers have been killed in the conflict.2 Despite such huge economic and human costs, the war-torn country remains in turmoil.

Tehreek-e-Taliban Afghanistan (TTA), the main insurgent group fighting American-led intervention, has control of four per cent of Afghan territory and has open and active physical presence in 66 per cent of the territory. Contrarily, the Kabul regime has control of over 30 per cent of the territory. The minimum or no government writ in the two-thirds area of the country provides safe havens, empowering terrorist outfits to operate freely.3 Several terror groups having their origin in the Central Asian countries not only target Afghan population but also target security forces and foreign troops. Operating from their safe havens in Afghanistan, several terrorist groups like the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Jamaat-ul-Ahrar (JuA) target Pakistan, while the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) targets China, etc.

The decade-long conflict has proved that there is no military solution to wade through this quagmire. This viewpoint has been reiterated by Afghanistan’s neighbours like Pakistan, China, and Iran and by other regional countries like Russia and Turkey.4 Prior to the Kabul Peace Process Conference in February this year, the US State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert acknowledged

1Jeanne Sahadi, “The Financial Cost of 16 Years in Afghanistan,” CNN, last modified August 22, 2017, http:// money.cnn.com/2017/08/21/news/economy/war-costs-afghanistan/index.html.

2Ahamd Quraishi, “Over 3,500 Foreign Soldiers Killed in Afghan Conflict,” Pajhwok Afghan News, last modified February 9, 2018, https://www.pajhwok.com/en/2018/02/09/over-3500-foreign-soldiers-killed- afghan-conflict.

3Shoaib Sharifi and Louise Adamou, “Taliban Threaten 70% Of Afghanistan, BBC Finds,” BBC News, last modified January 31, 2018, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42863116.

4“Afghanistan: Hezb-I-Islami Armed Group Signs Peace Deal,” Al Jazeera, last modified September 23, 2016,https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/09/gulbuddin-hekmatyar-group-signs-afghan-peace- deal-160922093420326.html.

Stratagem

that political solution is the best option to end the conflict in Afghanistan.5 Therefore, it is crucial to examine how the great powers (US, China, and Russia) can bring an end to the Afghan conflict through a political settlement.

Past Peace Efforts in Afghanistan

Efforts towards peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan started in 2002. These efforts included political outreach, dealing with transitional injustice, disbanding armed groups and community-based peace-building. However, all these efforts were not systematic and consequently fractured.6

In February 2004, Karzai launched Takhim-e-Solh (strengthening peace) programme. He also established the Independent National Commission for Peace and Reconciliation (INCPR), under the chairmanship of his mentor Sebghatullah Mujaddadi in May 2005. The INCPR was tasked to reintegrate militants into the society. According to Mujaddadi, over 10,000 TTA and Hizb- i-Islami Gulbuddin (HiG) members abandoned violence through the efforts of INCPR, but this initiative failed to end the conflict.7

In early 2009, the focus of Obama administration was exclusively on reintegration or persuading the insurgents, rather than engaging in a reconciliation process with them. Later in November, Karzai vowed that national reconciliation, which was a presidential campaign promise, was the top priority of his Government’s peace-building policy. In the wake of the increased terror attacks and dwindling US public support, President Barrack Obama said that the US would support Kabul in reconciling those TTA fighters who would abandon violence and respect human rights.8

5“US Sees No Military Solution to Afghan Problem as Kabul Conference Kicks off to Discuss Peace,” Associated Press of Pakistan, last modified February 28, 2018, http://www.app.com.pk/us-sees-no-military-solution- afghan-problem-kabul-conference-kicks-off-discuss-peace/.

6Surendrini Wijeyaratne, “Afghanistan: A Study on The Prospects For Peace.” (presentation, Ottawa, March 2008).

7Ahmad Shayeq Qassem, “Afghanistan’s Political Reconciliation Policy: Ill Conceived and Self-Defeating,” Strategic Analysis 38, no. 4 (2014): 476-492.

8Paul Steinhauser, “Poll: Support for Afghan War at All-Time Low,” CNN, last modified September 15, 2009, http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/15/afghan.war.poll/index.html.

68Vol. 1, No. 1, June 2018

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

Prior to the London conference in January 2010, the then International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) Commander General Stanley McChrystal hinted towards a political solution for the Afghan conflict. During the London conference, Karzai reiterated his previous offer of negotiating and reintegrating those associated with the Afghan insurgency, and announced to convene a Jirga; which is a traditional Afghan assembly, in spring to facilitate high-level talks with those associated with the insurgency. Meanwhile, the participants of London conference launched a US Dollars 500 million Peace and Reconciliation Trust Fund with the objective that if TTA fighters should renounce violence, they will be provided monetary assistance, job and the guarantee that they will not be arrested.9

Despite Karzai’s offer, the then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that her country would not negotiate with the leadership of TTA.10 Meanwhile, Karzai fulfilled his promise by organising the National Consultative Peace Jirga (NCPJ) in June 2010. The two outcomes from the Jirga were the reaffirmation of Burhanuddin Rabbani as its Chairman and the creation of High Peace Council (HPC). Subsequently, Rabbani was appointed Chairman of HPC. Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmad Motawakkel and IEA Ambassador to Pakistan Abdul Salam Zaeef, the two ‘reconciled’ TTA individuals who reportedly influenced the decision of creating HPC, conditioned the approval of TTA leadership to become part of the council.

In 2011, Afghanistan and Turkey instituted the HoA-Istanbul process to encourage member countries for engaging in result-oriented cooperation for a peaceful and stable Afghanistan. Despite several ministerial meetings, the process has not contributed towards the peace process. In the same year, Qatar assumed the role of a mediator, with the support of the US, to start peace talks between the Afghan Government and TTA. This effort initially led to the opening of a political office for TTA. However, the opening of the office was not welcomed

9Mark Hennessy, “Taliban to Decide on Peace Talks,” The Irish Times, last modified January 29, 2010, https:// www.irishtimes.com/news/taliban-to-decide-on-peace-talks-1.852508.

10J Alexander Thier, “Afghanistan’s Rocky Path to Peace,” Current History 109, no. 726 (2010): 131-137.

Stratagem

by the Karzai regime which called off the talks.

In May 2015, China, with the support of Pakistan, facilitated peace talks between the representatives of the Afghan Government and TTA in Urumqi. These meetings resulted in TTA and the Haqqani Network (HQN) agreeing to meet the Afghan Government representatives. The ‘Murree Peace Process’ was launched in July when representatives of the Afghan Government and TTA met for the first time in the Pakistani city of Murree, with Chinese and American representatives participating as observers. During the meeting, the Afghan Government called for an immediate ceasefire from TTA. TTA agreed to a ceasefire if Pakistan and China guaranteed the formation of a ‘United National Government’ in Afghanistan. Prior to the second round of Murree talks scheduled for 31 July, the Afghan Presidential Palace revealed the news of Mullah Omar’s death, thus bringing an abrupt end to the peace process.

InDecember2015,theQuadrilateralCoordinationGroup(QCG)comprising of Afghanistan, China, Pakistan and the US was formed at the sidelines of HoA conference in Islamabad. The group met for the first time in January 2016. The initial meetings (See Table 1) of the process showed some progress. However, the killing of the then TTA Chief Mullah Akhtar Mansur in May 2016 derailed the quadrilateral process. Efforts were made by Islamabad to restart talks, but no progress was achieved.11 The QCG is now largely petered out. In September, the Afghan Government signed a peace deal with HiG allowing Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, once known as the ‘Butcher of Kabul’, to make a political comeback. After Mullah Akhtar Mansur’s killing, secret talks between representatives of TTA and the Afghan Government took place for the first time in September and October in Doha.12

11Anwar Iqbal, “Pakistan Attempts to Restart Afghan Peace Process,” Dawn, last modified October 10, 2017, https://www.dawn.com/news/1362834.

12Sami Yousafzai, Jon Boone and Sune Engel Rasmussen, “Taliban and Afghanistan Restart Secret Talks in Qatar,” The Guardian, last modified October 18, 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/18/ taliban-afghanistan-secret-talks-qatar.

70Vol. 1, No. 1, June 2018

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

The year 2016 onwards, a number of various forums and meetings like the US-India-Afghanistan trilateral meeting (October 2016), China-Pakistan- Russia Trilateral Dialogue on Afghanistan (December 2016), Moscow six- party talks (February 2017) and 11-nation regional talks (April 2017), were

Stratagem

formed and held to support the intra-Afghan peace process.13 Since last year, no significant achievement has been made regarding peace efforts except for the formation of a new peace process called ‘the Kabul Process for Peace and Security Cooperation’; comprising of 24 countries, to secure the support of regional countries and the broader international community for ending the conflict.14 15 In February this year, Ghani, during the Kabul Peace Process meeting, made TTA the offer for unconditional peace talks, ceasefire and other proposals if the insurgent group was to become a part of the peace process.16

Obstacles to the Political Settlement

Since 2002, a number of initiatives were taken to chalk out a framework for the political settlement of the Afghan conflict. However, the initiatives proved to be unsuccessful due to a number of factors which acted as obstacles.

i.Focus on Military Option

From the start, the reliance on the military option continued to dominate reintegration and reconciliation initiatives. In other words, political initiatives were being deployed in order to supplement the military strategy further.

ii.Presence of Foreign Troops

The presence of foreign troops is one of the major obstacles in achieving a political settlement. One of the main pre-conditions of TTA has been the withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan. The presence of foreign troops and their involvement in various human rights abuses have motivated several

13Aziz Ahmad Khan, “From the Trenches to the Table: Waging Peace in Afghanistan,” Jinnah Institute, last modified 2018, http://jinnah-institute.org/the-afghanistan-essays-from-the-trenches-to-the-table-waging- peace-in-afghanistan-4/.

14“Afghanistan Launches the ‘Kabul Process’ To Make Peace,” Office of the President Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, last modified May 19, 2017, https://president.gov.af/en/986562.

15Amina Khan, “Russia-China-Pakistan Third Trilateral Dialogue on Afghanistan,” Institute of Strategic Studies, last modified January 17, 2017, http://www.issi.org.pk/issue-brief-on-russia-china-pakistan-third-trilateral- dialogue-on-afghanistan/.

16“Thematic Dossier XVII: Peace Talks (2),” Afghanistan Analysts Network, last modified March 1, 2018, https:// www.afghanistan-analysts.org/publication/aan-thematic-dossier/thematic-dossier-xvii-peace-talks-2/.

72Vol. 1, No. 1, June 2018

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

individuals to join the ranks of TTA. The US is allowed to maintain a presence of 10,000 troops in the country because of a bilateral security agreement signed with Afghanistan in September 2014. In addition, the agreement states that the US forces can remain in the country till 2024 and beyond. Afghanistan has signed a similar agreement with NATO allowing 4,000 to 5,000 additional troops to remain in a non-combat capacity.

The recent surge by the Trump administration has increased the strength of American troops to approximately 14,000. However, the surge will not contribute to ending the conflict as the US-led coalition could not end the conflict even with the presence of more than 130,000 coalition troops in 2011.

iii.Incapable Kabul Regime

Following the toppling of the TTA Government in late 2001, subsequent Afghan Governments have suffered internal political divisions. The climax of these divisions was exhibited during the 2014 presidential election when allegations of fraud created political turmoil in the war-torn country. The political turmoil ended with the American brokered power-sharing agreement between leading candidates Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah. Ghani assumed presidency whereas Abdullah was given an important governmental position in the form of Chief Executive. In subsequent years, both leaders accused each other of not collaborating. Such verbal exchanges undermined the legitimacy of the Kabul regime. The legitimacy has been weakened by failure to have control of nearly two-thirds area of the country. In other words, the Kabul regime has been seen as an incapable party that cannot engage with TTA to reach a political settlement.

iv.Conflicting Foreign Interests

All global and regional powers support the assertion that political settlement is the only way forward to end the Afghan conflict. However, every foreign stakeholder has its own interests and wants to achieve them without conceding much. The interest of great powers will be discussed in detail in the next section. Here, the core interests of other regional countries is discussed. Pakistan desires

Stratagem

a friendly government in Kabul so that the Pakistani strategic community can feel relieved, that it does not face any threat from the western side and can exert its efforts and resources towards India. Another major reason why Islamabad desires a pro-Pakistan government in Kabul is to make sure that New Delhi is unable to use Afghan soil for subversive activities against Pakistan.

For India, Afghanistan is the key to access the resource-rich Central Asian countries. In order to achieve this objective, it has financed Iran’s Chabahar Port project so that it can reach Afghanistan by circumventing Pakistan. Iran, the largest trading partner of Afghanistan, maintains good relations with the Kabul regime. But it has reportedly started to support TTA militarily to fight Islamic State (IS) Khorasan Chapter. Iranian approach suggests that it wants to remain on good terms with both parties in case of a future political settlement.17

Turkey aspires a political settlement for Afghanistan so that Ankara can strengthen its growing alliance with Doha and Moscow, while, Saudi Arabia is seen as a guarantor for future political settlement and can play an important role in bringing TTA to the negotiating table.18 19 The conflicting interests of global and regional powers have undermined prospects of future political settlement.

v.Constitutional Reforms

The need to introduce reforms in the Afghan Constitution is also a significant obstacle in chalking a political settlement. The main issue revolves around inserting the word ‘sharia’ in the Constitution. Presently, the Afghan Constitution uses the word ‘Islamic Law’ to refer to ‘sharia’. The inclusion of the word ‘sharia’ will pose a challenge to the donor countries; whose populations are averse to this decision. This is due to a misconstrued understanding of the jargon.

17“Afghanistan,” International Crisis Group, last modified March 15, 2018, https://www.crisisgroup.org/ trigger-list/iran-us-trigger-list/flashpoints/afghanistan.

18Samuel Ramani, “Can Turkey position itself as the most effective mediator in Afghanistan?,” TRT World, last modified March 13, 2018, https://www.trtworld.com/opinion/can-turkey-position-itself-as-the-most- effective-mediator-in-afghanistan--15883.

19“Saudi Arabia Assures Afghanistan of Support in Peace Efforts,” Ariana News, last modified February 22, 2018, https://ariananews.af/saudi-arabia-assures-afghanistan-of-support-in-peace-efforts/.

74Vol. 1, No. 1, June 2018

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

Far-right parties in Western countries can use ‘your government is funding the Afghan Government that wants to impose sharia’ rhetoric to mobilise the support of the nationalist voters and increase their presence in the parliaments. Another contentious issue is the definition of sovereignty. From TTA perspective, sovereignty belongs to God. However, the Afghan Constitution states that sovereignty belongs to the Afghan nation.20

vi.Absence of Pragmatic Reconciliation Strategy

A major obstacle in formulating a future political settlement is the failure of stakeholders in formulating a pragmatic reconciliation strategy. This can help in addressing the key drivers of the conflict. Any such strategy should be aimed at (a) achieving consensus among the stakeholders, (b) defining a minimal agreeable agenda, (c) dealing with preconditions set for opening negotiations,

(d)leadership of negotiations, (e) role of regional countries, (f) concessions that can be offered during negotiations, (h) projection of end-conditions by various actors, and (h) the possibility of consensual end-conditions.

Interests of Great Powers in Afghanistan

United States

Since the last 16 years, American interests in Afghanistan have been contradictory. Initially, the US intervened with two main objectives – dismantle Al Qaeda (AQ) and overthrow TTA regime. However, both these objectives were achieved by 2003. In order to avoid future use of Afghanistan as a safe haven by a transnational terrorist group, the US supported the democratically elected Afghan Government. The US was supported by allies and the broader international community in this endeavour. The American objectives were to fight insurgents, train Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF) and provide security till Afghans were prepared to assume the responsibility of

20Sean Kane, “Talking with the Taliban,” United States Institute of Peace, last modified January 12, 2015, https://www.usip.org/publications/2015/01/talking-taliban.

Stratagem

securing their country.21

During Obama’s era, two reasons - the security of Pakistani nukes and threat posed by AQ and its affiliates - were identified by his advisors for staying in Afghanistan. The ‘security of Pakistani nukes’ mantra was a hollow one. Among the nuclear-armed states, Pakistan has demonstrated the largest improvement in nuclear security. Up until now, not even a single event of a nuclear facility or radiological material theft has been reported in the country. Recently, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano lauded Pakistan for maintaining high standards at the various civilian nuclear facilities and installations.22 Regarding the threat of AQ, American academic Steve Coll writes that the return of AQ was ‘a plausible fear but an indirect and even speculative reason to send American men and women to war’.23

Currently, the interests of the US include assisting ANDSF to take control of the security situation, prevent expansion of IS and ending the conflict through a political settlement with the support of regional countries. However, it desires to remain engaged in Afghanistan politically, diplomatically and economically for long-term. Trump’s Afghanistan-South Asia strategy announced in August last year states that American withdrawal will now be conditions-based instead of time-based, which echoed American desire to remain involved in Afghanistan for a more extended period of time.24

Russia

The primary interest of Russia is to avoid the instability spill over from

21Nicholas Grossman, “The U.S. Needs to Rethink What Winning in Afghanistan Looks Like,” National Review, last modified February 7, 2018, https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/afghanistan-united-states- military-presence-maintain-troops-vietnam-war-different/.

22Muhammad Wajeeh, “IAEA chief impressed by Pakistan’s nuclear safety standards,” The Express Tribune, last modified March 15, 2018, https://tribune.com.pk/story/1660030/1-iaea-chief-impressed-pakistans-nuclear- safety-standards/.

23Steve Coll, “We Can’t Win in Afghanistan Because We Don’t Know Why We’re There,” The New York Times, last modified January 26, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/opinion/sunday/united-states- afghanistan-win.html.

24“U.S. Strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan,” Council on Foreign Relations, last modified March 12, 2018, https://www.cfr.org/event/us-strategy-afghanistan-and-pakistan.

76Vol. 1, No. 1, June 2018

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

Afghanistan into the Central Asian region, which is considered by Russia as its backyard. Russia’s interests of ending the chaos and preventing Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for terrorists is similar to American interests. The differences between the two major powers are with respect to the ways in which stability can be brought in Afghanistan. The American way is to have a strong central Kabul regime and well equipped and well trained ANDSF. Contrarily, Russia believes in engaging with various actors to bring stability in Afghanistan. In this regard, Moscow offers investment proposals, diplomatic outreach, cultural programmes, financial and military support to Kabul and power brokers in the northern part of Afghanistan and TTA.

Looking beyond stability, it is also creating its contacts to secure its interests in case the Kabul regime falls. Moscow remains in contact with TTA because of its interest with respect to defeating IS. However, the support offered by Moscow to TTA remains unclear. Moscow can use its relationship with TTA to influence and to kick-start peace talks. Moscow can also use increased Russian involvement in Afghanistan as another means to push the Ukrainian conflict in the background.25

Borrowing some elements of its successful Syrian strategy, Moscow has exploited the perceptions about weakening Washington. By organising peace talks of regional countries for Afghanistan, Moscow has made sure that it becomes party to any future political settlement, have long-term influence in the country and force the US to recognise Russian role in Afghanistan. In other words, the Russian way towards stability helps Moscow in consolidating its position as an important regional player, helps in exerting influence among South Asian countries like Pakistan and India, undermines American influence in the region and helps it to become an important stakeholder for resolving the

25Vladimir Sazonov, “Afghanistan as an Example of the Kremlin’s Hybrid Warfare - Why Russia is Arming the Taliban,” Diplomaatia, last modified January, 2017, https://www.diplomaatia.ee/en/article/afghanistan-as- an-example-of-the-kremlins-hybrid-warfare-why-russia-is-arming-the-taliban/.

Stratagem

global crisis in future.26 27

China

Both China and Russia have the convergence of interests in Afghanistan. They do not want it to be used as a safe haven for terrorism and intend to curb drug trading. China desires that the turmoil in Afghanistan should not affect the security situation of the Xinjiang province. In the past, the ETIM has conducted several terror attacks in that region. Beijing is concerned that the exiled Uighur members of ETIM and fleeing IS militants could sneak into Xinjiang from Afghanistan through the Wakhan Corridor; a narrow strip of territory in northeastern Afghanistan extending to China. According to media reports, Beijing is in talks with Kabul to construct a military base in the corridor, to ensure that terrorists will not be able to enter into China.28

Beijing intends to use the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) to create stronger economic ties with Kabul. It has already invited Afghanistan to become part of the CPEC. For furthering its regional economic expansion, China also aims to build infrastructure in Afghanistan. China can extend a road or railway line across the 4,250 kilometres long Pak-Afghan border to reach out to the oil-rich Iran and even Turkey. Under the CPEC, two rail projects have been planned between Pakistan and China. China can reach out to Iran and Turkey through Afghanistan, by using transportation corridors. The transportation corridors will allow China direct access to Iran, the major provider of oil to China, which will increase their bilateral trade. It can also open the opportunity to increase trade with Turkey. Therefore, an unstable Afghanistan is detrimental

26Julia Gurganus, “Russia’s Afghanistan Strategy,” Foreign Affairs, last modified January 2, 2018, https://www. foreignaffairs.com/articles/afghanistan/2018-01-02/russias-afghanistan-strategy.

27Anna Blue, “The Real Threat to US Interests in Afghanistan,” Fair Observer, last modified April 12, 2017, https://www.fairobserver.com/region/north_america/us-foreign-policy-afghanistan-russia-china-taliban- world-news-analysis-44304/.

28“China in Talks over Military Base in Remote Afghanistan: Officials,” The Straits Times, last modified February 2, 2018, http://www.straitstimes.com/world/middle-east/china-in-talks-over-military-base-in- remote-afghanistan-officials.

78Vol. 1, No. 1, June 2018

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

to Chinese economic interests in the region.29

A stable Afghanistan is in the interest of both China and the US. China knows that stability in Afghanistan is the key to successful implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in the Central Asian region. Both countries also have mutual interest in ensuring that there should be no spill over effects of extremism from Afghanistan into the neighbouring countries. Like Russia, China also knows that the withdrawal of foreign troops without a political settlement will jeopardise its regional interests.30

Mutually Hurting Stalemate and Prospects of Political Settlement

The main parties of the Afghan conflict are the US-led coalition and TTA. Both parties have been fighting for more than 16 years without any chance of victory. The US-led coalition has lost more than 3,500 troops whereas TTA and other groups have lost more than 42,000 fighters. Despite such huge human losses, no party is willing to accept defeat. TTA, with its estimated 35,000 fighters, continues to fight against the US-led coalition which contains approximately 15,000 troops. The US knows that it cannot win militarily in Afghanistan. Several American political and military officials have come to the conclusion that political settlement is the only way forward. On the other hand, TTA has reiterated several times that it will continue to fight until the last foreign troop is withdrawn from Afghanistan.

The presence of foreign troops, the human rights abuses committed by the coalition troops and ANSF, the failure of the Government to provide necessary facilities and weak governance structures are factors which continue to help TTA get new recruits. However, several members within TTA are supportive of peace talks. The TTA’s recent letter addressing American public in which the insurgent group offered to enter into peace negotiations with the Kabul regime

29Ralph Jennings, “China Needs a Win in Afghanistan to Keep Its Edge in Asian Trade,” Forbes, last modified February 27, 2018, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphjennings/2018/02/27/china-needs-a-win-in- afghanistan-to-keep-its-edge-in-asian-trade/#38c55a621d5c.

30David Rank, “For an Afghan Peace, Work with China,” United States Institute of Peace, last modified March 15, 2018, https://www.usip.org/publications/2018/03/afghan-peace-work-china.

Stratagem

has increased the hope of reaching a political settlement.31

The military option to defeat TTA has proved to be ineffective for more than 16 years. David Galula, the father of modern counterinsurgency theory, wrote in his book Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice that the availability of problems is one of the important components to wage a successful insurgency.32 Therefore, it is important to address the problems which motivate individuals to join the ranks of TTA. Apart from the deteriorated security situation, inter-ethnic grievances and the unavailability of basic facilities remain the key issues. To address these two major issues, a framework should be chalked out to increase decentralisation in the Afghan political structure. The decentralisation process can help local leaders in solving problems faced by their communities without looking up to Kabul.

To make the decentralisation process effective, it is important to deal with rampant corruption existing in the current political structure. Afghanistan is ranked fourth in Transparency International’s 2018 Corruption Perceptions Index. Despite several anti-corruption measures taken by the Ghani Government, the efforts have proved to be not enough to achieve anti-corruption targets mentioned in the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. The Afghan Government needs to introduce a comprehensive anti-corruption law which should fulfil the commitments mentioned by the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC). Other major anti-corruption measures should include whistleblower protection law and investigating and prosecuting major cases of corruption and other forms of organised crimes to end the culture of impunity.

If Afghans start to feel that they are not marginalised because of their ethnicities and have access to basic facilities then the support for TTA will start to decline gradually and the insurgent group will face difficulty in finding new recruits. This non-military strategy can force them to come to the negotiating

31“Taliban Addresses “The American People,” In Rambling Letter,” CBS News, last modified February 14, 2018, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rambling-taliban-letter-addresses-the-american-people/.

32David Galula, Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice (Westport: Praeger, 2006), 17.

80Vol. 1, No. 1, June 2018

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

table. During the negotiating process, it is important that the great powers, with the support of regional countries and the Kabul regime, should formulate a pragmatic political settlement that should be binding on all parties – local and regional – which should be sanctioned by the UNSC to confer international legitimacy on it like the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on Iranian nuclear programme.

The negotiations, spearheaded by the great powers, should announce that the withdrawal of foreign forces will be gradual and conditions-based. The conditions-based withdrawal will take place with respect to speedy mainstreaming of TTA fighters. TTA fighters should be categorised in terms of their involvement in attacking soft and hard targets. Those involved in attacking soft targets should go through the rehabilitation process and should be sentenced to pay a specific monetary amount, in a gradual manner, which should vary depending on the severity of their actions.33

Similarly, those involved in attacking hard targets only should be brought into the mainstream by rehabilitation and should be provided with financial support to start their livelihoods as law-abiding members of the society. The TTA leadership will be instructed to ask their fighters and supporters to abide by the political settlement in full letter and spirit. The leaders will pay double the monetary amount for their involvement in encouraging fighters to use terrorism tactics. The foreign fighters who will not become a part of the political settlement will be hunted down to make sure that Afghanistan no longer remains a safe haven for terrorism.

It will also be important for the great powers to address the concerns and interests of regional powers. A political settlement of the Afghan conflict can trigger a turf war between regional countries for having a regime in Kabul which is friendly towards them. For example, a pro-India Kabul regime will not

33As part of a political settlement, the fighters should be provided financial support to start their livelihoods. After starting their livelihoods, those fighters should start paying a monthly installment of the total monetary amount, which they will be ordered by the courts to pay after investigating their involvement in attacking soft targets, to the Afghan government. It will be the responsibility of the Afghan government to create a conflict victims support fund which should collect the money from the fighters and use them for the welfare of the conflict victims.

Stratagem

be tolerable for Pakistan in the same way as a pro-Pakistan Kabul regime will not be taken positively by India. To deal with such issues, it is important that present and future Kabul regimes should not become a party to any proxy war by ensuring that its soil is not used to orchestrate terrorist or separatist attacks against any country.

The great powers need to introduce reforms in current Afghan political structure and constitution. The political structure needs to be a decentralised structure to allow local governments to resolve the main issues of masses and provide them with basic facilities. For accepting the Afghan Constitution, the TTA should be offered the removal of the names of their leaders from the UN Blacklist; a list which subjects the individuals to the international travel ban, assets freeze and arms ban, and further ensures that there will be a gradual release of all TTA prisoners from Guantanamo Bay provided that they do not resort to a violent path.

Conclusion

Since 2002, efforts have begun to reconcile fighters of TTA and other groups. Several initiatives like INCPR and HPC were launched but could not prove to be fruitful in ending the conflict. The first serious efforts towards resolving the conflict came through the ‘Murree Peace Process’, but further progress was hampered with the revelation of Mullah Omar’s death. In subsequent years, several meetings that included great powers and regional countries, have been held but without any major breakthrough.

A number of obstacles are in the way of achieving a major breakthrough to end the conflict. The main obstacles include the over-reliance of the US on the military option, the presence of foreign troops, the incapability of Kabul regime in maintaining its writ across the country, conflicting interests of foreign powers and deadlock over the constitution. To summarise, the failure in formulating a reconciliation strategy has created several hindrances for a political settlement. Apart from having specific interests in Afghanistan, all three great powers also have converging perspectives on various matters. These include ensuring

82Vol. 1, No. 1, June 2018

Role of Great Powers in Resolving Afghanistan Conflict

that Afghanistan is not used for terrorism, curbing drug trade, preventing the expansion of IS and stopping the spillover of turmoil beyond Afghanistan.

TTA should be forced to negotiate at the table by dealing with motivational factors which can help the insurgent group in getting new fighters. Once TTA becomes part of negotiations, it will be important to formulate a political settlement that shall be binding upon all participating parties. A political settlement is the only way forward to create a stable Afghanistan. Failure to resolve the conflict through a political settlement will make sure that Afghanistan remains conflict ridden for years to come.