Akbar Jan Marwat
NO doubt the peace agreement signed between the US and Taliban on 29 February, was a momentous development. But it seems to have gone up in smoke, after Afghan President Ashraf Ghani refused to release 5000 Afghan prisoners, as stipulated in the peace agreement. The release of prisoners by both the Ghani Government and the Taliban was an important confidence building measure, which was to facilitate the direct talks between the Taliban and the Ghani government, to which the Taliban had agreed after a lot of resistance. The purported meeting of the Taliban and the Afghan government, which was to take place in Oslo on March 10, could obviously not take place under the circumstances. Other terms of the peace agreement included withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan within 14 months, in lieu of certain Taliban security guarantees. In fact the US has already started the evacuation of its troops.
The Taliban, who have an ascendancy in the battlefield, reacted badly to Ashraf Ghani’s reneging on the prisoners issue. As a result the Taliban resumed attacks on the Afghan forces, killing about 20 soldiers in the Helmand province. The US forces had to retaliate by launching air strikes to protect the Afghan Army. The peace agreement between the Taliban and US received another sever setback when two rival Presidents in Afghanistan took oath of their office one week after the peace agreement was signed. The ostensible winner of the elections, held six months ago, marred by vote rigging and a very low voter turnout, Ashraf Ghani took oath of his office in the presidential palace. At another venue, Mr. Abdullah Abdullah, the runner up also took oath as the rival President, refusing to accept the result of the elections. The twin oath taking ceremonies greatly undermined Afghan government authority to negotiate with the Taliban.
In order to appreciate the chances of peace returning to the war-ravaged Afghanistan, a brief overview of the options available and possible actions taken in the light of those options, by the various Afghan actors involved in the conflict would be instructive. Taliban I believe are the main protagonists in the Afghan crises. A spokesman of the Taliban has already declared that they are the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan, as their government was overthrown by the illegal occupation of Afghanistan in 2001. The Taliban know that once the American troops have withdrawn, the Afghan security forces would be no match for them. In spite of these strengths, the Taliban are a very pragmatic lot also. On the one hand, they want the American troops to withdraw from Afghanistan, but on the other hand, they also want that American aid for war torn Afghanistan to continue as long as possible. They realistically presume, that very soon they would be solely in-charge of Afghanistan, or would be the major shareholders in any power arrangement post-American troops’ withdrawal.
The Afghan government led by President Ashraf Ghani may be a weakened authority but it still is the de jure government in Afghanistan. President Ghani’s oath taking ceremony was given legitimacy by the presence of US special Envoy Zalmi Khalilzad and NATO force Commander Scot Millers. One of the first announcements of President Ghani was the formation of a negotiating team for holding intra-Afghan dialogue with the Taliban. Ghani’s position was further strengthened after US Secretary of State Mike Pompio issued a statement saying that: “Washington strongly opposes the creation of a parallel government and any use of force to resolve political differences’’. The runner up in the recent Afghan elections Abdullah Abdullah’s role may have diminished after he lost. But it must not be forgotten, that Mr Abdullah has the solid support of the country’s diverse ethnic groups especially the major ones like the Tajiks and the Uzbeks. Abdullah also said in his inaugural speech that his first commitment was to the peace process. Mr Abdullah, who was once the key lieutenant of the legendary guerrilla commander Ahmed Shah Masood, has the support of most leaders of the Northern Alliance. According to Afghan analyst Faiz Muhammad Zaland: “Abdullah has the support of key political leaders who can oppose any agenda Ghani is holding in his mind’’.
The US government is another very important player in the Afghan conflict. The US because of its unique position and super power status has leverage with all the other players involved in the Afghan crises including Pakistan. The US due to a stalemated war in Afghanistan for the last 19 years has pretty much made up its mind to withdraw its remaining about 13,000 forces from Afghanistan. Short of any catastrophic development, the American President seems to be adamant to pull out its troops from Afghanistan, even if the Afghan government and the Taliban do not arrive at a comprehensive peace deal. The only thing that could, perhaps change the mind of the American leadership is: if Afghan soil is again used for a terrorist attack against America. The role of the Pakistani government in facilitating the peace agreement has also been quite cardinal. According to US envoy Khalilzad, Pakistan’s role was decisive in not only persuading the Taliban to have meetings with the US, but also convincing them to agree to meet the representatives of the Afghan government. The arrival of durable peace in Afghanistan is very important and imperative for Pakistan and the region. But because of the factors alluded to in this article, durable peace in Afghanistan may still be a far cry. The recent onset of Covid-19 Corona Virus may further delay the peace process, as meetings of the Afghan Government representatives with the Taliban would be difficult as restrictions on assemblage are in place in most parts of the world.
—The writer is former Health Minister of KP.
