Is Afghanistan Once Again Becoming A Battleground For Major Powers? – OpEd

Why is Afghanistan always in trouble?

 July 6, 2024  

By Sher Khan Bazai

The sufferings of Afghanistan in the distant past and current difficulties are in large measure the product of its geographical location combined with its mines and minimal wealth, water resources, and mostly due to their constant internal conflicts. These factors have resulted in a troubled history since the beginning and produced a venerable state Afghanistan open to meddling from a range of external powers. 

Neville Teller, a graduate of Oxford University has rightly summed up Afghanistan. According to him, certain areas of the world, simply on account of their geographical location, seem destined to be perpetual trouble spots. One such unhappy country is Afghanistan. Because of its position plumb in the middle of central Asia, Afghanistan is a prize that has been fought over and won by foreign occupiers many times in its long history. Its domestic story is equally turbulent, with warring tribes battling it out over the centuries for power and control. 

Recorded history tells us that Afghans have been engaged with external enemies to protect themselves and their land for the last five thousand years. The Afghans have faced more invasions on their land than any other people in the world. Whether they were Greeks, Kushans, Mongols, Turks, white Huns, Persians, Mughals, and especially the British imperial forces in the nineteenth century after Afghans achieved unity first under the command of Mirwais Hotak, who successfully revolted against the Safavids in the city of Kandahar in 1707, and later on by the young Ahmad Shah Durrani in 1747. The geography of Afghanistan at that time extended up to Isfahan present-day Iran including most of present-day Pakistan and emerged on the world map as an independent nation in the early 18th century.

Geo-strategic location and importance of Afghanistan 

Afghanistan has been at the heart of networks: a roundabout, a place of meetings, civilizations, religions, cultures, and of course, armies’ traders and pilgrims. Centuries on, Afghanistan enjoys the same status as the principal connector of the North and South and the East and West.   It sits at the heart of Central Asia, at the meeting point of ancient trade routes – known together as “The Silk Road” – that goes out to all parts of Asia.

Due to its geostrategic importance, Afghanistan faced the outrage of British imperialism when the First Anglo-Afghan War was fought between them in the year 1838 to 1842. The second Anglo-Afghan War from 1878 to 1880 resulted in the division of Afghanistan for the first time in history and the Durand Line was drawn which is now the 2,640-kilometer border between Afghanistan and Pakistan since 1947.

The famous great game was too played on Afghan land earlier by Great Britain and Russia in the nineteenth century and reached its climax when two superpowers Former Soviet Union and America in the twentieth century fought there. 

The strategic importance of its water resources

The strategic potential of Afghanistan’s water assets are five noteworthy river basins – Kabul, Helmand, and western flowing rivers, Hari Rod and Murghab, northern flowing rivers, and Amu Darya (Oxus river) – make up the surface water assets of Afghanistan, all of which are flowing to the neighboring countries. Afghanistan is the upstream riparian to these river basins which flow into Pakistan, Iran, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Together, these river basins contribute a total of 57 BCM (billion cubic meters) of water, which will make Afghanistan the epicenter of external powers to influence their internal situation and external relations.

The strategic importance of mine and mineral resources

According to Christopher Wnuk, an American geologist, “I have never seen anything like Afghanistan. It may very well have the most mineralized place on Earth. 

Further, the United States Pentagon Task Force on Business and Stability Operations dubbed the country the “Saudi Arabia of lithium”. A year later, the US Geological Survey said in a study that Afghanistan “could be considered as the world’s recognized future principal source of lithium”. By 2040, the demand for lithium could rise 40-fold as the world’s use of electric vehicles increases.

Afghanistan’s huge and largely untapped mineral wealth is also a huge attraction for international and regional players. Furthermore, the global electrification drive through the electric vehicle (EV) industry, has intensified the race between China and the US, to secure lithium, a vital component in EV batteries. Afghanistan’s estimated lithium reserves are pegged at around 2.3 million tons, making it a highly coveted prospect for countries vying for dominance in the clean energy sector. 

China’s growing presence in Afghanistan’s mining sector has generated geopolitical concerns for the US and other European countries. The United States, another major player in the EV market, views China’s involvement as a strategic threat, potentially leading to heightened competition for Afghan resources. This scenario has led both countries to influence the Taliban regime, aggravating the existing tensions and realignments of inter state relations in the region. The neighboring countries like Pakistan, Iran, and Russia have therefore been drawn into the troubled waters. The exacerbating regional tensions along with several other factors could influence the future trajectory of this geopolitical landscape in the region.

The Wakhan Corridor has great Geo-strategic and geo-economic significance for Afghanistan, China, and Pakistan. The opening of this corridor has resulted in serious implications for regional and global players involved in Afghanistan, especially India and the US on the one hand, China Pakistan Iran, and Russia on the other hand. 

Such competition of the major players to increase their presence and influence through their proxies and client states is turning Afghanistan again into a battlefield and the fallout of such a situation definitely will be on Pakistan including other neighboring countries.

Taliban-2 versus regional and international powers 

After over four decades of unrest and turmoil in the war-ravaged Afghanistan, international and regional powers, which in the past competed for influence in Afghanistan, developed minimum consensus on the future of Afghanistan when the US-led foreign forces left the region soon after the US-Taliban Doha Agreement.

The US, China, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, and other key stakeholders pledged that the Afghan Taliban government would get recognition only after they met some conditions, of the formation of an inclusive government, respecting human and women rights and denying use of Afghan soil by terrorist groups.

For this purpose, a lot of diplomatic activity about Afghanistan — internationally and at regional level — has been underway. After the Taliban re-entered Afghanistan all those efforts have not been fruitful to make the Taliban to remove the international concerns. 

Present situation in Afghanistan 

Though Taliban 2.0 has brought peace to Afghanistan but the country is facing socio-economic, political military, and diplomatic chaos and uncertainty. On the internal front, there is a trust deficit between the Kabul-based Taliban leadership led by Haqqani and the Taliban leadership based in Kandahar. Hardliner factions vie for a conservative and introverted model of governance of the 1990s while moderates aspire for an inclusive approach as per the expectations of the rest of the world. The control over resource-rich regions is another reason for the internal strife of the Taliban! which has provided an opportunity to the major players to intervene in the country’s internal affairs.

Therefore, the US and Pakistan blame Afghanistan that despite Taliban commitment to the Doha agreement, it has become a hotbed of terrorist organizations like (TTP), Al-Qaeda in Subcontinent (AQIS), Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and Islamic State of Khorasan (IS-K). Both claim that these terrorist outfits are posing a serious threat to Pakistan, and US interests in the region. Pakistan blames TTP for carrying out cross-border attacks into Pakistan from their safe havens in Afghanistan. 

A US State Department strategy paper released earlier this year cautioned US policymakers about the growing influence of its rivals — China, Russia, and Iran — in Afghanistan. The strategy paper advocated preserving the US interests and not letting its adversaries take a foothold in Afghanistan. This shows the growing tension between the two rivals pushing Afghanistan into another war theatre.

Recently, Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United Nations, conveyed to the UN Security Council: the Taliban government in Afghanistan has failed to fulfill its promises to curb cross-border terrorism by (TTP), followed by Defence Minister Khawaja Asif in an interview with Voice of America said Islamabad could strike terror havens in Afghanistan and it would not be against international law since Kabul had been “exporting” terrorism to Pakistan and the “exporters” were being harbored there by the Taliban government.

Furthermore, soon after announcement of Operation Azm-e-Istehkam against the terrorist outfits within and out side the country, Pakistan’s ambassador to the US, told Washington that “we need sophisticated small arms and communication equipment to oppose and dismantle terrorist networks.” 

On the other hand, most recently the Russian president Vladimir Putin in an interview referred to the Taliban which governs Afghanistan, as an, “ally” in fight against terrorism.

Further, the impact of India, China, and Russia on Afghanistan depends on their strategic, economic, and security objectives. The trajectory of their bilateral relationship with Afghanistan will significantly shape the geopolitical dynamics in the region leading to Afghanistan toward another battlefield for the major players in the region.

How can the grime situation in the region be addressed to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a battleground again?

One thing must be clear to everyone particularly to Pakistan that Auckland manifest never worked in the distant past nor will work in the future. Afghanistan is a sovereign state that cannot be anybody’s backyard. Pakistan being an immediate neighbour must let Afghanistan be. The Afghans can decide to befriend whomever they want. Pakistan should not dictate Afghanistan in their internal and external relations, particularly about India. In case Pakistan feels threatened by TTP, it safeguards its interests from our side of the border, not through proxies. Pakistan must tell Afghanistan clearly that it will not become a frontline state again.

Major players should be competitors rather than rivals in Afghanistan. They can harvest the dividends of Afghanistan’s geo-strategic, and geo-economic resources once all of them agree to accept the sovereignty of and non interferences in the internal affairs of Afghanistan. Otherwise, as proven by the last two countries’ history, no one can take benefit of and can’t dream to serve or save their interests in the region, particularly in Afghanistan. Afghan security must be secure in an indigenous recipe to reap the benefits of economic development and regional connectivity.

Since the Taliban for the moment is now a reality in Afghanistan and no alternative is in hand, their alienation will be counterproductive, therefore, the international community, and its neighbors, particularly Pakistan should find a political settlement with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Engagement with the Taliban rather than pushing them to the wall will pave the way toward amicable settlements of the ongoing controversies with them. 

On the other hand, the ball is in the Taliban court, they must address international concerns by improving human rights credentials, particularly concerning women’s rights particularly education and health and respect for and implementing the Doha agreement in its entirety. 

Take immediate practical and sincere steps to engage Afghan leadership and civil society living within and abroad for intra-Afghan dialogue to settle constitutional, political economic reforms, institution reorganization and to provide a level playing field to Afghans for their representation in the governance system. In the Afghan context- calling a true representative Grand Jirga to decide the future course of action for a peaceful and prosperous Afghanistan. Otherwise Taliban single-handedly will not cater to internal and external challenges and the ultimate results definitely will be plunging Afghanistan into another battlefield leading to uncertainty and destruction of the country.

Sher Khan Bazai is a retired civil servant, and a former Secretary of Education in Balochistan, Pakistan. He can be reached at skbazai@hotmail.com.

Afghanistan and Pakistan agree to immediate ceasefire, Qatar's Foreign Ministry says

Copyright Shafiqullah Mashaal/Copyright 2025 The AP. All rights reserved.

By Malek Fouda
Published on 19/10/2025 - EURONEWS

The two sides have agreed to hold follow-up talks in Qatar to establish conditions and a framework for lasting peace, bringing an end to a week of deadly cross border skirmishes, which have killed dozens of people.

Afghanistan and Pakistan have agreed to an immediate ceasefire after holding talks with Qatari mediators in Doha, according to Qatar’s Foreign Ministry.

The deal marks an end to a week of cross-border fighting that has killed dozens of people and injured hundreds more, in what was the deadliest crisis between the two countries in several years.

The two sides have agreed to establish mechanisms to consolidate lasting peace and stability, and to hold follow-up talks in the coming days to ensure the sustainability of the truce, the Qatari statement said.

The statement added that Turkish negotiators also contributed to brokering this deal.


Violence has escalated between the neighbours since earlier this month, with each country saying they were responding to aggression from the other. Afghanistan denies harbouring militants who carry out attacks in border areas, a key area of concern for Islamabad.


Pakistan has been grappling with a surge in militancy in its western border areas with Afghanistan since 2021, after the Taliban seized control and returned to power in Afghanistan.

Fighting has threatened to further destabilise a region where groups including the Islamic State group and al-Qaeda are trying to resurface.

On Friday, just hours after the expiration of a 48-hour truce, Pakistan struck across the border, targeting militants belonging to the Hafiz Gul Bahadur group, in the eastern Afghan province of Paktika.

Locals dig graves for people killed in a cross-border airstrike by the Pakistani army in Afghanistan's eastern Paktika province, Saturday, Oct. 18, 2025 Shafiqullah Mashaal/Copyright 2025 The AP. All rights reserved.

Islamabad claimed the attacks on at least two districts in the Afghan province neutralised dozens of armed fighters, and killed no civilians.

Officials added that the strikes were in response to a suicide bombing of a security forces compound in Mir Ali in Pakistan’s western Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province a day earlier.

Taliban officials however say the aerial raids killed at least 10 civilians, including women, children and local cricket players who had been competing in a match in close proximity to the sites targeted.

The attacks prompted the national cricket board to boycott an upcoming competition in Pakistan. Cricket's global governing body, the International Cricket Council, said it was “saddened and appalled by the tragic deaths of three young and promising Afghan" players.

Zabihullah Mujahid, the Taliban government’s chief spokesman, had earlier criticised the “repeated crimes of Pakistani forces and the violation of Afghanistan’s sovereignty.”

Such acts were deemed provocative and viewed as “deliberate attempts” to prolong the conflict, he added.

Locals dig graves for people killed in a cross-border airstrike by the Pakistani army in Afghanistan's eastern Paktika province, Saturday, Oct. 18, 2025 Shafiqullah Mashaal/Copyright 2025 The AP. All rights reserved.

Pakistan's army chief, Asim Munir, urged Afghans to choose “mutual security over perpetual violence and progress over hardline obscurantism.”

“The Taliban must rein in the proxies who have sanctuaries in Afghanistan,” he told an audience at the Pakistan Military Academy in Kakul, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, as high-level delegations from both countries met in the Qatari capital on Saturday for the negotiations.

The two countries share a more than 2,600 kilometre border, known as the Durand Line, but Afghanistan has never recognised it, viewing it as a historical issue imposed during British colonial rule, although it functions as the de facto border in practice.

Kabul has rejected the borders, saying it was imposed on them under duress in 1893 and divides Pashtun tribes who inhabit western Pakistan and eastern Afghanistan.

It instead recognises the 1947 borders, which disputes large swathes of Pakistani land, and has resulted in various cross border skirmishes over the decades, led by local militant groups, over control and territorial disputes.

Additional sources AP

China–India Rapprochement And Its Strategic Implications For Afghanistan – Analysis



October 19, 2025 

By Imran Zakeria, Scott N. Romaniuk and László Csicsmann

Afghanistan’s history reads as a catalogue of great power competition. From the 19th-century rivalry between Tsarist Russia and Great Britain to the Cold War confrontation between the United States (U.S.) and the Soviet Union, the country’s strategic location has repeatedly drawn external actors into its domestic affairs. Its terrain and position have made it both a prize and a battleground, where the ambitions of powerful neighbors have often eclipsed the needs of its own people.

These rivalries not only hindered meaningful reconstruction but actively eroded Afghanistan’s existing infrastructure, underscoring how external competition repeatedly translated into internal devastation. Following the US military intervention at the start of the 21st century, Afghanistan witnessed modest economic growth and partial infrastructure reconstruction, but these outcomes came at an extraordinary cost. External powers once again turned the country into a battleground for their geopolitical rivalries, prioritizing strategic interests over Afghan stability and welfare. Ordinary citizens endured the heaviest burden, facing daily casualties and profound human suffering.

While Afghanistan’s strategic geography has made it a target of foreign rivalries, the persistence of its problems cannot be explained by external factors alone. The absence of effective strategic vision among Afghan rulers, coupled with their inability to manage the country’s geopolitical position within regional and international frameworks, has perpetuated instability and limited opportunities for national resilience. Domestic political challenges—including factional divisions within the Islamic Emirate, governance capacity limitations, and local power dynamics—further shape decision-making and influence Afghanistan’s ability to leverage regional partnerships. Without stronger internal legitimacy and administrative effectiveness, even well-intentioned foreign engagement faces significant constraints.
Afghanistan–Pakistan Relations and Regional Frictions

During the period of US military presence, relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan were characterized by persistent tension and mistrust. Since the return of the Islamic Emirate in 2021, these frictions have not only continued but intensified, reflecting enduring disputes over border security, militancy, and mutual accusations of interference.

Disputes over the Durand Line, Pakistani airstrikes on Afghan territory, and reciprocal accusations of supporting terrorism have further deepened the complexity of bilateral relations. India, as another key regional actor, has consistently criticized Pakistan in international forums, holding it accountable for sponsoring terrorism and undermining regional stability. Recent frictions, particularly Pakistan’s repeated closure of the Torkham gate, have strained bilateral ties and impeded regional economic cooperation.

Pakistan’s hosting of the two-day conference ‘Toward Unity and Trust’, organized by the South Asia Strategic Stability Institute (SASSI), marked the first occasion on which Taliban opponents were formally received by Islamabad. The event highlights the complexity of regional involvement in Afghanistan’s internal politics. Some observers viewed the meeting as a cautious step towards political inclusivity, while others regarded it as a demonstration of Pakistan’s continued leverage and a reflection of the fragmented Afghan political landscape. The episode underscores both Islamabad’s enduring influence and the challenges the Islamic Emirate faces in consolidating domestic legitimacy while navigating regional pressures.



Although China has attempted to mediate between Afghanistan and Pakistan, historical experience suggests such initiatives may yield limited outcomes. Afghanistan also faces ongoing security threats from ISIS-K and other militant groups, as well as border challenges with Iran and Pakistan. These risks not only undermine domestic stability but affect Afghanistan’s ability to participate in regional connectivity projects and attract foreign investment, highlighting the interconnection between security and strategic positioning.
Emerging China–India Interests in Afghanistan

Despite its political isolation, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has achieved a relative improvement in relations with India. India has continued development and humanitarian initiatives, including constructing the Afghan Parliament building, the Salma Dam, and investments in healthcare and education. These historically cordial ties, combined with China’s pragmatic non-interference policy, have drawn both powers’ attention towards Kabul. China has engaged through economic dialogue and regional forums such as the SCO, exploring opportunities for trade and connectivity without overt political involvement.

Afghanistan’s strategic location makes it critical for regional stability, affecting trade routes, energy corridors, and security dynamics. The sustainability of these relations depends on internal governance. The Islamic Emirate faces factional divisions and limited administrative capacity, which shape policy implementation and foreign engagement. Improved ties with India and engagement with China offer strategic openings, but their long-term benefits hinge on Afghanistan’s ability to consolidate governance, manage internal divisions, and deliver stable, predictable policies that reassure regional partners.
Afghanistan’s Role in Regional Connectivity

Guided by a balanced and economically oriented foreign policy, the Islamic Emirate has drawn increasing attention from Central Asian states and other regional actors. Afghanistan maintains constructive relations with Central Asia and China, alongside positive ties with India, creating potential avenues for regional economic cooperation.

Central Asia possesses abundant energy resources, and Afghanistan’s strategic location provides a viable corridor for transporting these resources to South Asian markets. A key initiative illustrating this potential is the Turkmenistan–Afghanistan–Pakistan–India (TAPI) pipeline, designed to deliver Turkmen natural gas to Pakistan and India via Afghanistan. If successfully implemented, TAPI could become a cornerstone of regional energy integration, offering Afghanistan transit revenues and employment while linking Central and South Asian economies.

Such connectivity supports Central Asia’s economic development, reduces reliance on Russian energy, and offers Afghanistan prospects for stability and long-term growth through regional projects. If India and China cooperate more closely, the strategic significance of Iran’s Chabahar port increases, offering Afghanistan an alternative trade corridor for Indian goods to Central Asia. Afghanistan’s geography also provides China the shortest route to the Middle East; with Iran’s expanding railway network and China’s potential construction of the Wakhan road in Badakhshan, Chinese goods could transit through Afghanistan to Iran and onward to Middle Eastern markets.

Despite these opportunities, practical constraints remain, including limited infrastructure, political instability, logistical challenges, insecurity along corridors, and environmental pressures such as water scarcity and land degradation.
Prospects for Trilateral Cooperation: China, India, and Afghanistan

Western criticism of the Islamic Emirate, particularly from the U.S. over human rights concerns, combined with ongoing trade frictions between India and the U.S., may create space for closer engagement between Afghanistan, India, and China.

Such engagement depends on the Islamic Emirate addressing concerns, responding to legitimate expectations, and fostering trust through diplomatic exchanges and visits. Russia’s recognition of the Islamic Emirate highlights close ties between the two countries and may catalyze stronger Afghanistan–India–China relations. Russia, India, and China, as SCO and BRICS members, are influential regional powers viewing Afghanistan as a potential source of security challenges. A coordinated stance could foster regional consensus and contribute to reconstruction and economic stabilization, provided domestic governance and security challenges are addressed.
India–China Relations and Their Impact on Afghanistan

India’s opposition to Afghanistan joining the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) reflects strained India–China relations. However, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to China and participation in the two-day SCO summit in Tianjin, China, from 31 August to 1 September 2025 signals potential improvement.

Greater India–China cooperation could allow Afghanistan to join CPEC while deepening historic ties with India. This would position Afghanistan as a vital connector of regional corridors, enhancing its economic and geopolitical significance. Afghanistan’s capacity to benefit depends on managing internal political divisions, ensuring security along trade routes, and developing necessary infrastructure.
Multipolarity and the Decline of US Influence in Asia

The global order is shifting towards multipolarity, accompanied by declining confidence in US influence in Asia. The recent SCO summit demonstrated China’s soft power and its ability to convene regional powers in a cooperative framework. China’s 3 September military parade showcased hard power, highlighting advancements in technology and defense industry growth. President Xi Jinping emphasized the necessity of a multipolar world grounded in equality, signaling dissatisfaction with the US-led order.

Amid these dynamics, Afghanistan’s internal governance remains critical. The recent Kandahar meeting convened by Taliban leader Hibatullah Akhundzada illustrates efforts to consolidate discipline and secure strategic assets, including Bagram Air Base, amid concerns over potential US intervention. The episode reveals factional anxiety, sensitivity to US intentions, and a deliberate show of unity to deter threats, highlighting how the Islamic Emirate navigates domestic governance while projecting strength to regional and internal audiences.

The evolving multipolar framework offers Afghanistan opportunities to engage multiple powers while mitigating US influence, provided the Islamic Emirate strengthens governance, security, and infrastructure.
Policy Recommendations and Strategic Positioning

Afghan authorities should strengthen and expand relations with India and China. Their engagement offers Afghanistan an opportunity to overcome political isolation.

Given its strategic location and rich resources, Afghanistan can attract investment across key economic sectors. Cooperation could foster growth, advance infrastructure reconstruction, and enhance regional integration. Afghanistan is well-positioned to serve as a hub connecting regional economic corridors, but success depends on governance, legitimacy, and security.

Closer ties with India may heighten Pakistan’s sensitivities. However, Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi emphasized that Afghanistan’s foreign policy seeks balance, fostering equitable relations with all major actors while enabling economic cooperation.

Afghanistan’s stability is intrinsically linked to regional stability. SCO members should work towards a unified policy promoting political stability and economic growth through investment. Achieving this requires full SCO membership for Afghanistan and deeper India–China cooperation, resolving border disputes peacefully, and respecting regional influence.

Improved ties could mitigate US strategic competition while opening avenues for bilateral collaboration and joint regional initiatives.
Afghanistan’s Future at the Intersection of Power and Geography

Afghanistan’s geography and history at the crossroads of great power rivalries continue to shape its environment. The emerging China–India rapprochement, combined with improving relations with both powers, offers opportunities to leverage connectivity, economic corridors, and infrastructure investment. Domestic governance, security threats, and environmental constraints may limit these prospects.

Key questions include: Can the Islamic Emirate strengthen legitimacy and administrative capacity to manage partnerships and attract sustainable investment? Can it mitigate security risks along trade and energy corridors? How will it balance engagement with competing regional powers amid evolving India–China relations and Pakistan’s sensitivities?

Multilateral mechanisms such as SCO and BRICS also raise questions: to what extent can they support Afghanistan’s reconstruction and economic integration while respecting sovereignty and internal dynamics? Environmental and infrastructure limitations pose practical challenges to translating strategic geography into economic gains.

Afghanistan’s future hinges on its ability to manage domestic stability, regional diplomacy, and economic development simultaneously. Its potential as a hub for regional connectivity could be transformative, but only if governance, security, and sustainable development strategies are pursued alongside careful navigation of complex regional and global relationships.

About the authors:Imran Zakeria is a Research Fellow at the Regional Studies Center, Afghanistan Science Academy.

Scott N. Romaniuk: Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Contemporary Asia Studies, Corvinus Institute for Advanced Studies (CIAS), Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary
László Csicsmann: Full Professor and Head of the Centre for Contemporary Asia Studies, Corvinus Institute for Advanced Studies (CIAS), Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary; Senior Research Fellow, Hungarian Institute of International Affairs (HIIA)

Source: This article was also published at Geopoliticalmonitor.com



Imran Zakeria is a Research Fellow at the Regional Studies Center, Afghanistan Science Academy.

US humiliated in Afghanistan

 

By: Mohsen Pakaeen

TEHRAN, Jul. 23 (MNA) – In his message to the world’s Muslims during the time of Hajj, Imam Khamenei referred to America’s ignorance in its presence in Afghanistan.

He stating that “This ignorance led America to be humiliated in Afghanistan. After that raucous invasion 20 years ago and after having used weapons and bombs against defenseless people and civilians, it felt it had become stuck in a quagmire and eventually withdrew its forces from that country.”

This is a certain reality that America was humiliated in Afghanistan many times. The peak of this humiliation was when Joe Biden confessed that he no longer wanted to see American soldiers being killed there after twenty years of occupying Afghanistan. Being ashamed of more than 2,400 soldiers being killed and approximately 21,000 being wounded, Biden withdrew all American forces from Afghanistan in such a way that the American people witnessed the greatest failure of their country in contemporary times after the Vietnam War. Biden said, “I am now the fourth United States president to preside over an American troop presence in Afghanistan: two Republicans, two Democrats. I will not pass this responsibility on to a fifth.”

The Afghans’ fight to free their country from the occupation of the arrogant NATO forces and particularly their continuous resistance to the White House occupation was another factor that led America to be humiliated.

The US deployed its army to Afghanistan like other superpowers would and left Afghanistan when its power was waning. American politicians realized quite well that the willpower of nations is much stronger than their torturers, killers, planes and missiles targeting the innocent people of Afghanistan.

America was also humiliated when they sat across from the Taliban leaders in Doha. They sat humbly before the Taliban asking them for their own soldiers’ security while they had come to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban terrorists and provide security for Afghanistan! Even though they had come to Afghanistan under the slogan of defending women’s rights, in Doha they approved of and accepted the Taliban as a supporter of women’s rights. In referring to the Islamic laws that support women’s rights, they expressed hope that the Taliban movement would fulfill its commitment to women.

America was also humiliated by the Taliban after announcing the withdrawal of its forces from Afghanistan. The Taliban accused the US of violating the Doha agreement and said, “The US has violated the Doha peace agreement by postponing the withdrawal of its forces from Afghanistan. Based on the Doha peace agreement, American forces should have left Afghanistan by May.”

The US’s humiliation of being accused by the Taliban terrorist group of breaking their agreement will remain in the history of that country.

The US was also humiliated in its own country. The occupation of Afghanistan cost the American taxpayers two billion dollars. Now a fundamental question that remains for the American people and particularly its intellectuals is, “If Taliban was a terrorist group, which was the reason for the US and NATO forces occupation of Afghanistan for twenty years, then why did you enter into negotiations with this group and why did you agree to withdraw your military forces?” Another question raised by intellectuals is, “How is it that after spending two trillion dollars in Afghanistan, not only terrorism was not defeated, but the terrorist group ISIS entered Afghanistan too?” One Afghan official said that if the Americans had given 20 cents of each dollar (they spent in Afghanistan) to us, we would have been able to build our country and train our forces. Indeed, if America had spent that two trillion dollars on building hospitals, schools, and universities, funding development projects and fighting narcotics and the farming of narcotics, would it have withdrawn from Afghanistan “humiliated”?

The US withdrawal from Afghanistan proved that this country is no longer the superpower of the world and cannot impose its will on nations. During the twenty years of its occupation of Afghanistan, the Americans were continuously exposed to humiliation. The US’s inhumane measures, which led to the destruction of Afghanistan, and the shameless actions of their soldiers in the Afghan prisons that were in opposition to human rights, not only led to the humiliation of the White House internationally, it also incited the endless hatred of the Afghan people toward the occupiers.

The Afghan people’s resistance shattered the US’s grandeur and the same will happen in the case of the US crimes against the people of Palestine, Yemen, Syria, and Iraq, because the resistance forces in the region have found the courage to defend their rights against the aggression of the US and its allies.

In his message on the occasion of Hajj 2021, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution referred to the US’s continuing plots against regional countries. He advised that the vigilant Afghan nation remain watchful concerning America’s tools for gathering intelligence, its soft-war weapons in this country and to vigilantly fight them.

One of the soft-war weapons used by NATO and the US in Muslim countries is transforming the culture of these countries. The West plans to spread the Western lifestyle in Afghanistan by promoting the culture of liberalism. At the same time, they wish to surreptitiously, slowly, quietly alienate the Muslim people of this country from their Islamic culture. These goals have been proposed by the Foreign Ministers of Western countries in international summits under the title of creating a civil society in Afghanistan. In claiming to defend women’s rights, they imply that not wearing the Islamic covering is a factor for women’s development in Afghanistan. The strategic plan of the NATO policy makers in Afghanistan, which will continue in Afghanistan even after the withdrawal of the military forces, is to use modern communication tools for institutionalizing the cultural superiority of the West in this country. Due to their strong religious roots, the people of Afghanistan will never accept the spread of the secular culture of the West or its promiscuity and unrestraint. In this area, the religious scholars and intellectuals should enter the field to protect the Islamic culture and identity of their country.  

On the other hand, America does not want the Afghan crisis to be solved and they want the withdrawal of US forces from this country to create a new round of crisis and insecurity. Following the US withdrawal, its mission in Afghanistan is likely to be taken over by third party countries such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey and terrorist groups such as ISIS or the military branch of Taliban. The US forces will be replaced by intelligence services in Afghanistan and the Pentagon is interested in continuing its political presence and role as an advisor in Afghanistan. The people of Afghanistan should restore the national unity they had when fighting in the way of God. The government and ethnic groups, particularly the Taliban, should realize that the crisis in Afghanistan cannot be solved by military means. The best action to be taken is to declare a ceasefire and to continue internal negotiations. In this way, the legal structures may be kept and based on the people and the influence of different ethnicities and groups, a Government of National Reconciliation can be established.

This article has been first published on Khamenei.ir

MAH

News Code 176454

How Many Troops In Afghanistan?

The Afghanistan assignment, which involves 16,000 NATO-led soldiers now and a projected 25,000 by the end of the year

Forgot to to mention that did we Mr. Harper.

And that will replace the Americans who are withdrawing. As they need more troops in Iraq they will reduce troop deployments to Afghanistan while NATO takes up the slack.

Even if the US left 15, 000 troops along with the 25,000 NATO forces this would be exactly how many troops the Soviet Union initially used in 1979 when it invaded Afghanistan. However this will stil not be enough to neutralize the Taliban threat.

Afghanistan

The Soviet armed forces that invaded Afghanistan in December 1979 consisted of about 40,000 officers and men and their equipment. The fierce resistance by Afghan guerrilla forces mujahidiin, literally meaning warriors engaged in a holy war. forced the Soviets to increase the size and sophistication of their military units, and in late 1985 a United States government official estimated that Soviet units in Afghanistan comprised about 118,000 men, of which about 10,000 were reported to be in the Soviet secret police and other special units.

It is errie to read this...which is oft repeated these days in the media refering to NATO operations moving from Peacekeeping to combat.


The Soviet Army also quickly realized the inadequacy of its preparation and planning for the mission in Afghanistan. The initial mission—to guard cities and installations—was soon expanded to combat, and kept growing over time. The Soviet reservists, who comprised the majority of the troops initially sent in, were pulled into full-scale combat operations against the rebels, while the regular Afghan army was often unreliable because of the desertions and lack of discipline.
The Soviet Experience in Afghanistan: Russian Documents and Memoirs
National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 57
Edited by John Prados and Svetlana Savranskaya
October 9, 2001


The irony is that the U.S. which funded the collapse of Afghanistan in order to force a Cold War defeat on the USSR now has to clean up its historic mistake. What began with Jimmy Carter was expanded by Reagan and later Bush I and II.


According to this 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, the CIA's intervention in Afghanistan preceded the 1979 Soviet invasion. This decision of the Carter Administration in 1979 to intervene and destabilise Afghanistan is the root cause of Afghanistan's destruction as a nation.

The Bush White house adopted the neo-con limited engagement strategy when it invaded Afghanistan and later Iraq. With the same success that the Russians had with it in Afghanistan.

The limited contingent in Afghanistan

In 1979, however, the Soviet Army intervened in a civil war raging in Afghanistan. The Soviet Army came to back a Soviet-friendly secular government threatened by Muslim fundamentalist guerillas equipped and financed by the United States. Technically superior, the Soviets did not have enough troops to establish control over the countryside and to secure the border. This resulted from hesitancy in the Politburo, which allowed only a "limited contingent", averaging between 80,000 and 100,000 troops. Consequently, local insurgents could effectively employ hit-and-run tactics, using easy escape-routes and good supply-channels. This made the Soviet situation hopeless from the military point of view (short of using "scorched earth" tactics, which the Soviets did not practise except in World War II in their own territory). The understanding of this made the war highly unpopular within the Army. With the coming of glasnost, Soviet media started to report heavy losses, which made the war very unpopular in the USSR in general, even though actual losses remained modest, averaging 1670 per year. The war also became a sensitive issue internationally, which finally led Gorbachev to withdraw the Soviet forces from Afghanistan. The "Afghan Syndrome" suffered by the Army parallels the American Vietnam Syndrome trauma over their own lost war in Vietnam.

And lets not forget that it was in the Post Soviet internecine civil war period; 1990-1999 that lead the Taliben to take power. Because the Americans cut and ran, leaving the country to the Mujahedin, War Lords, and Drug Lords. Not our problem said the CIA who conducted the anti-Soviet war.

One long-term effect of the Soviet invasion and pull-out was the establishment of a weak state full of religious hatred and hatred of richer nations: a breeding ground for terrorism. Though supplying the Afghan resistance with American guns and anti-aircraft missiles seemed like a good idea for the US in the 1980s, and was the reason for the Soviets’ defeat, now as the US invades, they are met with their own guns. The significance of the sophisticated guns has yet to be determined. In light of the US involvement today in Afghanistan after the September 11th terrorist attacks, it is especially important to understand the history of the Soviet's involvement there so we can avoid making the same mistakes.

The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan in 1979: Failure
of Intelligence or of the Policy Process?

1989–1991, after the official Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan,
when both the Soviets and the US nevertheless continued to support their
proxies in the Afghan conflict. The group also considered the consequences
of American policy decisions to withdraw from engagement in Afghanistan;
consequences which not only gave free license to years of internal Afghan
turmoil, but profoundly impacted US strategic and security interests as well.



And it makes for a great movie too. Not like all these 9/11 Memorial TV and Movie shows but the real reason for 9/11; the CIA failure in Afghanistan. All else is conspiracy theories. Osama bin Laden could not have attacked America if America had not destabilized Afghanistan in the first place. And five years after ousting the Taliban we are still no better off.

Also See:

9/11

CIA

Afghanistan






Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Canada, Nukes, Pakistan, Taliban, Balochistan, Harper, Bush, Afghanistan, nuclear, nuclearfuel
NDP, liberals, Afghanistan, PB, BT, Canada, Progressivebloggers, bloggingtories, blogs, blogging, bringthetroopshome, Layton,NDP, Layton, TroopsOut, Afghanistan, War, Harper, Conservatives, Liberals, Canada, politics, military, NATO, peacekeeping, Karzai, NDP, liberals, Afghanistan, PB, BT, Canada, Progressivebloggers, bloggingtories, blogs, blogging, bringthetroopshome, Layton,NDP, Layton, TroopsOut, Afghanistan, War, Harper, Conservatives, Liberals, Canada, politics, military, NATO, peacekeeping, Karzai, Graham, Liberals, Canada, Soldiers, Death, Injury, Afghanistan, Government, Politics, values, Men, mysogyny, women, Afghanistan, Canada, Harper, war, Taliban, Kabul, Karzai, Islam, fatewha, girls, school


Tags
Canada
USA
War
Friendly Fire
Canadian Troops
Afghanistan
Kandahar
NATO