Joe Biden’s Approach to Afghanistan Peace Process

2020/11/17 | interview, political, top news

Strategic Council Online: Sarwar Danesh, Second Vice-President of Afghanistan, has called on the next US administration to reconsider the process of negotiations with the Taliban group. Danesh also criticized escalation of violence and the Taliban’s lack of cooperation in the peace process, saying that most Taliban members who have been released from prisons in Afghanistan had returned to the battlefields contrary to their commitment. Now the question is whether with the victory of Joe Biden in the US elections the policies of that country towards Afghanistan will change?

In response to this question, Pir Mohammad Mollazehi, an expert on the Subcontinent affairs, told the website of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations that the US general policy with regard to Afghanistan is not determined only by the president of that country. Rather, the collective governing body determines the general policies at the global level, including Afghanistan. Therefore, it cannot be expected that a fundamental change be made in Biden’s policies towards Afghanistan compared to Trump’s policies.

He continued by saying: Of course, since human rights issues are of more importance to the Democrats, perhaps changes would be made at a more limited scale such as putting the Taliban in a more difficult position and showing more support for the central government in Kabul.

According to the expert, the reality is that the current situation is not as such that if Biden starts his work at the White House, he could make a serious and rapid change in the US policies.

Referring to the fact that the Americans have reached the conclusion that there is no military solution to the Afghan issue and that they have spent money in that country in vain, Mollazehi said: In Afghanistan, the Taliban have power and the United States should give a share to this group in the power so that they might be able to solve the problem in a controlled way.

Meanwhile, the Taliban have shown a reaction to Biden’s victory in the US elections. The group said in a statement that the elections and the change of US officials are the internal affairs of that country and the Taliban are committed to the peace agreement it had signed with the United States.

According to the expert on the Subcontinent affairs, the Taliban’s concern is that the agreement they signed with the US might be modified by Biden because it is too much unilaterally in their favour and the Kabul government is opposing it.

Regarding the Taliban’s commitment to the peace agreement reached under the Trump administration, Mollazehi said: The Taliban should not be taken too seriously in this regard; rather it is the ISI of Pakistan that has taken control of the affairs. The general policy of the ISI of Pakistan in Afghanistan is that Afghans should accept at least four cases so that Pakistan would force the Taliban to compromise;

  • Accept the Durand Line
  • Open a free transit line without customs and formalities for Pakistan to Central Asia; because this issue is highly important for Pakistan due to its rivalry with India and knows that India is trying to take Central Asia out of the hands of the Pakistanis through Chabahar.
  • There should be a puppet government in Kabul that would at least be in line with Islamabad.
  • Afghanistan reduces India’s influence in that country.

Mollazehi continued: Therefore, until Pakistan fails to achieve its targets the Taliban game would not be over and the Americans have realized this point. But because Pakistan is getting closer to China and Russia, Trump’s hands were not much open to impose serious pressure on Islamabad to change its policy.

He also referred to other variables related to the issue of Afghanistan and said: For example, the role of Saudi Arabia and its relationship with the Taliban should not be overlooked. If we consider all these conditions collectively, it can be said that the US had come to the conclusion that it should not pay more for Afghanistan, but this does not mean that the US will evacuate Afghanistan completely. Even Trump would not do that.

Emphasizing that the US deal with the Taliban also has an undisclosed part which has not been revealed yet, Mollazehi explained: In that part, the Taliban with strong possibility have accepted that the US troops would remain at a limited level in the two main bases in Afghanistan. However, although no reliable information has been released yet, in general, it can be concluded that the US will not evacuate Afghanistan because, for Washington, only the issue of Afghanistan itself is not important, but for the US other issues such as Central Asia, Iran, the Uighurs and China are more important. In fact, the US presence in Afghanistan is aimed at controlling China.

He concluded that Biden would pursue the same policy towards the Taliban and that more possibly they might only put more pressure on Pakistan.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

LATEST CONTENT

Implications of the ICC’s Arrest Warrant for Myanmar’s Leader

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: Myanmar’s military leader, Min Aung Hlaing, is facing charges of committing crimes against humanity for the killing and persecution of Rohingya Muslims. The crimes, which affected more than a million people in Myanmar, took place between August and December 2017. During this period, the Myanmar military launched an operation called “clearance” under the pretext of fighting armed groups that led to the genocide of Muslims in Rakhine State in western Myanmar. This operation was accompanied by the widespread killing of more than 200,000 Rohingya Muslims and the displacement of about 700,000 people. The International Criminal Court has identified these actions as examples of genocide and crimes against humanity.

Ukrainian War and the Widening East-West Divide

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: A proxy war is when two countries fight each other indirectly by supporting the warring parties. Classic examples from the Cold War era include the Congo crisis in the 1960s and the Angola crisis in the 1970s when the Soviet Union and the United States supported each of the warring sides in a civil war with money, weapons, and sometimes soldiers, but never directly engaged in the war themselves. Accordingly, the approach of the United States and Europe, in the form of NATO and their all-out support for Ukraine, has all the hallmarks of a proxy war against Russia.

Turkey’s Policy Towards Trade Relations with the Zionist Regime

Strategic Council Online—Opinion: Recently, the Turkish Minister of Commerce confirmed that Turkish customs have been completely closed to trade with the Zionist Regime. This news was met with many comments and questions, and one of the most important questions was why Turkey decided to take such a step, how serious it is in practice, and what will be its consequences on the relations between the parties.

Analysis: The Reasons for Accepting the Ceasefire in Lebanon

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: Finally, after about two months of the Zionist regime’s war against Lebanon and in a situation where the war on the Lebanese front had intensified to an unprecedented extent in the days leading up to the ceasefire, the Zionist regime agreed to truce.

An Analysis on Trump’s Possible Foreign Policy Approach

Strategic Council Online—Interview: An expert on American affairs said: Although, during Donald Trump’s presidency, the approach to the Chinese threat will be the first issue of American foreign policy, the American public will not support the government in a full-scale economic war with China.

Terrorist Attack in Syria; Scheme to Open a New Front Against the Resistance Axis

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on regional issues considered the terrorist attack on the city of Idlib at the beginning of the winter season a “surprise” move and said: “Basically, an attack at this time of the year is out of the question because fighters usually do not choose the cold and winter seasons for military operations. There is no other reason why and how they took military action and advanced towards the city of Idlib and then Aleppo in a surprising way except that it is related to regional issues and the Israeli regime’s war in Lebanon and Gaza.”

Analysis of the Roots and Prospects of the Conflict in Aleppo, Syria

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: After several years of calm and immediately after the ceasefire agreement in Lebanon, the Syrian city of Aleppo has become the scene of clashes between opposition and armed groups led by Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra) and the Syrian army and government.

Iran-Saudi Balanced Approach to Reviving Relations

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The second round of the Iran-Saudi-China trilateral meeting, hosted by Riyadh, signals the development of relations in an atmosphere of increasing regional and international tensions and uncertainties. The meeting also confirmed China’s role beyond facilitating the revived relations between Tehran and Riyadh and related to China’s political economy perspective in the Middle East, which has significant implications for the Beijing-Washington macro-rivalry.

Loading

Últimas publicaciones

Implications of the ICC’s Arrest Warrant for Myanmar’s Leader

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: Myanmar’s military leader, Min Aung Hlaing, is facing charges of committing crimes against humanity for the killing and persecution of Rohingya Muslims. The crimes, which affected more than a million people in Myanmar, took place between August and December 2017. During this period, the Myanmar military launched an operation called “clearance” under the pretext of fighting armed groups that led to the genocide of Muslims in Rakhine State in western Myanmar. This operation was accompanied by the widespread killing of more than 200,000 Rohingya Muslims and the displacement of about 700,000 people. The International Criminal Court has identified these actions as examples of genocide and crimes against humanity.

Ukrainian War and the Widening East-West Divide

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: A proxy war is when two countries fight each other indirectly by supporting the warring parties. Classic examples from the Cold War era include the Congo crisis in the 1960s and the Angola crisis in the 1970s when the Soviet Union and the United States supported each of the warring sides in a civil war with money, weapons, and sometimes soldiers, but never directly engaged in the war themselves. Accordingly, the approach of the United States and Europe, in the form of NATO and their all-out support for Ukraine, has all the hallmarks of a proxy war against Russia.

Turkey’s Policy Towards Trade Relations with the Zionist Regime

Strategic Council Online—Opinion: Recently, the Turkish Minister of Commerce confirmed that Turkish customs have been completely closed to trade with the Zionist Regime. This news was met with many comments and questions, and one of the most important questions was why Turkey decided to take such a step, how serious it is in practice, and what will be its consequences on the relations between the parties.

Analysis: The Reasons for Accepting the Ceasefire in Lebanon

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: Finally, after about two months of the Zionist regime’s war against Lebanon and in a situation where the war on the Lebanese front had intensified to an unprecedented extent in the days leading up to the ceasefire, the Zionist regime agreed to truce.

An Analysis on Trump’s Possible Foreign Policy Approach

Strategic Council Online—Interview: An expert on American affairs said: Although, during Donald Trump’s presidency, the approach to the Chinese threat will be the first issue of American foreign policy, the American public will not support the government in a full-scale economic war with China.

Terrorist Attack in Syria; Scheme to Open a New Front Against the Resistance Axis

Strategic Council Online – Interview: An expert on regional issues considered the terrorist attack on the city of Idlib at the beginning of the winter season a “surprise” move and said: “Basically, an attack at this time of the year is out of the question because fighters usually do not choose the cold and winter seasons for military operations. There is no other reason why and how they took military action and advanced towards the city of Idlib and then Aleppo in a surprising way except that it is related to regional issues and the Israeli regime’s war in Lebanon and Gaza.”

Analysis of the Roots and Prospects of the Conflict in Aleppo, Syria

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: After several years of calm and immediately after the ceasefire agreement in Lebanon, the Syrian city of Aleppo has become the scene of clashes between opposition and armed groups led by Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra) and the Syrian army and government.

Iran-Saudi Balanced Approach to Reviving Relations

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The second round of the Iran-Saudi-China trilateral meeting, hosted by Riyadh, signals the development of relations in an atmosphere of increasing regional and international tensions and uncertainties. The meeting also confirmed China’s role beyond facilitating the revived relations between Tehran and Riyadh and related to China’s political economy perspective in the Middle East, which has significant implications for the Beijing-Washington macro-rivalry.

Loading