Only an Afghan-led peace process can bring peace to Afghanistan (original) (raw)
Related papers
Academia Letters, 2020
against the Taliban in Afghanistan and enabled them to start its troops' withdrawal from the country. This agreement is perceived as a starting point to end the conflict and the longest US military engagement. Nonetheless, political commentators, including ordinary Afghans, sees this as a political move by the Trump Administration and as a legitimacy factor for the Taliban. This leaves one questioning if the Doha peace deal with the Taliban would be sustainable? and if this is any different from what occurred in the early 90s and early 2000s? And the most important question of all, if this would bring peace and prosperity to the country? This paper takes an analytical approach to the issue of peace and conflict in Afghanistan, and by considering a timeline to the current conflict, it attempts to argue that this peace deal with the Taliban in a long run is not sustainable as it ignores some key variables that have defined the conflict over the past fifty years.
Comprehensive Peace Agreement and Challenges February 2020: A Case of United States and Taliban
Global Strategic and Securities Review, 2020
Afghanistan remained the battleground for a long time period for number of strategic wars by external forces. Diverse and multifaceted Afghan society paved the way for external forces. Several negotiations were held for making the peace in country. Many peace agreements failed because the conflict was not addressed. There is a need to reach beyond the use of military force and to apply inclusive approach by involving the civil society in peace building. It is recognized as a crucial factor in the success of peace process. After more than 18 years of war, the US and the Taliban have reached an agreement to end the war. The central deal for the agreement is to withdrawal of US troops and counter terrorism assurance from Taliban. This study digs out, the factors involved in Afghan conflict and their demands from the peace process. The study relies on secondary sources to develop arguments.
The Afghan Peace Process: Domestic Fault Lines
Middle East Policy, 2021
The intra-Afghan dialogue stalled despite hectic diplomatic efforts by the United States, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Russia, and other countries to revitalize the dialogue and reach a political settlement before Western troops left Afghanistan. This article argues that there were three main reasons for disagreement between the Afghan government and the Taliban, and these issues remained a major stumbling block in the peace process and will prevent lasting peace. First, the Taliban were unwilling to reduce violence or declare a “permanent and comprehensive ceasefire,” as stated in the US-Taliban peace deal. Second, the Taliban would not accept Afghanistan’s democratic political system and insisted on establishing an “Islamic Emirate.” The group also showed its reluctance to respect women’s rights and advances made with respect to their social position. Third, the Taliban consistently refused to respect ethnic and religious tolerance of minorities, especially the Shia Hazara. The Hazara have declared that they will take up arms to protect themselves against the Taliban’s return to power in Kabul, which does not bode well for peace and stability in Afghanistan
The future of peace in Afghanistan is rooted in lessons from the past
The future of peace in Afghanistan is rooted in lessons from the past, 2019
In the complexity that has arisen from decades of conflict, with the multitude of actors aligning themselves on ethnic lines and the lack of national Afghan unity, reaching a consensus is proving to be nearly impossible. However, it seems that the future of Afghanistan will be played out by two main internal actors; the Taliban and the Afghan government led by Ashraf Ghani, an independent politician. And yet, there is little to no interaction between the Taliban and the government as the Taliban does not recognize the government as a legitimate entity, and the government does not appreciate the Taliban’s political momentum with other States. By engaging in talks with foreign governments and Afghan elites, the Taliban is gaining political credibility that is undermining Ghani’s government.
US-Taliban Talks, Agreement and Insurgency
FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 2020
In 2009, Obama’s administration signaled to hold talks with moderate Taliban leadership but no success was achieved. After each failed talks, the Taliban would intensify insurgency for achieving a greater share in the Afghan affairs as they considered the Afghan government a puppet of America. They wanted to establish their own version of shari’a government but the Afghan government had its own reservations regarding the Taliban and the US-Taliban talks. Such dividends approaches of both the stake holders made all peace overtures irrelevant for a long period of time. Even after the US- Taliban Agreement, the intra-Afghan negotiations could not be held which again caused escalated insurgency. The current research paper is an attempt to answer the question that what were the objectives of US and Taliban behind the peace talks and agreement when peace itself remained a distant reality, and insurgency and violence has escalated instead? It will also analyze the success and failure of those talks and the future prospects for peace
Afghan Peace Process: Prospects and Challenges
2021
This research paper highlights the prospects and challenges in the ongoing peace efforts. America has taken the most important step to end the longest war in the history of America. America and the Taliban have signed the historic Peace Accord on 29 February 2020 in the capital city of Qatar. This time America decided to talk with the Taliban leaders directly without the presence of the Afghan government. All the world and regional actors welcomed the American move to talk with the Taliban and called this agreement a historic milestone in the history of Afghanistan. The people of Afghanistan are hopeful that peace in Afghanistan is not far away. Neighboring states Pakistan, India, Iran, China and Russia welcomed this Peace Process and determined to support the people of Afghanistan. These efforts for peace are encouraged and supported from everywhere but spoilers are also working to implement their agenda.
The United States Approach to Peace building in Afghanistan: Problems and Prospects
International Journal of Research, 2014
The US-led Afghan Peace Process has achieved a partial success. On political front, the US-led international supporters have helped Afghanistan in conducting national elections to transfer power democratically in the last twelve years. However, on economic and social levels, Afghans have lost more than it has gained in more than a decade. The paper is a modest attempt to investigate and analyse if the US approach to peacebuilding in Afghanistan contradicts general objectives of peacebuilding. Few important questions are being raised with regard to the US approach. Does the US faces a dilemma while dealing with the problems in Afghanistan and the larger security concerns in the region? If yes, is it because the premises that led to the invasion in Afghanistan in 2001 contradict the outcomes that the US experiences in these twelve long years in Afghanistan? If no, why did the US take such a long time to sort out Afghan problem? Why it has been trying hard, implicitly, to get Taliban onboard in the Afghan Peace Process? Why peacebuilding has not been successful? The research attempts to answer these questions. It also looks into whether the US really has a "replacement model" in general to implement whenever it needs to intervene in any country as it did in Afghanistan and later in Iraq. If so, what is its replacement model?
The Faltering US-Taliban Peace Deal: Need to Engage Regional Actors
AFGHANISTAN TIMES, 2020
The US-Taliban peace agreement signed in February 2020, aimed to enforce the “Afghan-led and Afghan-owned” reconciliation process within 10 days. However, enough has transpired since then, to prove the peace agreement has failed until now to move the peace efforts forward substantially. It is desirable that a comprehensive peace deal contains a definite agreement on ceasefire, which the current one clearly lacks. The Taliban issue in Afghanistan is largely viewed as not merely domestic but also foreign one. In fact, the perpetual Afghan conflict is dominantly due to regional competition than being a domestic one. Thus, without a comprehensive engagement of regional actors, resolving Afghanistan’s long lasting war will be difficult. Unfortunately, the Trump administration, in a hurry to exit from Afghanistan, seems to ignore the role of regional actors; his administration has relied excessively on Qatar and on Pakistan on issues related to reconciliation with Taliban. However, there are also other potential actors like Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India and even China, which should be more actively engaged.
The Prospect of Peace Talks with the Taliban
This paper analyses the Afghan government-Taliban peace talks, discussing reasons why the talks lack legitimacy and do not effectively engage with the Taliban while identifying measures to strengthen the process.