The latest round of peace talks between the US and the Taliban ended on March 12 after 16 days of tough negotiations, with “agreement in draft” on two of the four issues — counterterrorism assurances, troop withdrawal, intra-Afghan dialogue, and a comprehensive cease-fire. Previously, the two sides had agreed in principle on these issues. Slow and steady progress is being seen to be made each time US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad meets with his Taliban counterparts. With each round of peace talks, there is renewed hope among Afghans for a permanent settlement of the almost 40 years of conflict. It is no secret that a silent majority of Afghans want peace and those who do not obviously have vested interests in the ongoing conflict.
Khalilzad has repeatedly assured that nothing will be formally agreed with the Taliban until everything is agreed — and this includes a comprehensive cease-fire and intra-Afghan dialogue. The Intra-Afghan dialogue here implies direct talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government. Although the government feels sidelined in the ongoing peace talks, the reality is that they will pave the way for it to be engaged in direct negotiations with the Taliban. It is noteworthy that one of the consistent demands and preconditions of the Taliban has been an agreement for US troops to withdraw from Afghanistan. Obviously, the Afghan government could not have negotiated on behalf of the US on this sensitive issue, and hence there is rationale for direct talks between the US and the Taliban.
An Afghan delegation led by former President Hamid Karzai is expected to meet with Taliban representatives in Qatar next month in a follow-up to the previous similar meeting in Moscow. It must be noted that Karzai still has wide influence, especially among the political circles in Afghanistan. However, the government would be as critical as before of such engagements. Without government representation, these intra-Afghan dialogues will have no binding obligations for any side, but they do help in national consensus-building and increasing trust between the two sides.
The Afghan government has serious concerns about the probable peace deal between the US and the Taliban, despite assurances from Khalilzad that nothing will be agreed until everything is agreed. The government’s most significant apprehension is a sudden withdrawal of US troops as a result of the peace deal, leaving Afghanistan vulnerable. The key question is whether the Afghanistan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF) are ready to handle any major onslaught without the support of US air power. In September 2015, the strategic northern city of Kunduz fell to the Taliban and was only recaptured with major air power support from coalition forces.
Although the government feels sidelined in the ongoing peace talks, the reality is that they will pave the way for it to be engaged in direct negotiations with the Taliban
Ajmal Shams
The government is also concerned about rumors of the establishment of an interim government as a precondition to reaching a political settlement with the Taliban. The government believes any such move would be unconstitutional and would push Afghanistan back to where it started its journey to democracy. Yet many believe that, if an interim government is the cost of peace, so be it, as the cost of war is much higher and more painful.
Recently, when Afghan National Security Adviser Hamdullah Mohib criticized Khalilzad’s ongoing peace efforts, the US government reacted strongly, summoning him to the State Department and lodging strong protests in response to his remarks. Obviously, these remarks were not Mohib’s personal views, but rather reflected the official opinion of the Afghan government.
The partnership with America is crucial to Afghanistan’s survival. The ANDSF cannot sustain itself without yearly financial assistance of about $4 billion from the US. The Afghan-US relationship is critical to our stability and strategic interests. Almost half of our national budget is funded by the US. Under these circumstances, can we afford to damage our ties with the US?
With all the optimism about the ongoing peace negotiations, the US must ensure that Afghanistan’s interests are equally protected while safeguarding its own national interests. There would be no better way of protecting Afghanistan’s interests than bringing a lasting and enduring peace to the war-ravaged country, while preserving its achievements in democracy and development.
• Ajmal Shams, based in Kabul, is president of the Afghanistan Social Democratic Party. He was a deputy minister in the national unity government, and served as policy adviser to Ashraf Ghani before his presidential bid. Twitter: @ajmshams
