“The situation remains fragile”: what are the prospects for a peace treaty between the US and the Taliban

By signing a peace agreement with the Taliban, the American side retained the right to self-defense and defense of US allies in the region. This was stated by the head of the Pentagon, Mark Esper, speaking at a joint press conference with British counterpart Ben Wallace. Asked by reporters whether the agreement provides for the protection of Afghan government forces from attacks by the Taliban, Esper recalled that, according to the terms of the agreement, the US will make efforts to "gradually reduce the level of violence." In addition, the American side will ensure that a comprehensive ceasefire is established throughout Afghanistan.

“At the same time, according to one part of the agreement, we will always have the right to protect ourselves and our Afghan partners, which we have done over the past few days and will continue to do so. On Saturday, I visited Kabul just to assure the Afghan authorities and the national defense forces of Afghanistan that we will continue to protect them and provide them with further support, ”the head of the US defense department emphasized.

Great outcome

Recall, in late February, US Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad and deputy leader of the radical Taliban movement Abdul Gani Baradar signed a peace agreement. This was preceded by lengthy negotiations between the American side and the Taliban leadership. The signing ceremony in Doha was also attended by Secretary General of the North Atlantic Alliance Jens Stoltenberg, head of the US State Department Mike Pompeo and Russian President’s Special Representative for Afghanistan, director of the second Asian Department of the Russian Foreign Ministry Zamir Kabulov.

• Taliban
• AFP
• © NOORULLAH SHIRZADA

According to the agreements, the United States must withdraw its military forces from Afghanistan within 14 months. At the same time, the Taliban are required to stop their attacks: if this condition is met, the United States will reduce its military contingent in Afghanistan to 8.6 thousand people within 135 days. In addition, the agreement implies Washington’s non-intervention in Afghanistan’s domestic policy.

In early March, US President Donald Trump held telephone conversations with Taliban deputy political affairs leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar. This was announced on Twitter by the representative of the Taliban Zabiullah Mujahid, the head of the White House also confirmed this information to reporters. As Trump noted then, the American side does not want violence and intends to observe how events unfold in Afghanistan.

Later, US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo said that the Taliban leadership is doing everything to fulfill the agreements reached.

“We see that the Taliban’s leadership is seriously working to reduce violence compared to similar periods in the past,” the head of the Department of State said.

However, on March 4, the United States launched an airstrike on Taliban positions in Afghanistan. This was announced on Twitter by the representative of the US Armed Forces in Afghanistan, Colonel Sonny Leggett. He explained that the strike was a response to the Taliban attack at a checkpoint in the Afghan province of Helmand. Leggett explained that it was a question of defensive actions by the US military.

In turn, the representative of the National Security Council of Afghanistan, Javid Faisal, accused the Taliban of violating the terms of the agreement. As the official emphasized in his Twitter, the Taliban carried out 76 attacks only in the first three days of March, and Afghan government forces had to destroy a total of 85 militants.

According to Natalia Khanova, an expert at the Center for Contemporary Studies of Afghanistan, these Taliban actions could be a reaction to the position of official Kabul.

“The agreement said that the Afghan authorities would release 5,000 Taliban prisoners in exchange for a thousand prisoners in the hands of the Taliban. However, Afghan President Ghani said that the United States did not have the right to make such decisions, and an agreement should be reached at the inter-Afghan negotiations. The Taliban took this as the president’s reluctance to fulfill the agreement, ”the expert said in an interview with RT.

The illusion of unity

Meanwhile, on March 6, a new armed attack occurred in Kabul - the attack was carried out on participants in a commemorative ceremony dedicated to the anniversary of the death of the founder of the Shiite Hizb-i-Wahdat party, Abdul Ali Mazari. The event was attended by Afghan government officials, including Prime Minister Abdullah Abdullah and former President Hamid Karzai. According to preliminary information, as a result of the attack, 27 people died, the head of government managed to escape. At the same time, none of the armed groups operating in Afghanistan, including the Taliban, have claimed responsibility for the attack.

• Prime Minister of Afghanistan Abdullah Abdullah
• Reuters
• © Jawad Jalali / Pool

As the director of the MGIMO Analytical Center Andrei Kazantsev noted in an interview with RT, despite the fact that the Taliban are usually represented as a centralized movement with a single command, in practice we are talking about a huge number of disparate cells and field commanders who may not be subordinate to the central command of the movement.

“Unfortunately, when the US signed an agreement with the Taliban, they also believed in the myth of the solidity of the Taliban.” To some extent, this is so: the Taliban have governing structures that have close ties with Pakistani intelligence. Most likely, they really have nothing to do with the attack in Kabul. But involvement of some small groups that are not subordinate to the center is not ruled out, ”the expert explained.

As Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova noted on March 6, Moscow expects that peace agreements between the United States and the Taliban will be implemented.

“We still hope that the signed agreement between the US and the Taliban will be fully implemented. And we are convinced that in the current situation in Afghanistan, the pursuit of genuine peace should become an absolute priority for all forces. And including I'm talking about socio-political forces, ”said Zakharova.

Split along multiple lines

In addition, according to experts, the situation is aggravated by the government crisis that erupted in Afghanistan after the election.

“As you know, the Afghan government is now split, it’s difficult even to sum up the results of the elections held last year. Ashraf Ghani believes that he won the election, the opposition disputes this. The contradictions also apply to the situation with the Taliban and the United States: Ghani is dissatisfied with the agreement they signed, while the opposition supports Washington’s position, ”Andrei Kazantsev noted.

Recall, the military operation Enduring Freedom was launched by the United States against Al Qaeda ** and the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001 in response to the September 11 attacks. The American army managed to overthrow the Taliban government and push the group away from the capital.

• US Air Force
• Reuters
• © Omar Sobhani

However, the Taliban were able to maintain significant influence and resources in the remote provinces of Afghanistan, which were virtually beyond the control of the central authorities. The United States had to leave the country with an extensive military contingent to support the new Afghan government.

In 2009, President Barack Obama of the United States increased the US military presence in Afghanistan by another 30 thousand troops, hoping to stabilize the situation. According to the original plan, in this case, the military of the United States and allied countries could return home in 2011. However, it was not possible to implement this strategy on schedule, the American contingent was partially withdrawn from Afghanistan only in 2013. Then the region left 34 thousand troops. Soon, a new mission was announced - Resolute Support, designed to help the Afghan government.

Before the 2016 elections, Donald Trump promised to stop the expensive US overseas campaigns and return the military home. His administration initiated peace talks with the Taliban.

However, now, after the signing of the agreement, experts doubt the prospect of stabilizing the military-political situation in Afghanistan.

“The situation remains fragile, attacks on Afghan troops continue, although observers say that the number of such incidents has decreased since the last air strike. The Taliban are now probing whether the United States is ready to turn a blind eye to the conduct of hostilities against the government, which the Taliban do not intend to recognize the legality of, ”Natalia Khanova explained.

A similar point of view is shared by Andrei Kazantsev. According to him, the American side was initially aware that the agreement was unlikely to be fully implemented. The goal in this case was different - to tear off a large group from the Taliban that would agree to reconciliation provided that it was included in the national government.

“In turn, the Taliban also have their own strategy - to get the American army out of the region, and then act in their own interests, forgetting about the agreement. It is clear that all parties are playing a double game, and there is nothing surprising in this, it has always been done in Afghanistan, ”the expert noted.

At the same time, Donald Trump also pursues his goals - it is important for the head of the White House to fulfill his promises made during the last election campaign, since he is now entering a new race, Kazantsev believes.

“It's hard to say how viable the agreement signed by the US and the Taliban. It depends on Washington’s goals. If the goal is the withdrawal of the American contingent from Afghanistan at any cost, then this is quite easy to do. And if we are talking about establishing a lasting peace in Afghanistan, then this task with one hundred percent probability will not be completed. Most likely, the conflict will continue, simply, perhaps, in some other forms, ”summed up Kazantsev.

* “Taliban” - the organization was recognized as terrorist by the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 14, 2003 .

** Al-Qaeda - the organization was recognized as terrorist by decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 14, 2003.