Afghan peace process: where is it heading?

After eight months of rigorous talks between US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad and the Taliban, the prospects of its success have attracted various comments but one thing has become obvious: that the peace process has finally taken off the ground. Zalmay Khalilzad has resumed his shuttle diplomacy and he seems to have extracted consent from Russia and China while making a stopover in Moscow last week. His Chinese and Russian counterparts gave their support to the American efforts for bringing peace in Afghanistan. He also had substantive talks in Islamabad with the high officials.

Concurrently, President Ashraf Ghani convened a Consultative Grand Jirga to consolidate his position viz-a-viz the Taliban. At the conclusion of the Jirga, which selected former warlord Rasool Siaf as its President, it was announced that the government side would nominate from amongst 3,000-plus Jirga members its representatives for the forthcoming intra-Afghan dialogue which were suspended last month due to the Taliban’s objection to the long list of Afghan delegates representing the government. It appears that the government side has been unable to consolidate its position due to lack of understanding form amongst the government officials. How President Ghani plays his cards in the coming days would be watched with keen interest, especially in presenting his nominees for the intra-Afghan dialogue in a situation when major players such as former president Hamid Karzai, Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah, and presidential candidate Hanif Atmar remained outside the Jirga tent.

The US approach of directly engaging with the Taliban has already set the agenda for the future contours of the Afghan polity. Ironically, Ashraf Ghani who, as President, should have offered guarantees that the Afghan soil would not be used by terrorists was unable to do so. It is obvious that the Taliban who control more than half of the country could offer much better guarantees than Mr Ghani. The Afghan Supreme Court’s controversial ruling of extending his tenure till the holding of new elections has already caused heartburns even within the ruling National Unity Government (NUG) partners. In this scenario, President Ghani’s expectations from Pakistan to make a place for him at the high table along with the US and the Taliban would be unrealistic unless latter agrees to his participation in the talks.

However, a frustrated or wounded Ashraf Ghani may be equally embarrassing for the peace process. In the present situation he is likely to end up in a secondary position which would be unacceptable to him. Consequently, he may start playing the spoiler’s role which would provide fertile ground to the outsiders to meddle in Afghanistan and let the country remain unstable.

Second, the non-Pashtun ethnic groups may become frustrated of the ongoing peace process unless an intra-Afghan dialogue allays their apprehensions. This would entail greater responsibility upon the Taliban to raise the comfort level of other ethnic group although satisfying well-entrenched warlords of these ethnic groups would be a gigantic task.

Third, major issues which Afghanistan is likely to face after the withdrawal of the US troops have not been fully discussed by any side, especially the Taliban and other Afghan groups. The following would be faced by the future Afghan government after the withdrawal: (I) How and by whom would Afghan budgetary requirements be met? American watchdog, CIGAR, has quoted IMF assessment according to which “it will take Kabul another four years to contribute 50 per cent to its own budget”. The future sustenance of Afghanistan would be a Herculean task and would require deft handling with lots of mutual accommodation. (II) Given the past 20 years’ developments in sociopolitical arena in Afghanistan, the moot question would be whether the country retains its character as an “Islamic Emirate” or “Islamic Republic”? The Taliban may have put up tough resistance to the Americans but within the country they will have to accommodate various interest groups. If they brush aside aspirations or demands of the people, which they did in the past, this would only create unrest in the country. Internationally also, the Taliban’s behaviour would be monitored minutely, especially their treatment of women and ethnic or religious minorities would determine the level of international engagement with the future dispensation of Afghanistan. (III) Future status of the Afghan National Army and the National Police or Taliban fighters would be an important challenge as to how they are accommodated or assimilated into the national security institutions. Any neglect by the future Afghan government or international community would mean that these fighters or even army or police personnel would become available to highest bidders, including the IS.

Despite treading carefully in facilitating the US-Taliban dialogue, major challenges lie ahead for Pakistan. The foremost challenge would be maintaining a balance between all Afghan groups while playing the role of a facilitator. Taliban are already identified with Pakistan, but this would not be enough for Pakistan as it would have to be sensitive to the overall peace of Afghanistan which could be ensured if various ethnic and religious minorities are satisfied. Similarly, Afghanistan’s neighbours would expect a future dispensation in Afghanistan which is not a threat to their societies or promote fundamentalist tendencies. While the Taliban have assured that they do not follow an outward looking agenda, their actions would be the focus of attention of its neighbours.

Therefore, Pakistan will have to be watchful in the coming days and weeks when the peace talks between the US and Taliban would be entering a crucial phase. Without being provoked by the Afghan and other regional detractors, Pakistan will have to engage all Afghans who can positively contribute to the Afghan peace. However, Pakistan alone would not be able to play its positive role if spoilers amongst Afghans and outsiders are not roped in and counselled to contribute towards Afghan peace. This would require assurances from the US, China, Russia and other regional powers interested in a peaceful Afghanistan.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 7^th, 2019.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.