Biden might plagiarise General Zia

General Akhtar Abdul Rahman was the DG ISI when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan on Christmas eve in 1979. General Zia said to him, “The water in Afghanistan must boil at the right temperature.” General Rahman was to keep the support for Jihad alive to keep the Americans happy but also tread carefully to avoid angering the Soviets.

President Trump had signed a peace deal with the Taliban after tireless efforts of Special Diplomat Zalmay Khalilzad. According to the deal, American forces would withdraw from Afghanistan and in return the Taliban would not allow their land to be used by terrorist groups for executing attacks against US and its allies. The deal is a transactional one where the Americans must put their skin in the game by literally removing their skin from the country. The Taliban must demonstrate keeping their word later. They, however, do not have an insurance policy against an American invasion at a future date.  

The Taliban promised not to attack the departing forces. Sparing Afghan forces was never part of the deal. Talking about that is merely making noise. Afghan President Ashraf Ghani had been delaying the peace deal’s execution, hoping a Biden victory would ensure a return to war and occupation of his country. 

The US Congressional bipartisan mandated body called Afghanistan Study Group (ASG) came up with what they call a “finding” when it should really be called a customised conclusion. The ASG report says that an American withdrawal based on a strict timeline is not good for the interest of peace, and withdrawal should depend on assessing the peace situation in Afghanistan. 

So, invading Afghanistan in 2001 was more about Afghanistan and less about America because had it been the latter, America would have realised that its actions are causing terrorism and would have focused inwards. Lo and behold, it patted itself on the back by asking ‘why do they hate us?’ Today, withdrawing from Afghanistan is also more about Afghanistan and less about America in that the stated argument is that peace in Afghanistan is a prerequisite for American exit.

Kelly A Ayotte, a former Republican senator and a leader of the commission, said, “It is not whether we leave, but it’s how we leave.” The debate is being shifted from ‘when’ to ‘how’. Obama was all about ‘Change’, Biden is all about ‘No Change’. Back to the mission creep. Back to keeping US forces deployed. War should be open for business decade after decade. 

President Biden and his cabinet members are true warriors. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken had criticised Obama for not following up on the latter’s promise to attack Syria. At the time, Blinken had said, “Superpowers don’t bluff.” Last month, he spoke with President Ghani and expressed “the US desire for all Afghan leaders to support this historic opportunity for peace while preserving the progress made over the last 20 years”.

What progress was made in the last 20 years? The rise of ISIS? The achievement of the ballot with the lowest turnout on record? More than 100,000 Afghans have been killed since the UN started documenting in 2009. God knows how many died before that. That? Or the thousands of Americans killed in combat? Or is it the trillions of dollars spent, which I’m sure bought many luxury houses for those American weapons manufacturers. Afghan leadership is making belligerent noise because they have been given the thrust from their American counterparts about rescinding the peace deal. “Preserving the progress” is actually code for keeping Afghanistan occupied. 

President Biden is likely not to stick to the May 1 deadline for the withdrawal and would simply adopt General Zia’s strategy by not fully occupying Afghanistan while also not departing to keep the water warm enough to serve American imperialist urges.