Violence and peace in Afghanistan

Both sides must realise that a conducive atmosphere is imperative to settle terms and conditions for a political setup

Afghanistan continues to be in turmoil and hopes for peace arising out of the Doha Agreement, inked on February 29, 2020, appear to be in tatters. The unabated violence during the last year up until now has forced many stakeholders to reconsider the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. The intensity of violence targeting the Afghan security forces and civilians alike has made the world a scary place, amidst loud thinking that the objectives of the Doha Agreement have not been achieved.

The report of a watchdog, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), has also indicated a spike in Taliban-initiated attacks across Afghanistan during 2020 and 2021. According to numbers furnished by US forces, attacks in Kabul were higher than during the previous quarter, when compared with last year. SIGAR reported 2,586 civilian casualties from October 1 to December 31 last year, including 810 killed and 1,776 wounded. The proportion of casualties caused by improvised explosive devices increased by nearly 17% in this quarter. Similarly, an increase in magnetically attached IEDs or sticky bomb attacks has also been observed.

All these statistics are indicative of the negation of the steps towards comprehensive peace. The spike in violence only suggests the Taliban’s intention to grab more and more land and social space, eventually capturing the capital to the exclusion of others. The worst is that the Islamic State (Daesh) has also escalated its acts of violence not only in Afghanistan but also in Pakistan. Thus, danger of a perpetual conflict in one form or another remains, thus jeopardising the chances for peace.

Analysts having an understanding of history are of the view that the policy of appeasement had neither worked in the past nor would it work now. They also compare the modus operandi of the Afghan Taliban with that of the Pakistani Taliban to achieve their strategic objectives. They inked numerous agreements with the Government of Pakistan. But after the signing of these agreements, without abandoning arms, they increased their physical and social influence and started the cycle of violence in new areas. The climax of such a breach of agreement was witnessed at Grassy Ground, Swat, where Maulana Sufi Mohammad, instead of abiding by the terms of the agreement, announced rejecting the “un-Islamic” Constitution of Pakistan. Afterwards, they went on a rampage in Buner, setting houses on fire, maiming and killing in order to generate terror.

The government realised then that if the Taliban were not stopped at that juncture, they would have a snowball effect up to Islamabad. Therefore, a full-scale operation was launched eventually rolling them back. Sensing the same pattern in Pakistan as well as in Afghanistan, the Biden administration has categorically announced reviewing the Doha Agreement, as the main objective of having durable peace does not appear to have been achieved. The government officials and intelligentsia in Afghanistan having experienced the ever-increasing violence also argue that the Taliban have not demonstrated their commitment to reducing violence and therefore would come under pressure from the new American administration.

Aside from that in the overall geopolitical situation, the US has a greater stake in the region. Biden’s new strategy to contain China by strengthening Indo-Pacific security through the Quad grouping of countries, intelligence reports of the shifting of Al Qaeda to Iran, and the Indo-Pak conflict (both nuclear powers) are suggestive that the US will not easily leave Afghanistan and would like to have a friendly government over there.

In this context, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has stated before the Congress that the administration would “have to look carefully at what has been negotiated to understand fully what commitments were made by the Taliban and to see where they get with their negotiations with the Government of Afghanistan”. He asserted that Washington wanted to “end this so-called forever war” and “bring forces home”. He also announced retaining some capacity to deal with any resurgence of terrorism.

Echoing the same message, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, while conversing with his Afghan counterpart Hamdullah Mohib, made clear “the United States’ intention to review” the Doha deal and check whether the Taliban are “living up to [their] commitments to cut ties with terrorist groups, reduce violence in Afghanistan, and engage in meaningful negotiations with the Afghan government and other stakeholders”. “Mr Sullivan underscored that the US will support the peace process with a robust and regional diplomatic effort, which will aim to help the two sides achieve a durable and just political settlement and permanent ceasefire.” The Taliban’s spokesman responded that they would “honour the agreement” and expected “the other side to remain committed to their agreement too”. But in another statement the Taliban have threatened that if all foreign troops do not withdraw by spring, as agreed by the Trump administration, they will resume attacks on international forces. So, the situation in Afghanistan is quite precarious, with chances of an escalation in violence.

In the new scenario, the alignment of strategic interests of the US in the region as discussed above, and of the Afghan government appears to be there. Therefore, it is for the Taliban to adjust with the dictates of time. One way leads to violence and the other towards reduction in violence. The Afghan Pakhtunwali code of conduct also suggests a ceasefire (Teega) between warring tribes, before conclusive peace. This provides an enabling environment to have amicable peace.

Both sides to the conflict must realise that a conducive atmosphere free from violence is imperative to settle the terms and conditions for the future political setup of Afghanistan. The Taliban, in particular, have to demonstrate with action that they are no longer associated with violence. For this, they have to find a middle ground.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 17^th, 2021.

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