Search

Begin New Search Topic Taliban Political Geography United States of America

1. Taliban Fragmentation: Fact, Fiction, and Future

Author:
Andrew Watkins
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
The U.S. and Afghan governments have, at various times, intentionally pursued strategies of “divide and defeat” in an attempt to fragment and weaken the Taliban. These approaches have proved ineffective and, as long as peace efforts are being pursued, should be discontinued. Contrary to lingering narratives from earlier eras of the Afghan conflict, the Taliban today are a relatively cohesive insurgent group and are unlikely to fragment in the near term. This has not happened by accident: the Taliban’s leadership has consistently, at times ruthlessly, worked to retain and strengthen its organizational cohesion. To this day, the group is unwilling to cross internal “red lines” that might threaten that cohesion. The literature on insurgency and negotiated peace suggests that only cohesive movements are capable of following through and enforcing peace agreements. Many of the feared scenarios of Taliban fragmentation, including the defection of “hard-liners” or mass recruitment by the Islamic State, do not correspond to current realities on the ground. Fragmentation of the Taliban is not impossible, and the group is certainly far from monolithic, but ideological rifts are not a sufficient explanation of why this has taken place in the past—or might again. By studying what makes the Taliban cohesive and what has caused instances of its fragmentation, all parties invested in an Afghan peace process might be better equipped to negotiate with the Taliban under terms the movement would be willing to accept, even if it has not defined those terms publicly. This report examines the phenomenon of insurgent fragmentation within Afghanistan’s Taliban and implications for the Afghan peace process. This study, which the author undertook as an independent researcher supported by the Asia Center at the U.S. Institute of Peace, is based on a survey of the academic literature on insurgency, civil war, and negotiated peace, as well as on interviews the author conducted in Afghanistan in 2019 and 2020.
Topic:
Non State Actors, Taliban, Conflict, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

2. Taking Stock of the Taliban’s Perspectives on Peace

Author:
International Crisis Group
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
What’s new? On 29 February 2020, the United States and the Taliban signed an agreement meant to prompt peace talks between the militant group and the Afghan government. Many issues have delayed those talks, including widespread concerns about the Taliban’s willingness to compromise in a political settlement ending the war. Why does it matter? The U.S.-Taliban deal opened a fragile window of opportunity to settle the world’s deadliest conflict. But for talks among Afghans to progress, the Taliban will need to move beyond vague governing principles and put forth concrete negotiating positions on reconciliation, power sharing and governance. What should be done? The Taliban should swiftly determine clear negotiating positions and be prepared to debate – and eventually reach compromises – on these as intra-Afghan talks unfold. The U.S. and other donors should leverage prospects of post-transition assistance as encouragement, while the Afghan government and civil society should engage the group and its ideas.
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, Non State Actors, Taliban, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, South Asia, and United States of America

3. U.S. Policy Priorities for Afghanistan: A Conversation with U.S. Representative Mike Waltz

Author:
Michael Waltz and Marvin G. Weinbaum
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Middle East Institute (MEI)
Abstract:
The Middle East Institute (MEI) hosted U.S. Representative (FL) Michael Waltz to address U.S. policy priorities for Afghanistan. In conversation with Dr. Marvin Weinbaum, director of Afghanistan and Pakistan Studies at MEI, Rep. Waltz will discuss the many complicated challenges facing Afghanistan, key regional challenges to consider, and policy prescriptions given the fallout of the deal with the Taliban.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Taliban, Conflict, and Negotiation
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, North America, and United States of America

4. Prospects of a Settlement with the Afghan Taliban: Exit, peace and governance from the Taliban perspective

Author:
Mona Kanwal Sheikh and Amina Khan
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies
Abstract:
While the Taliban continue to display strength through lethal attacks in Afghanistan, some important steps have also been taken to find a settlement. Interviews with Taliban leaders, commanders and foot soldiers highlight an unprecedented momentum, calling for the international community to identify ways to support the Afghan peace and reconciliation process. Afghanistan continues to face harsh challenges. Even though the Taliban remain united under their current leadership, significant internal developments have taken place, including defections and divisions, but also their changing approach towards the future of Afghanistan. The Taliban interviewed for this report display a high degree of pragmatism towards their original vision of an emirate, and the report questions whether radical opposition to democracy truly defines their identity. Instead it appears that their primary raison d’être is the liberation of Afghanistan, and that they do not reject the idea of elections. They are less concerned with sectarian interpretations or resistance to democracy than to ending the ’US occupation’ and the practice of decisions being ’taken by the occupiers’. Positive developments in the recent past, including overtures by the Afghan government and a willingness on the part of both the US and the Taliban to engage directly with each other, indicate moderate progress towards a negotiated settlement. The report, based on interviews and secondary sources, will be launched at a seminar hosted by DIIS on January 30, 2019. It is authored by senior researcher Mona Kanwal Sheikh and Amina Khan, a PhD scholar focusing on the Afghan Taliban.
Topic:
Terrorism, Treaties and Agreements, Taliban, and Peace
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, South Asia, North America, and United States of America

5. Maneuvering: Why Iran is Cozying up to Taliban?

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
Iran is currently making unremitting efforts to further its relations with the Afghan Taliban. Although these attempts are not new, as there have always been unannounced channels of communication between the two parties, Iran is keen to uncover the presence of these channels and its efforts to foster relations with the movement. This was evident in the recent statements of Iranian officials such as its Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and the Secretary of the Supreme Council for National Security Ali Shamkhani. This is, without a doubt, inseparable from the Iranian attempts to pave the Afghan arena for the return of elements of the Fatimid militia, and perhaps prepare in advance for a possible and sudden US withdrawal from the country, like the recent US decision to withdraw from Syria.
Topic:
Non State Actors, Taliban, Conflict, and Militias
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iran, South Asia, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

6. Assessing the Trump team’s Afghanistan peace plan

Author:
Michael Rubin
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
The Trump administration’s Afghanistan strategy repeats mistakes made by the Clinton and Obama administrations. The Taliban repeatedly fail to keep diplomatic commitments. Treating the Taliban as independent from Pakistani command-and-control will undercut the utility of any peace deal struck with the Taliban. Diplomatic outreach and Taliban empowerment are directly proportional. The Afghan perception of Special Envoy Zalmay Khalilzad is colored heavily by a personal history about which many in Washington, DC are unaware.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Taliban, and Al Qaeda
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Asia, North America, and United States of America

7. President Trump’s Strategy in Afghanistan: The Way Forward to Normalcy

Author:
Muhammad Nasrullah Mirza and Yasir Malik
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
South Asian Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
Over the years, the Taliban have overwhelmingly grown in influence and their stature is being well recognized; exerting more pressure on Washington’s future orientation in Afghanistan. Amidst the backdrop of transitions taking place in Afghanistan’s political landscape, the foreseeable future has, ostensibly, rekindled the prospects of peace. Although peace process is gradually moving further, yet both sides are reluctant to compromise on each others’ terms. Since the assumption of power, President Trump’s approach to Afghanistan has been oscillating in consulting varying options to bring the Taliban to their terms rather to indulge, in true spirits, in a widely acknowledged political framework for peace. These chosen policy actions posit more challenges and less opportunities for peace in war-ridden Afghanistan. The emergent scenario requires a comprehensive, well-crafted and compromising structure to be devised, featured with inclusiveness of all stakes and issues involved in this prolonged conflict. Evaluating and analyzing President Trump’s strategic policy toward Afghanistan, this paper aims to explore the manifesting failures and grey areas of Trump’s Afghan strategy and also attempts to provide strategic foresight while considering the framework of endgame in Afghanistan.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Taliban, Trump, Negotiation, and Exit Strategy
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Asia, Central Asia, Asia, North America, and United States of America

8. The US in Afghanistan: Consequences of an Untimely Withdrawal

Author:
Dayyab Gillani
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
South Asian Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
The following paper attempts to analyze the ongoing insurgency in Afghanistan by critically evaluating the insurgent ideology, its past, current and future relevance. The paper draws on lessons from the recent Afghanistan history and discusses the irrelevance for the future of Afghanistan. It traces the success of Taliban insurgency by highlighting the role of „mullahs‟ and „madrasas‟ in the Afghan society. It argues that the US policy in Afghanistan thus far has failed to isolate the public from the insurgents, which poses serious present and future challenges. By drawing parallels between the sudden Soviet withdrawal in the early 1990s and a potential US withdrawal in the near future. It also points out that an untimely US withdrawal from Afghanistan may entail an end of US engagement but it will not be an end of war for Afghanistan itself. The essay stresses the importance of a consistent long-term US policy aimed at addressing the very root causes of insurgency in the region.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, War, Military Strategy, Insurgency, Taliban, and Islamism
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, South Asia, Central Asia, Punjab, and United States of America

9. Peace Talks on Afghanistan. A Last Opportunity for Peace? / Conversaciones de paz sobre Afganis-tán ¿Una última oportunidad para la paz?

Author:
Javier Ruiz Arévalo
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
Institution:
International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
Abstract:
When it has been more than 17 years since the fall of the Taliban regime, the Afghan conflict is far from being over. The country continues to experience a kind of resilient civil war in which neither the legitimate government of Kabul, supported by a large part of the international community, nor the Taliban have managed to impose themselves in a clear and lasting manner. To date, it seems that none of the contenders considers it feasible that the conflict will end with a military victory. This reality has ended up addressing all the direct actors (the government of Kabul, the US and the Taliban) and the indirect actors (NATO, Russia, Pakistan, Iran...) to seek a negotiated end. The task is not easy given the difficulty to find an acceptable definition for everyone on the Afghanistan that should arise from the agreement. Reconciling the Islamic Republic that some advocate, with the Democratic State designed by the current Constitution is not an easy task. Perhaps for this reason, more than a decade of talks has not been enough to illuminate a peace agreement acceptable to all. At first, one might think that nothing has changed and that the talks currently undegoing are hopelessly doomed to failure, as they face the same problem as all previous attempts: the impossibility of reconciling the interests of the Afghan government, the Taliban and the US and its allies. However, it seems that the ongoing talks have been addressed by the US and the Taliban with a different spirit. The fatigue after so many years of conflict and the evidence, eventually assumed, of the impossibility of a military victory seems to have made a dent in both, making them see that there are only two possible options: accept an imperfect agreement or be doomed to an endless war.
Topic:
Taliban, Political stability, Conflict, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, South Asia, North America, and United States of America

10. How Imran Khan Might Change Pakistan and its U.S. Relations

Author:
Michael Kugelman, Arif Rafiq, Tamanna Salikuddin, and Moeed Yusuf
Publication Date:
08-2018
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Middle East Institute (MEI)
Abstract:
Many anticipate that as the new prime minister, Imran Khan will change Pakistan and alter its relations with the United States and regional powers. Khan’s first speech to the nation was moderate in tone and substance. He has an ambitious reform agenda that above all promises to deal with corruption. What domestic constraints will he face? Will his being a successful populist, the first since the 1970s, embolden him to pursue transformative policies such as on taxation and land reform? How will his government handle Pakistan’s looming economic crisis? Will he inevitably butt heads with the military over its budget and Pakistan’s policies toward countering terrorism? Is Khan prepared to modify his deeply negative views on the U.S. role in Afghanistan? How far should he be expected to go curbing the Afghan Taliban and pushing it toward peace talks? Can he improve relations with India and also satisfy his religious-political base? These and other questions were addressed in a discussion among a distinguished panel of experts on Pakistan hosted by the Middle East Institute (MEI). The panelists are Michael Kugelman (Wilson Center), Arif Rafiq (Cizier Consulting), Tamanna Salikuddin (U.S. Institute of Peace) and Moeed Yusuf (U.S. Institute of Peace). MEI’s director for Afghanistan and Pakistan Studies, Marvin Weinbaum, moderated.
Topic:
Politics, Bilateral Relations, Reform, Taliban, and Economy
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Asia, and United States of America