Search

Begin New Search Topic Taliban

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. Displacement and the Vulnerability to Mobilize for Violence: Evidence from Afghanistan

Author:
Sadaf Lakhani and Rahmatullah Amiri
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
Forced displacement affects over 70 million people worldwide and is among the most pressing humanitarian and development challenges today. This report attempts to ascertain whether a relationship exists between displacement in Afghanistan and vulnerability to recruitment to violence by militant organizations. The report leverages an understanding of this relationship to provide recommendations to government, international donors, and others working with Afghanistan’s displaced populations to formulate more effective policies and programs.
Topic:
Development, Taliban, Violent Extremism, Radicalization, Displacement, Violence, and Mobility
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, South Asia, and Central Asia

3. No Peace Without Justice in Afghanistan

Author:
Huma Saeed
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:
Afghanistan’s presidential election took place on September 28, 2019, with less than 2 million people participating out of 9.7 million registered voters. Taking into consideration Afghanistan’s total population of 35 million, the turnout was a historic low—a problem further amplified by the fact that the government poured a huge amount of financial and human resources into election preparation. The main explanation for such low turnout is twofold. On the one hand, security threats such as suicide attacks or gun violence—which reached their peak during the presidential election campaigns—deterred many people from going to polling stations. On the other hand, Afghans have become wary about determining their own political fate because, for decades, regional and international powers have steered the political wheel in Afghanistan, rather the people. After four months, election results have still not been announced, leading to further speculation and anxiety among a population which has already been the victim of four decades of violent conflict in the country. This anxiety is further exacerbated by the ongoing “peace” negotiations with the Taliban. Afghan people have learned from experience that, even in the best-case scenario of the election results or peace negotiations, they cannot hope for new justice measures to heal their wounds. As demonstrated by the experience of Afghanistan and other countries, peace and security will not last without addressing the people’s demands for justice.
Topic:
Development, Human Rights, Politics, Elections, Taliban, and Justice
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Central Asia, and Middle East

4. 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

5. Twelve Ideas to Make Intra-Afghan Negotiations Work

Author:
International Crisis Group
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
Eighteen years after the U.S. war with Afghanistan’s Taliban began, all sides are taking the first formal steps toward a political settlement. From designating a neutral mediator to agreeing on “rules of the road”, Crisis Group lays out twelve prerequisites for keeping the talks going. What’s new? On 29 February, the U.S. and Taliban signed an agreement on a phased U.S. military drawdown, Taliban guarantees to sever ties with terrorist groups, and swift initiation of peace negotiations among Afghan parties to the war. These intra-Afghan negotiations could commence as soon as 10 March. Why does it matter? Intra-Afghan negotiations would be the first formal step to politically settle Afghanistan’s conflict since the U.S. toppled the Taliban regime in 2001. The U.S.-Taliban deal sets the stage for those talks, but it does not resolve issues among the Afghan parties that could prevent them from making progress. What should be done? All parties have crucial preparations to make, both before intra-Afghan negotiations start and during the talks’ early stages. Crisis Group has identified twelve key points that could make the difference between a successful beginning to a peace process and delays or early stagnation.
Topic:
War, Taliban, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and South Asia

6. November/December 2020 Issue

Author:
Seth G. Jones, Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, Jason Warner, Ryan O'Farrell, Heni Nsaibia, and Ryan Cummings
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
CTC Sentinel
Institution:
The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:
In this month’s feature article, Seth Jones examines the evolving threat posed by the Taliban in Afghanistan. “The Taliban is in many ways a different organization from the one that governed Afghanistan in the 1990s. Yet most of their leaders are nevertheless committed to an extreme interpretation of Islam that is not shared by many Afghans, an autocratic political system that eschews democracy, and the persistence of relations with terrorist groups like al-Qa`ida. These realities cast serious doubt about the possibility of a lasting peace agreement with the Afghan government in the near future,” he writes, adding that “without a peace deal, the further withdrawal of U.S. forces—as highlighted in the November 17, 2020, announcement to cut U.S. forces from 4,500 to 2,500 troops—will likely shift the balance of power in favor of the Taliban. With continuing support from Pakistan, Russia, Iran, and terrorist groups like al-Qa`ida, it is the view of the author that the Taliban would eventually overthrow the Afghan government in Kabul.” In a feature commentary, Hamish de Bretton-Gordon outlines the urgent action needed on biosecurity in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. He writes: “For years, the United States and many other countries have neglected biosecurity because policymakers have underestimated both the potential impact and likelihood of biological threats. COVID-19 has had a devastating effect on the planet and could be followed by outbreaks of even more dangerous viral diseases. Meanwhile, advances in synthetic biology are transforming the potential threat posed by engineered pathogens, creating growing concern over biological attacks and bioterror. Given the scale of the threat, biosecurity needs to be a top priority moving forward. Not only do efforts need to be stepped up to try to prevent the next pandemic (natural or engineered), but resilience needs to be built by developing early warning systems, the capacity to track outbreaks, and medical countermeasures, including ‘next generation’ vaccines.” He stresses that “winning public acceptance for public health measures will be imperative to tackling biological emergencies in the future.” Jason Warner, Ryan O’Farrell, Héni Nsaibia, and Ryan Cummings assess the evolution of the Islamic State threat across Africa. They write that “the annus horribilis Islamic State Central suffered in 2019, during which the group lost the last stretch of its ‘territorial caliphate’ in Iraq and Syria and its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed, does not appear to have had a discernible impact on the overall operational trajectory of the Islamic State threat in Africa” underscoring “that while connections were built up between Islamic State Central and its African affiliates—with the former providing, at times, some degree of strategic direction, coordination, and material assistance—the latter have historically evolved under their own steam and acted with a significant degree of autonomy.”
Topic:
Terrorism, Biosecurity, Taliban, Counter-terrorism, Islamic State, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Africa, and Middle East

7. India’s Role in Afghan Peace Process

Author:
Ghulam Mustafa, Aamir Junaid, Rana Basam Khan, and Imran Wakil
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Political Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
The disastrous event of 9/11 changed the Political and Security dynamics of the world. The event of 9/11 provided a chance for India to enter into Afghanistan. Afghanistan attracts the world powers due to its strategic importance. Afghanistan is a gateway to the energy rich Central Asian Republics. India’s involvement in Afghanistan is quite realistic. India had never established cordial relations with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. The event of 9/11 gave India a chance to establish cordial relations with the Afghan political government. India participated in the Bonn Conference and announced its support for the people of Afghanistan in the reconstruction of the country. India enjoyed its best relations with the governments of Hamid Karzai and Ashraf Ghani in Kabul. India enhanced its ties with Iran to secure its interest in Afghanistan and to counter Pakistan. India and Iran have some common interests in Afghanistan. New Delhi has invested a big amount in various sectors in Afghanistan to enhance its influence in Afghan society. India has worked hard to facilitate Afghan Nationals to boost its soft power. India now influences the internal politics of Afghanistan. The world considers India a major market in South Asia. India’s presence in Afghanistan has always been a source of worry for Pakistan. Pakistan considers India’s presence in Afghanistan a threat to its National Security. Pakistan thinks India should work for the betterment of Afghan people but she should avoid using Afghan soil against Pakistan. Pakistan has already suffered a lot due to the disturbance in Afghanistan. Peaceful Afghanistan is in the favor of South Asia and for the Global Powers. This paper focuses on the Indian presence in Afghanistan and India’s role to bring peace in Afghanistan.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Taliban, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Asia, and India

8. 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

9. Central Asia’s Growing Role in Building Peace and Regional Connectivity with Afghanistan

Author:
Humayan Hamidzada and Richard Ponzio
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
In its 2017 strategy for South Asia, the Trump administration called on Pakistan to reduce support for the Taliban and encourage them to enter into peace negotiations. Yet as crucial as Pakistan will be to peace in Afghanistan, a similarly persuasive argument can be made for Afghanistan’s northern neighbors—the Central Asian republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. In this Special Report, Humayun Hamidzada and Richard Ponzio examine the vital economic and political roles these countries can play to support a just and lasting peace in Afghanistan and the region.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, Taliban, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, Central Asia, Kazakhstan, Asia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan

10. Loya Jirgas and Political Crisis Management in Afghanistan: Drawing on the Bank of Tradition

Author:
Scott Smith
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
Many times over the past century, Afghan political elites have utilized a loya jirga, or grand national assembly, when they have needed to demonstrate national consensus. Based on traditional village jirgas convened to resolve local disputes, loya jirgas have been used to debate and ratify constitutions, endorse the country's position and alliances in times of war, and discuss how and when to engage the Taliban in peace talks. In light of the growing political uncertainty in Afghanistan, this report examines the strengths and weaknesses of the loya jirga as an institution for resolving national crises.
Topic:
Politics, Governance, Taliban, Democracy, Crisis Management, Peace, and Jirga
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, South Asia, and Central Asia