Is Trump handing over Afghanistan to Pakistan?

[INDIAPOSITIVE]

US media have reported that President Donald Trump is planning to withdraw half of American troops from Afghanistan. Analysts say the move would give the upper hand to the Taliban and their ostensible backer, Pakistan.


The Trump administration is reportedly planning to withdraw nearly 7,000 US troops – roughly half of the American military presence in the country – from Afghanistan.

US media claims that these soldiers could be heading back home within months.

These reports emerged after President Donald Trump announced Thursday that the "Islamic State" militant group had been defeated in Syria and thus the Middle Eastern country no longer required US troops there.

But the Taliban – the strongest militant force in Afghanistan – have not been defeated yet. On the contrary, their control over Afghan territories has increased manifold in the past few years. If this is the case, why must Washington reduce its presence in the war-torn country?

The US has intensified efforts to find a political solution with the Taliban in the past few months, with Zalmay Khalilzad, the US' special representative for Afghanistan, holding several high-profile talks with Taliban leaders in Qatar.

Read more: Direct talks with Taliban: 'US exploring all avenues,' State Department tells DW

Error loading media:
File could not be played
Watch video04:52
US & Afghanistan call on Taliban to negotiate
A victory for Pakistan?

These talks are being facilitated by Pakistan, whose prime minister, Imran Khan, maintains that the Islamist group can't be defeated through war.

However, both Kabul and Washington have been skeptical of Islamabad's long-term motives in Afghanistan. Afghan and US officials have repeatedly said that Pakistan backs some factions of the Taliban that destabilize the Afghan government. By doing that, the powerful Pakistani military hopes to minimize Indian influence in Afghanistan and a return of the Taliban in Afghan politics, they say.

Pakistan's military and civil establishment, analysts say, still consider the Taliban an important strategic ally, who they think should be part of the Afghan government after the NATO pullout.

Observers say that the Pakistani military hopes to regain the influence in Kabul it once enjoyed before the United States and its allies toppled the pro-Pakistan Taliban government in 2001.

Pakistan's Afghanistan policy hasn't changed since the US toppled the Taliban regime in 2001, but the Trump administration's stance toward Islamabad has wavered in the past few weeks, experts point out.

The potential US troop reduction would likely to give an upper hand to Islamabad in dictating the future political setup in Afghanistan.

Siegfried O. Wolf from the Brussels-based South Asia Democratic Forum (SADF) told DW that he was convinced that several elements within the Pakistani security apparatus still believe that the Taliban could be used as a strategic tool to counter Indian presence in Afghanistan.

Read more: 'Father of the Taliban' killed in Pakistan

• 
  
  MILITANT HAQQANI NETWORK - A BRIEF HISTORY
  Remnants of the Afghan war against Soviets
  The Haqqani Network was formed by Jalaluddin Haqqani, who fought against Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s. In 1995, the Haqqani Network allied with the Taliban and the two groups captured the Afghan capital Kabul in 1996. In 2012, the US designated the group a terrorist organization. On September 4, 2018, the Taliban announced that Jalaluddin passed away after a long illness.
  

123456789
'Weakening your own position'

It remains to be seen whether President Trump would actually withdraw 7,000 troops from Afghanistan, but the fact that the US Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis – one of the main supporters of a strong US military presence in Afghanistan – is leaving his post in February, 2019, has definitely created more uncertainty around the West's Afghan mission.

"If the US actually goes ahead with the troop reduction plan, it would be a manifestation of Trump's 'America First' policy," Thomas Ruttig, an expert from the Afghan Analysts Network, told DW.

"But at a time with Khalilzad is trying to negotiate with the Taliban, the troop reduction does not make any sense," he added.

"This would weaken the positions of both Washington and Kabul in the middle of peace talks," Ruttig emphasized.

But some experts are of the view that a potential troop withdrawal could be a calculated decision by Trump.

"The Taliban have repeatedly stressed that they would only make peace with the Afghan government once US troops leave the country," Wahid Muzhdah, a Kabul-based security analyst and a former Taliban official, told DW.

"Reports of the US troop reduction are probably meant to give some assurance to the Taliban – assurance that the US does not plan to stay in the country forever," Muzhda added.

Read more: Why Taliban won't make peace with Kabul

Error loading media:
File could not be played
Watch video03:02
US Defense Secretary James Mattis steps down
Alienating Kabul

Attiqullah Amarkhail, a retired Afghan army general, has a different take on the situation. He said that the media reports about a possible troop reduction could be a message for the Afghan government, which is not on the same page with Khalilzad on how to pursue peace talks.

"It sends a message to Kabul that it should back the US plan or face the Taliban on its own," Amarkhail told DW.

President Ashraf Ghani's government is reportedly unhappy with Pakistan-mediated talks between the Taliban and the US. It believes that it will further weaken its position and will leave it out of the future political setup in Afghanistan. That is why Kabul once again stressed that peace negotiations should be Afghan-owned and Afghan-led.

Analysts believe that Pakistan could be the main beneficiary if the Trump administration goes ahead with troop withdrawal.

"It shows that Trump does not care about Afghanistan," said analyst Ruttig.


https://www.dw.com/en/is-trump-handing-over-afghanistan-to-pakistan/a-46832240

 

[cloud4000]

I say let the Pakistanis deal with the Afghans as they see fit. It's abundantly clear that Afghans are incapable of governance.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

In nutshell, new delhi south block needs start planning the evacuation plan from Afghansitan before shite hits the fan. It wont be wise to leave the assets on ground with no protection from uncle sam.

 

[Chakar The Great]

Hahaha no no not at all. If people still asks that question they are fool.

On a serious note Pakistan virtually controls Afghanistan whether you like it or not. They have strategic in-depth in Afghanistan.

 

[YeBeWarned]

and the b!tching starts ..

 

[Zibago]

I say let the Pakistanis deal with the Afghans as they see fit. It's abundantly clear that Afghans are incapable of governance.

All that matyers to us are our interests economical and political if Afghan help us in achieving them they can be our allies if not well last 17 years were fun

 

[Path-Finder]

I didn't read the article as I can imagine it will be recycled hokum. From the headline alone, when was afghanistan in their control?

 

[Kompromat]

Its not his to handover.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

it cannot be what it looks like! it is more likely as follows:

• first the get rid of the only decent person from Trump 'cabinet' namely Gen. Mattis
• then pretend to withdraw
• then carry out some huge black operation in Afghanistan
• then become 'outraged' and come back with full might of NATO

So in over 17 years, a superpower could not think of that scenerio yet some random on the net did...........

 

[Jungibaaz]

I say let the Pakistanis deal with the Afghans as they see fit. It's abundantly clear that Afghans are incapable of governance.

They are perfectly capable of governance, but you have to give them a proper chance. It's their misfortune that they've been ravaged by occupation and decades of war.

2001 till now was a stupid american experiment in attempting to ascend a section of Afghan politics to power while labelling others as terrorists, who shan't be negotiated with.

The current government was doomed from the start because it never represented all Afghans. If a political settlement can be reached involving and representing ALL afghans, a political process can form and inshAllah evolve to get better with time.

Even though many demonise Pakistan's role, and even though we know that mistakes were made. Pakistan would be very happy if the above comes to happen and there's peace. It's what the motivation has been on our side. We only suffer when they're actively undermining us or they're at war, internally or because of occupation.

 

[hussain0216]

Pakistan just wants peace in the region we will help the U.S and afghans achieve that whilst maintaining Pakistani security

Pakistan simply maintains that india is a enemy and a security risk to the region and must be contained within Afghanistan and the wider region

Pakistan understands Afghanistans security issues

Itz upto Afghanistan to understand ours!

 

[Tejas Spokesman]

NO.
Not at all.

US is withdrawing at the most only 5000-6000 troops from Afghanistan and around 8000 will remain behind.

The withdrawal will be supplemented by 2000 Blackwater & other PMC contractors who will be far more effective.

So no benefit for Pakistan.

 

[Jungibaaz]

Hahaha no no not at all. If people still asks that question they are fool.

On a serious note Pakistan virtually controls Afghanistan whether you like it or not. They have strategic in-depth in Afghanistan.

I'd like to clarify somethings on these concepts. We don't control Afghanistan, but we could heavily influence it and have in the past been kingmakers. But this comes at a cost, and not just resources, and we aren't capable of making Afghanistan comply if it as a whole is unwilling.

And as for 'strategic depth', it's a term bandied around often. It's not something we have, it's something we aim to achieve. With a hostile neighbour to the East, we need a quiet, peaceful and tamed West. Instead we've had Afghanistan in turmoil and Afghan soil being used against us.

The last 15 years we've had a strategic nightmare, in place of strategic depth. A whole new front has opened up to the West. We've paid for it with hundreds of billions in economic damage and tens of thousands of lives.

If we can have a peaceful Afghanistan, and make sure that the Afghans don't allow anyone to undermine us, that would be the goal, that in simple terms is 'strategic depth'. It's a simple concept, but that phrase is often used to paint our objectives in a negative light.

 

[Max]

Pakistan control? if Taliban wanted to be b*itch of anyone they would have chosen Yanks over Pakistan any day, there is some difference between northern warlords which Bharat and other supported and are now part of Afghan puppet regime and Taliban.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

NO.
Not at all.

US is withdrawing at the most only 5000-6000 troops from Afghanistan and around 8000 will remain behind.

The withdrawal will be supplemented by 2000 Blackwater & other PMC contractors who will be far more effective.

So no benefit for Pakistan.

Any evidence/link to back up your claims?