Shabtai Gold -
With the world watching, representatives of the United States and the Taliban shook hands after signing an agreement that seeks to end the conflict in Afghanistan and allow US forces to finally come home, after a nearly 19-year deployment.
The deal is not without its critics. Hawks are warning it amounts to US capitulation and could pose terrorism risks to the homeland. Those in favour of a total drawdown worry the agreement is not rock solid and could see a dithering presence in Afghanistan. The main argument supporting what is on the table is two-fold, but largely rests on US weariness with the war. First, Afghanistan is the longest US conflict in history. Soldiers who were not yet born on September 11, 2001, when Al Qaeda attacked the US, are now eligible to fight there.
“Everybody is tired of war. It has been a particularly long and gruesome one,” US President Donald Trump said in Washington.
He campaigned on ending the war and wants it done, with elections looming this year, vowing troops will start leaving “immediately.” Secondly, this may be the best deal the US can get without waiting another generation. Past chances at sealing an agreement were passed over and the situation has only turned more against the US, rather than improving.
“We had more leverage and could have gotten a better deal at any point before today. We didn’t largely because we wouldn’t acknowledge our limits,” said Jarrett Blanc, who was a US envoy to Afghanistan under Barack Obama.
“The deal available tomorrow would be worse,” Blanc said.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was dispatched from Washington to Doha at the last minute to add heft to the agreement and contribute a supplemental warning to the Taliban that the US drawdown was conditional on a sustained end to violence.
“This agreement will mean nothing, and today’s good feelings will not last, if we don’t take concrete actions on commitments and promises that have been made,” Pompeo said.
Effectively acknowledging that critics of the deal are worried the Afghan government has not been a party, Pompeo insisted the Taliban must now sit with the representatives of the authorities in Kabul. “When it comes down to it, the future of Afghanistan is for Afghans to determine,” he said.
US Secretary of Defence Mark Esper stood next to the Afghan government in Kabul, a sign of reassurance to the entity Washington has propped up for nearly two decades, and warned the insurgents that a return to violence would “nullify” the deal.
The agreement, if it holds, would pave the way for direct talks between the Taliban and figures within the elected Afghan government.
The US withdrawal would be in two stages. First, the US will cut back forces during the coming months to 8,600 soldiers, levels seen before Trump took office. During the next year, the hope is for a total end to the deployment.
“We have signed an agreement with the Taliban that achieves US objectives and puts Afghanistan on a path to peace,” said Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad.
However, he is facing a question of whether this is really a peace deal or merely a plan for the US to be able to wind down. The reduction in violence setting up the signing of the agreement came during the normal lull in fighting in winter. The complete withdrawal is set for early next year, before fighting season would begin again.
“It’s far less a ‘peace deal’ than it is an exit deal,” said conservative pundit Stephen Hayes. He noted there are secret annexes to the agreement, which raised more doubts for him about whether particularly thorny issues are being hidden from the public.
David Petraeus, a retired general and former US commander in Afghanistan, said this week he had “reservations” about the agreement, including on the terrorism front, as Afghanistan was used as a base for the September 2001 attacks. — Reuters
Oman Observer is now on the WhatsApp channel. Click here
