Published :
Updated :
For all latest news, follow The Financial Express Google News channel.
The past weeks have seen a gradual decline in the assurance of security within Afghanistan. Several factors appear to be juxtaposing together to create greater uncertainty within its paradigm. Analysts, in this regard, are identifying increased attacks not only on the Taliban but also on the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
Despite losing occupied territories in and around Mosul in Iraq and Syria, the ISIL has slowly enlarged its presence in neighbouring countries - particularly in Afghanistan. It has substantially increased its attacks in the past two years and appears to have recruited hundreds of additional supporters. It is now targeting mainly the Shias and the Hazara minority and in parts joining forces with the Taliban thereby changing the dynamics of the war in Afghanistan. Afghanistan's complex security and political problems are providing this armed group and also the Taliban the chaotic conditions that they need to prosper.
In its latest attack on a village in the northern province of Sar-e Pul, described as a war crime by the Afghan president, Ashraf Ghani, government officials have commented that ISIL and the Taliban jointly participated in the brutal killing of more than 50 civilians, mainly Shia Hazaras.
This process is provoking Iran, particularly because the Persian-speaking Shia Hazara, estimated to make up about nine per cent of Afghanistan's population, have close socio-economic ties with Iran. RUSSIAN INTEREST: Russia is also following the evolution within Afghanistan with great interest. This is quite understandable given the fact that some of the Central Asian Republics - formerly part of the Soviet Union - share a long border with Afghanistan. This has led the Russian Foreign Ministry in February this year to express the necessity of strengthening "military-technical cooperation with Kabul". Zamir Kabulov, the Russian president's special envoy to Afghanistan, has warned that if the situation on the border between Tajikistan and Afghanistan deteriorated further "capabilities of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) may be used" as appealed for by "the Tajik side".
It may be recalled that in April this year, Russia had organised an 11-nation international conference on Afghanistan with the participation of all neighbours of Afghanistan, including Iran, Pakistan and India, but the US government did not attend citing possible growing Russian military association with the Taliban. Russia, as expected, rejected this claim.
This existential dynamics led the US and NATO chief commander in Afghanistan, General John W Nicholson to warn Pentagon in December last year that political instability in Afghanistan might have two outcomes: the possible convergence of terrorist groups in Afghanistan and the enhancement of destructive influence of Pakistan, Iran and Russia. The connotation of this was that time was running out and there was need for a fresh American strategy.
NEW US APPROACH: US officials and the US media at different times, it may be noted, indicated that President Trump remained deeply sceptical about the notion of a continued presence in Afghanistan but was concerned that if the US comes home, it would leave a vacuum that could be exploited by terror groups.
This time round, the President's approach and policy review on the continuing crisis in Afghanistan and US approach to South Asia appears to have been influenced greatly by US Defence Secretary James Mattis. Finally, Trump unveiled his Administration's strategy on Afghanistan on August 21 from Fort Myer, in Arlington, Virginia.
Analysis of Trump's speech has revealed several key elements with regard to his Afghanistan plan. Broadly, these are - (a) Pentagon has been given authority to ramp up troop levels, but US military as yet is not willing to reveal specific numbers; (b) military has been given greater autonomy to attack Taliban and other groups; (c) the end goal is to find a political solution to the Afghan war; (d) Pakistan has been called upon to stop providing a safe haven for terrorists; (e) similarly, Pakistan's regional rival India, has been asked to "help us more with Afghanistan, especially in the area of economic assistance and development.
In setting out what was described as a new approach to the 16-year campaign, Trump had harsh words for US ally Pakistan, saying Washington could "no longer be silent about Pakistan's safe havens for terrorist organisations." He also remarked that "we have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars, at the same time, they are housing the very terrorists we are fighting ... that must change immediately." This accusation has however been quickly dismissed by Pakistan's army spokesman Major General Asif Ghafoor, who has told reporters "there are no terrorist hideouts in Pakistan".
Neighbouring countries will now need to be patient and see whether peace and stability emerges from this format of regional diplomacy based on a new version of US Afghan strategy that forgot to take note of or mention China - another pivotal player - even once, during the Trump speech.
The writer, a former Ambassador and Chief Information Commissioner of the Information Commission, is an analyst specialised in foreign affairs, right to information and good governance.