• Home
  • About
  • Africa
  • Americas
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Middle East
  • Russia
  • South Asia
  • Space
  • World
  • Newsletters
  • Podcast
  • Contributors
  • Write For Us
  • Contact Us
Facebook Twitter YouTube
  • Leaders
  • States
  • Networks
  • Ideologies
  • Technologies
Facebook Twitter YouTube
Globely NewsGlobely News
  • Africa
  • Americas
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Middle East
  • Russia
  • South Asia
  • Space
  • World
Subscribe
Trending
  • Pro-Russia Bloc Victory in Slovakia Polls Would Mark End of Ukraine Aid
  • Ukraine and Russia Spar Over Invasion’s Legality
  • Ukraine Military Faces Manpower Shortage in War With Russia
  • Imran Khan Remains Pakistan’s Most Popular Politician By Far
  • Vivek Ramaswamy’s Immigration Views Clash With His Real Life Story
  • How the African Union Can the Most of Its G20 Membership
  • Unpacking China’s Moves to Regulate Generative AI
  • Canadian Sikh Killing Should Be the West’s Wakeup Call on India
Globely NewsGlobely News
Home » Is Ashraf Ghani an Obstacle to an Afghanistan Peace Deal?
South Asia

Is Ashraf Ghani an Obstacle to an Afghanistan Peace Deal?

Arif RafiqBy Arif RafiqSeptember 4, 2019
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Reddit WhatsApp
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani addresses the London Conference on Afghanistan on December 4, 2014. (Image Credit: Foreign & Commonwealth Office of the United Kingdom/Patrick Tsui)
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani addresses the London Conference on Afghanistan on December 4, 2014. (Image Credit: Foreign & Commonwealth Office of the United Kingdom/Patrick Tsui)
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Reddit WhatsApp

As the United States and the Afghan Taliban near a peace agreement, prominent voices are voicing their concerns over the potential deal, arguing that it may embolden the insurgency and pave the way for a civil war.

On Tuesday, nine former U.S. ambassadors—including eight who served in Afghanistan—published an article on the website of the Atlantic Council think tank warning that a rush to an agreement with the Taliban could lead to the collapse of the Afghan state, renewed civil war, and the spread of the local affiliate of the so-called Islamic State or ISIS. Their primary recommendation is that “a major troop withdrawal must be contingent on a final peace” between Afghans.

The risks of renewed civil war in Afghanistan are real. Ethnic and religious minorities in Afghanistan are fearful that a U.S.-Taliban ceasefire would enable the Taliban to gain full control over their areas and repeat the ugly massacres witnessed in the 1990s. While the Taliban have made statements proclaiming that they will respect the rights of Afghans of all ethnic and religious backgrounds, they have done little to earn the confidence of those who faced their wrath during the brutal 1990s.

But fear of the Taliban is not the lone driver of a potential civil war in Afghanistan. What current and retired Western officials will not concede on the record, but imply in their warnings, is that the foreign presence in Afghanistan is ultimately what is binding the country together and preventing an all-out civil war from emerging again.

Ethnic tensions are a reoccurring feature of modern Afghanistan, particularly since the 1980s. Both the anti-Soviet resistances and Afghanistan’s two major Communist factions—the Khalq and the Parcham—were divided to some degree along ethnic lines. In the early 1990s, the Northern Alliance was formed made from As the late Afghan historian M. Hassan Kakar noted, “most Parchamis were non-Pashtuns.” In 2014, the dispute over the presidential election results between the Pashtun Ashraf Ghani and Tajik Dr. Abdullah almost led to civil war.

Eighteen years after the U.S. invasion, Afghanistan today is far from a unitary, democratic state. It is divided into fiefdoms controlled by strongmen who may or may not have the backing of the central government. Its rural areas are largely governed by local traditions.

The U.S.-backed Afghan central government and national security forces, as well as the large sums of money flowing into the country—including directly from Western intelligence agencies to Afghan power brokers—provide some limit to the intra-Afghan discord.

At the same time, the stationing of Western military forces in Afghanistan is a driver of the insurgency. Their exit is key to a meaningful reduction in violence in Afghanistan.

Amid that withdrawal, the United States must play an active role in helping produce a political arrangement and security architecture that brings the Taliban into the fold, while preventing Afghan power brokers who recognize the current system from stepping out of the mainstream.

Ultimately, what Afghanistan needs is a revision to the 2001 Bonn Agreement, which brought virtually all the major participants in the Afghan civil war into a new political system. The Taliban were excluded, paving the way for their insurgency.

But the post-Bonn system is eroding. And it is eroding in large part due to the actions of President Ashraf Ghani. The insistence of the authors of the Atlantic Council article, and other voices like former U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright, that this month’s presidential elections should take place, is dangerously misguided.

Albright, writing in the Financial Times, argues that the presidential elections are “essential to reaffirming the legitimacy of the country’s institutions.”

But the legitimacy of both Afghanistan’s elections and the country’s governmental institutions as a whole have fast-eroded under Ghani, whose main objective is to remain in power indefinitely.

In 2018, just before the long-delayed parliamentary elections took place, only 19 percent of Afghans had confidence in the honesty of elections in their country, according to a poll by Gallup. The year before, the figure was 10 percent. That’s a steep drop from 2009, when 34 percent of Afghans surveyed expressed confidence in the elections.

The survey demonstrates that confidence in elections actually erodes after every major election in Afghanistan. The upcoming presidential polls, should they be held, are unlikely to be any different from the previous ones. So it makes little sense to view the presidential polls as a means to restore the legitimacy of the Afghan government. They, in fact, are likely to further damage the credibility of the system.

Afghanistan’s elections ought to be delayed. But another postponement—they’ve already been twice-delayed—would amount to an indefinite extension of the tenure of Ghani as president. Not only will his political rivals, whose consent to an all-Afghan peace deal is vital, oppose Ghani’s continued stay in power, but Ghani will use the time period to delay a U.S.-Taliban agreement.

This week, Ghani was shown a copy of the draft U.S.-Taliban peace agreement by the U.S. Special Envoy for Afghan Reconciliation, Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad. Ghani was allowed to take notes of the agreement, but not permitted to have a copy of his own. Based on those notes, he conferred with his cabinet and advisors. On Tuesday, Ghani’s spokesman, Sediq Seddiqi, expressed concerns about the agreement and a desire to obtain “further clarity” on it.

U.S. negotiators are, however, in a race against the electoral clock. Washington has sought to secure a deal with the Taliban before the Afghan elections take place, recognizing that it a newly-elected Afghan government would be unlikely to agree to a new powersharing arrangement early in its term.

Ghani is trying to prolong the negotiation process and may ultimately sabotage it. One of the major cards he has is the ability to determine the non-Taliban participants of the intra-Afghan talks that are likely to take place after a U.S.-Taliban agreement. In April, Ghani’s government submitted a ridiculously large list of 250 people who would take part in intra-Afghan talks that month in Doha. Those talks were then postponed after the Taliban complained that the size of the meeting was better suited for a wedding, not a serious dialogue.

Afghanistan’s best bet is that the September presidential elections are delayed and a conversation begins on the formation of an inclusive caretaker government that can lead negotiations with Taliban and preserve as much of the good in Afghanistan’s current very flawed system as possible, preventing a civil war or the emergence of a radical regime.

Arif Rafiq

Arif Rafiq is the editor of Globely News. Rafiq has contributed commentary and analysis on global issues for publications such as Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, the New Republic, the New York Times, and POLITICO Magazine. He has appeared on numerous broadcast outlets, including Al Jazeera English, the BBC World Service, CNN International, and National Public Radio.

  • Arif Rafiq
    https://globelynews.com/author/arif-rafiq/
    Record Year for Opium Production in Afghanistan
  • Arif Rafiq
    https://globelynews.com/author/arif-rafiq/
    The Battle for the Maldives
  • Arif Rafiq
    https://globelynews.com/author/arif-rafiq/
    The Xi Jinping Era Continues Indefinitely
  • Arif Rafiq
    https://globelynews.com/author/arif-rafiq/
    The Great Game in the Horn of Africa Has Just Begun
Afghan Taliban Afghanistan Ashraf Ghani Featured

More from Globely News

Here’s Where Gas is the Most Expensive in the U.S.

June 27, 2023

Vladimir Putin’s Approval Rating Remains Sky High. Here’s Why.

June 23, 2023

As Modi Meets Biden, India Skepticism Grows. But Does It Matter?

June 22, 2023

As U.S. Rivalry With China and Russia Grows, Global South Goes Its Own Way

June 19, 2023

Making a Hydrogen Car Industry Work for the UK

June 14, 2023

Messi Heads to U.S. As Saudi Arabia Kicks off Bidding War With MLS

June 8, 2023
Add A Comment

Comments are closed.

Newsletter

Subscribe to the Globely Daily

Our flagship newsletter covers the leaders, states, networks, ideologies, and technologies that are transforming world power.

Pro-Russia Bloc Victory in Slovakia Polls Would Mark End of Ukraine Aid

September 29, 2023

Ukraine and Russia Spar Over Invasion’s Legality

September 29, 2023

Ukraine Military Faces Manpower Shortage in War With Russia

September 28, 2023

Imran Khan Remains Pakistan’s Most Popular Politician By Far

September 28, 2023
© 2023 Globely News.
  • Home
  • About
  • Editorial Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Contributors
  • Write For Us
  • Contact Us

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
Do not sell my personal information.
SettingsAccept
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are as essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
SAVE & ACCEPT

Ad Blocker Enabled

Ad Blocker Enabled
Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please support us by disabling your Ad Blocker.
Go to mobile version