WASHINGTON: Pakistan will decide Afghanistan’s future as, after almost 20 years of uninterrupted military presence, the United States now only has a minor role in the country
This claim made by Afghan President Ashraf Ghani in the US Congress this week was met with concern by lawmakers of both Republican and Democratic parties about Afghanistan’s future, after the withdrawal of American and Nato forces and they deliberated on the key role that must be played by Pakistan in this.
By September 11, the Biden administration plans to withdraw all foreign troops from Afghanistan, almost 20 years after the first US troops arrived in the country.
In an interview with German publication Der Spiegel earlier this week, President Ghani had said that getting Pakistan on board was the first and foremost matter in bringing peace to Afghanistan.
“The US now plays only a minor role. The question of peace or hostility is now in Pakistani hands,” he claimed, adding that the withdrawal would greatly reduce American influence in Afghanistan.
On Tuesday, Congresswoman Sara Jacobs, a California Democrat, read Ghani’s alarming quote, in the House Foreign Affairs Committee as well, during a hearing on “the US-Afghanistan relationship after the withdrawal.”
She described the Afghan president’s claim as “quite a statement” and inquired America’s chief negotiator on Afghan affairs, Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, about the future.
“What specifically are you doing to push Pakistan’s leaders and to ensure that they do step up the way we want them to?” she asked.
Khalilzad replied that Pakistan’s civilian and military leaderships, he believed, both recognised there was an economic benefit in reaching peace in Afghanistan.
“COAS Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa and Prime Minister Imran Khan both (also) recognise that this economic benefit is where the future is. Gen Bajwa has said countries do not develop, regions develop,” he added.
“And I know there are challenges inside Pakistan, but I believe that Gen Bajwa’s last visit to Kabul was positive. They have discussed some steps that the two sides will take — working with the United Kingdom — in support of the effort to improve relations between these two countries.”
He called the Pak-Afghan relationship the Achilles heel of Afghanistan’s recent history that needs to be overcome and he said “we are hopeful, given the recent developments”.
The US envoy also underlined the need to view Ghani’s statement in the regional context, adding: “President Ghani is right in the sense that the region is important for a peace agreement to bring lasting stability to Afghanistan.
“It needs broad support inside […] Afghanistan and in the region, because part of Afghanistan’s problem has been a […] proxy conflict.”
He said the US was trying to build a regional consensus and support for peace and that is why he repeatedly emphasises the importance of this economic dimension of peace.
“The potential connectivity and trade between Central Asia, Afghanistan and South Asia is a vital part of the future of that region and for Afghanistan,” Khalilzad said while urging Afghans also to avail this opportunity for peace.
“One should not absolve the Afghans of their responsibility. They must accept each other and find a formula that can resolve their differences,” he said.
Congressman Ted Lieu, another California Democrat and a former US Air Force colonel, commented that if Pakistan was so crucial to achieving peace in Afghanistan then why was it not being treated accordingly.
“I am just curious about what happened earlier this year when 40 world leaders were invited to the climate summit, including the leaders of India and Bangladesh. And the leader of Pakistan was not invited, even though Pakistan is the fifth most climate vulnerable country. Even though 35 of the 40 countries invited have populations smaller than Pakistan’s,” he said.
“It seems to be disrespectful to not have invited the Pakistani leader to this climate summit when the leaders of India and Bangladesh were invited.
“And now we are asking Pakistan to help us, a lot, in Afghanistan. So, I am wondering what was the thinking (behind) that sort of exclusion of the Pakistani leader?”
Khalilzad replied: “Of course, you are right. Pakistan is an important country. We have had periods of great cooperation with Pakistan. And Pakistan has a critical role to play in Afghanistan going forward and in a number of other issues.
“As to the climate summit, I am not in a position to respond as to what decisions were made but Pakistan’s participation, I believe, did occur. If you are interested, we can take that question for a response for the record. But I was not involved in it,” he added.
“Yes, I would like a response for the record,” responded Congressman Lieu.
Congressman Darrel Issa, a California Republican, observed that “during the ten years or twenty years, we have watched our ability to have a positive influence on Pakistan and Pakistan having a positive influence on Afghanistan go from bad to worse”.
Responding to a question from the committee’s chair Congressman Greg Meeks, Khalilzad said that the US has recently had productive meetings with Russia, China and Pakistan, calling on the two Afghan sides to reduce violence and engage seriously in negotiations and on the Taliban not to pursue a spring offensive.
“We would like Russia and China and Pakistan to back efforts for a peaceful settlement in Afghanistan. Working to build a consensus on this objective,” he added.
In response to a Texas Republican, Congressman Michael McCaul’s question about how the US would defend its interests in Afghanistan after the withdrawal, Khalilzad said: “We will maintain assets in the region. We are developing opportunities for enhanced cooperation with regional partners.”
And when Congressman Joseph Chabot, an Ohio Republican, suggested that the Taliban were the bombing of a girls’ school in Kabul last month that killed a number of students, Ambassador Khalilzad said: “I don’t believe that they blew up the school. It’s likely ISIS which is seeking to disrupt any potential peace process and the Talibs have been fighting ISIS forcefully, which is positive.”
The Taliban were a formidable force against ISIS, he pointed out, and that this situation in Afghanistan is different from Iraq, where space was created for ISIS due to the Shia-Sunni conflict, while the Taliban and ISIS were from the same sect.
“The Talibs have done a reasonably good job in taking ISIS on,” he added.
Congressman Ami Babulal Bera, a California Democrat, asked that since Pakistan “has been supporting the Taliban all along,” how could the Biden administration expect them to support the peace process now.
“There’s no military solution to Afghanistan and that comes to the diplomatic solution and the role of Pakistan. Pakistan has a special responsibility, given the fact that you described,” Ambassador Khalilzad said.
“And if Afghanistan goes towards a protracted war or a long war, Pakistan will suffer and Pakistan will be blamed for it. Gen Bajwa and PM Imran have said they have changed their policy, that peace settlement is the best.”
Pakistan had signed its name on a document forbidding a Taliban emirate and a military takeover, he pointed out. “We expect that they will deliver on those commitments. And we have found the recent engagement between Afghanistan and Pakistan encouraging,” he added.
Congresswoman Dina Titus, a Nevada Democrat, asked that, if needed, whether the US bases in Qatar and Diego Garcia could be used to conduct airstrikes into Afghanistan.
“We are going to maintain both monitoring and strike capability in the region and expand cooperation with some of the neighbouring states for counter-terrorism purposes,” Khalilzad said.
“We will also maintain financial support and cooperation with Afghan security forces, but direct military support, such as strikes, are not being contemplated at this time.”
