[The tentative agreement for a framework to pull out U.S. troops, in exchange for Taliban promises to deny al-Qaeda and the Islamic State a foothold on Afghan soil, comes as Washington races to clinch a deal just weeks after President Trump ordered the withdrawal of up to half of the 14,000 American troops in the country but stopped short of announcing the plan.]
By
Pamela Constable
 |
|
Afghan President Ashraf
Ghani gave a televised address on Jan. 28, as six days
of talks
between the Taliban and the United States came to a close.
(Reuters)
|
KABUL
— U.S. and Taliban officials
have moved closer to an agreement that could meet a Taliban demand for
withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan, officials here indicated Monday, a
potential step toward ending more than 17 years of American involvement in the
country’s long conflict.
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, speaking from
his palace in Kabul, addressed what appeared to be a significant breakthrough
in talks between American officials and Taliban representatives in Doha, Qatar,
calling on insurgents to begin “serious talks” with his government and embrace
a “speedy peace.”
The tentative agreement for a framework to
pull out U.S. troops, in exchange for Taliban promises to deny al-Qaeda and the
Islamic State a foothold on Afghan soil, comes as Washington races to clinch a
deal just weeks after President Trump ordered the withdrawal of up to half of
the 14,000 American troops in the country but stopped short of announcing the
plan.
But both U.S. and Afghan officials said
several major issues remain to be resolved before a peace agreement can be
reached, including U.S. demands for an extended cease-fire and the Afghan
government’s insistence on being included in talks about the Taliban’s future
role in government and society.
Strong support across the U.S. government for
a political solution reflects a recognition of the elusiveness of a military
victory against a militant group that has defied almost two decades of warfare
with U.S. and NATO forces.
It also reflects the toll that a war that
began in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks has taken on Afghanistan’s
people, government and economy.
During six days of talks in Qatar last week,
Taliban and U.S. representatives outlined but did not formally agree on a broad
plan in which U.S. troops would leave the country in exchange for the
insurgents pledging to ensure that Afghan territory would not be used by them
or other Islamist militant groups to harm American interests.
Significant obstacles remain to reaching a
peace deal, though — or even beginning substantive talks.
“This is a major breakthrough. It’s the
closest we’ve ever been to ending this 18-year war. But a framework shouldn’t
be mistaken for a deal. There is still a lot to flesh out,” said Michael
Kugelman, deputy director of the Asia program at the Wilson Center. “Above all,
the Afghan government needs to be brought into these discussions. And even with
all this momentum, a fundamental challenge will remain in place: how to ensure
that the Taliban holds up its end of the bargain and doesn’t take up arms
again, in the event of a deal.”
Though U.S. officials expressed cautious
optimism Monday, the Pentagon hasn’t adjusted its plans to continue aiding
Afghan national forces fighting the Taliban.
In Washington, acting defense secretary
Patrick Shanahan called the developments “encouraging” but said he had not been
asked to prepare for a full troop withdrawal.
News of a potential breakthrough generated
anxiety within the Afghan government, which has been excluded from the talks
because the insurgents view it as an American puppet. Speaking in a televised
address, Ghani warned that a deal without Afghan government involvement could
lead to the kind of “catastrophic” civil strife that followed the Soviet troop
withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989.
Speaking after being briefed by Zalmay
Khalilzad, the Trump administration’s special envoy for Afghan peace, Ghani
assured Afghans that he would not accept a deal that undermines their rights
and the nation’s unity.
Khalilzad told the New York Times on Monday
that U.S. and Taliban officials had agreed in principle on the two key elements
of an eventual deal. But he said a U.S. troop pullout still hinges on the
Taliban’s acceptance of a cease-fire and direct talks with the Afghan government
on domestic issues as part of a full-fledged peace accord.
“Nothing is agreed until everything is
agreed, and ‘everything’ must include an intra-Afghan dialogue and
comprehensive ceasefire,” he said Saturday on Twitter after leaving Doha. Talks
between the two sides are expected to resume next month.
Ghani, who met with Khalilzad late Sunday in
Kabul, said in his speech that no agreements would be concluded without the
government’s full participation.
Taliban officials, for their part, issued a
statement late Saturday saying that progress had been made but that further
talks were needed to deal with “unsolved matters.” The statement added
pointedly that Taliban policy was made “very clear” during the talks: “Until
the issue of withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan is agreed upon,
progress in other issues is impossible.”
Among crucial issues to be addressed in
future talks are the Taliban’s role in a post-peace governing system and the
extent to which its strict Islamic codes could be reimposed on a society that
has known democratic freedoms for the past 17 years. A statement from Ghani’s
office on Monday said Khalilzad told him the Doha talks did not include such
issues.
The issue of Afghan inclusion in the peace
process is especially sensitive for Ghani, who is seeking reelection in a vote
slated for July. He has opposed suggestions that an interim government be
formed to implement a peace plan, and he has expressed concern that a hasty
U.S.-Taliban deal could come at the expense of Afghan democracy and freedoms.
Several Afghan critics derided Ghani’s
assertion that his government would be consulted on U.S. troop pullout plans.
They noted that Trump has already said he wants to withdraw thousands of troops
and that Khalilzad has been under White House pressure to arrange a deal with
the Taliban as fast as possible.
“America does not need our advice or
consultation for leaving. It came here for its own interests, and it will leave
for its own interests,” said Hafiz Mansour, an opposition legislator. “Trump
can decide to pull out troops at any moment, and the U.S. is looking for a
face-saving approach to do it. But our troops do not have the capacity to
defend the country. We will need foreign help for years to come.”
Trump’s troop reduction plans have dismayed
military officials who have said Afghan forces require ongoing help to execute
offensives and defend urban centers.
Ghani has worked closely with U.S. military
officials since taking office, strongly endorsing a buildup in U.S. training
and advising of Afghan forces over the past two years. At an international
economic conference last week in Davos, Switzerland, Ghani said that 45,000
members of the Afghan security forces had died since he took office in 2014, a much
higher toll than previously reported.
Washington’s push for a deal comes 18 months
after the president — initially setting aside his impulse to order an immediate
withdrawal — approved a strategy for Afghanistan that included thousands more
U.S. troops and more-aggressive rules of engagement.
Since then, the president has grown impatient
with the lack of progress, as a stalemate between U.S.-backed Afghan forces and
the Taliban persisted and violence continued to spike.
Against that backdrop, according to Barnett
Rubin, a former State Department official and Afghanistan expert at New York
University, U.S. negotiators have been authorized for the first time to put the
withdrawal of American troops on the table in their talks with militant
representatives.
“Our national security strategy has now changed
so that fighting terrorism is no longer our top priority,” Rubin said,
referring to the Pentagon’s new focus on competing with China and Russia. “So
we don’t want to have so much of our resources tied up in Afghanistan.”
Even if a peace deal emerges with the
Taliban, both Washington and Kabul still have to contend with a common enemy in
the Islamic State, an offshoot of which has been carrying out attacks in
Afghanistan.
The Pentagon might theoretically seek to
withdraw the bulk of troops under a peace deal but leave a counterterrorism
mission in the country to combat the Islamic State and al-Qaeda — or conduct
periodic strikes from outside Afghanistan.
Hanging over the flurry of diplomatic efforts
are questions about how much time Trump will allow to attempt a negotiated
solution.
“The American departure could be 280
characters away,” said Christopher Kolenda, a retired Army colonel who
commanded troops in Afghanistan and took part in talks with the Taliban during
the Obama administration. “The question is: Does the United States depart as
part of a durable peace agreement that supports our interests, or does it
depart in a way that allows Afghanistan to descend to a new level of civil
war?”
Sonne and Ryan reported from Washington.
Read more:
