Afghanistan 2.0

Context: As the US withdraws troops from Afghanistan, developments in the country will raise security concerns beyond South Asia.

Background: The US has announced that the Afghan War will end by September 11, having seized the Doha agreement as an opportunity.

• While its withdrawal will exacerbate chaos and violence in Afghanistan and impact the wider region, there are enough indicators of a “re-engagement” by the US and NATO in the country (Afghanistan 2.0).

Possibilities of re-engagement of the US in Afghanistan: Implying that a US’s shadow presence will remain.

• Past experiences: While the US has reduced its troops to 10,000 and handed over responsibilities to Afghan forces in 2015, a NATO-led Train-Advise-Assist Mission and US CT mission have continued partnership with Afghan forces.
• Political support: While the US signed the Doha Agreement in 2020, giving edge to the Taliban, Unlike Iraq, there was clear political support for the US forces to remain in Afghanistan.
• Presence of active terrorist links: The US has correctly assessed that Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan stands degraded, and ISIS and AQ networks are scattered across the globe.
  • For instance, the AQ-affiliate in Syria, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, has hundreds of fighters led by Khatiba Imam al Bukhari and Tawhid wal Jihad, active under the umbrella of the Taliban.
• Strategic significance: Current geopolitical compulsions, including the US-China competition, the China-Pakistan embrace, the China-Russia strategic partnership, and the China-Iran deal, have made Afghanistan strategically important.
• Presence of continued US’s influence:
  • Afghanistan is part of the US-led Coalition against ISIS (the only country from South or Central Asia)
  • The Afghan government can take a sovereign decision to ask for training or operational support;
  • The US has sufficient resources in the Central Command theatre on land, sea, and air to provide immediate support on request; It has the option of drone strikes in Afghanistan and beyond; high-end technological and “signature reduction” options exist for remotely-controlled operations;
  • The US retains its soft power over Afghan institutions and personalities.
• Continued violence: Vicious attacks on civilians, such as the killing of schoolgirls in Kabul on May 8, are conveniently blamed on Islamic State Khurasan Province (ISKP) (alleged to be controlled by Pakistan) by the Taliban.

Conclusion: While the UN-led peace process is expected to be slow, the chaos would create more ungoverned spaces strengthening the terror infrastructure and will continue to have security implications for the region.