Policy Alert #225 | March 12, 2021
The Afghan peace process was beginning to see signs of revival after the stalling of Doha talks in January and a surge of Taliban violence in early February. As the Biden administration reviews U.S. Afghanistan strategy, which includes how far the Taliban have fulfilled their commitments for a U.S. troop withdrawal, U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken spoke with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani in mid-February and expressed support for the peace process. The U.S. even released a draft peace agreement. However, the reveal March 7 of a letter from Secretary Blinken to President Ghani calling for a 90-day reduction in violence and a transitional government, coupled with a warning that a U.S. exit by May 1 remained possible, puts the contours of the peace process into some question. Still, the new twist by the Biden team to involve all regional players – Russia, Iran, India, Pakistan, China, U.S. – for a “unified” approach suggests an openness to even bolder options.
In this Policy Alert, we briefly update the Rising Powers’ reactions to advances in the Afghan peace process.
Russia
In mid-February, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova first presented the idea that additional efforts were needed to speed up the Afghan peace process: “Stalemate at the talks was among the focal points at consultations of Russian Special Presidential Representative Kabulov and a delegation of the Political Office of the Taliban Movement…The Russian side emphasized the necessity of an early start of substantive intra-Afghan dialogue. The Taliban side pledged that they remained interested in constructive talks with the delegation of Kabul and committed to the Doha agreement with the U.S.”
On March 9, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that the peace conference on Afghanistan will take place on March 18 in Moscow. The meeting is expected to include representatives from Russia, China, the U.S., Pakistan, as well as the two sides in Afghanistan. Two days later, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that the Moscow meeting is not an attempt to compete with Qatar: “We do not speak here from positions that can be made the subject of some kind of jealousy…[The Moscow meeting] was initiated by the so-called Russia-US-China trio…It is aimed at encouraging the parties to be more cooperative through informal, free discussions and trust-based conversations.” Although India is not included in the March 18 Moscow meeting, a statement from Russian Embassy in New Delhi said India plays a “very important role” in Afghanistan, and its “eventual deeper involvement” is “natural.”
- In an op-ed for RT, a government-funded news outlet, Tom Fowdy, an independent analyst based in the UK, foresees that Washington’s acceleration of the Afghan peace process is unlikely to be fruitful: “[E]ither Biden U-turns and the peace deal with the Taliban breaks down and the war continues, or little progress is made in Taliban-Afghan talks and the clock simply runs down, and again the war continues…Irrespective of ideas, the Taliban fighters’ goal is simple: they want their country back and are able to tap into the utter depravity of conditions in Afghanistan…Even if the ideologies are different, it’s very much the same scenario as in Vietnam.”
India
In January, Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval visited Afghanistan in two separate occasions and met with their Afghan counterparts. During the visits, the two sides discussed issues of strategic mutual interest, including synchronizing efforts to combat terrorism and build peace. New Delhi also promised more military assistance to Kabul, though the specifics of the support remained unclear.
- In an op-ed for the liberal Indian Express, C. Raja Mohan, Director of the Institute of South Asian Studies at National University of Singapore, expects more Indian engagement in Afghan peace process under the Biden administration: “New Delhi will take a strong interest in the ambitious new US framework and the multiple challenges that are likely to come up in its implementation… Biden has underlined the American impatience with a war that has dragged on for far too long as well as his eagerness for an early settlement.”
- In an op-ed for the liberal Hindustan Times, Vivek Katju, former Indian Ambassador to Afghanistan, questions the viability of Washington’s peace agreement draft and India’s refusal to accept the Taliban: “The larger strategic aspects of the India-US relationship and India’s utility to help move sections of the Kabul elite in a direction which the US would want is responsible for its inclusion. But India’s justified satisfaction over this development cannot mean that it should continue to turn its back on the Taliban, despite the unsavouriness of its ideological positions and the violence it perpetrates.”
China
On March 1, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Wang Wenbin responded to a question on the Afghan peace process by repeating the talking points from an earlier statement that was issued by the Chinese Embassy in Afghanistan before Washington’s recent actions: “China is following the implementation of the US and Taliban peace agreement and the progress of the intra-Afghan negotiations. We have noticed that relevant parties and the international community have expressed concerns about the current direction of the evolving situation in Afghanistan… China firmly supports the ‘Afghan-led, Afghan-owned’ process of peace and reconciliation that is extensive and inclusive. On the basis of respecting the wishes of all parties, China will act as a constructive party in upholding a fair and objective position and continuing to be a supporter, mediator and facilitator of the Afghan peace and reconciliation process.”
- In an op-ed for South China Morning Post, a newspaper based in Hong Kong, Gulshan Rafiq, a research associate at the Islamabad Policy Research Institute, sees a mutually beneficial relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan in the Afghan peace process: “The current momentum in the Afghan peace process is already revealing some spoilers in the Afghan government and the Indian strategic community. They appear to feel that the trajectory of US policy in Afghanistan will leave little room for the Doval Doctrine to affect Afghanistan-Pakistan relations…The US withdrawal from Afghanistan permits it to redefine its interests in the region. It also presents Pakistan with opportunities to strengthen its strategic and economic ties with the US through effective implementation of the Afghan peace process.”
Japan
In a February 1 statement announcing the Japanese government’s $122.2 million humanitarian and development assistance to Afghanistan, Japanese Ambassador to Afghanistan Okada Takashi specifically mentions Tokyo’s contribution to the Law and Order Trust Fund for Afghanistan (LOTFA): “Enhanced security sector plays an essential role in the Afghan-led nation-building as we gaze at peace on the horizon. Our continuous contribution to LOTFA exemplifies Japan’s commitment for a peaceful Afghanistan, as LOTFA is a significant multi-donor program that plays a vital role in strengthening the country’s security sector.” In a call with his Afghan counterpart on March 2, Japanese Foreign Minister Motegi Toshimitsu expressed his deep concern about the ongoing violence across Afghanistan, and strongly condemned a series of recent terrorist attacks, while he also requested continued thorough investigation on the case of the murder of Dr. Nakamura Tetsu.
- In an op-ed for center-right The Japan Times, James Stavridis, a retired U.S. Navy admiral and former supreme allied commander of NATO, urges the U.S. to keep troops in Afghanistan during the negotiation process with Taliban: “[Keeping troops] would permit U.S. forces to continue to provide intelligence and logistic support to the Afghan National Security Forces; ensure protection for the hundreds of U.S. diplomats and aid workers in the country; continue training programs for the ANSF, especially in aviation and special forces; and ensure compliance by the Taliban to the agreements negotiated.”
