ASHRAF GHANI

It will be very unfortunate for the poor people of Afghanistan if a repeat of 1990s occurs, where, after defeating one of the two superpowers of the time — the Soviet Union — Afghans decided to kill each other for control of Kabul. The ground situation is presenting a similar situation as another superpower — the United States — is leaving the country after two decades of war without any significant achievement. In fact, President Biden’s address about withdrawal from Afghanistan says it all about US success or otherwise. “We went to Afghanistan because of a horrific attack that happened 20 years ago, … that cannot explain why we should remain there in 2021.” Biden said in a White House speech on April 14, 2021. Therefore, instead of discussing US accomplishments in Afghanistan, which are significant in terms its military spending and fatalities on both sides, it is necessary to explore the short- to medium-term future of the war-ravaged state and its people.

The Trump administration signed a landmark peace agreement with Taliban in Doha on February 29, 2020, to end the war in Afghanistan. According to Doha Agreement, US withdrawal from Afghanistan was to be completed by May 1, 2021, however, the Biden White House has both stalled and accelerated the final exit; first revising it back to September 11, 2021, perhaps for symbolic reasons, before the forward revision to another symbolic date, July 4, America’s Independence Day.

Now that the US withdrawal from Afghanistan has formally started, so has the infighting between the Taliban and the Afghan National Army, as expected, though unfortunately. The US knows that Afghan President Ashraf Ghani would have little control over the country and therefore, reportedly, outgoing US forces have started to destroy sensitive military equipment so that it does not land into the hands of Taliban.

Perhaps time is running out for the regional countries to intervene, because the Taliban have already rejected all peace deals offered by President Ghani. One needs to understand that the Taliban have their roots amongst the people and will not accept any puppet set-up as in the era of foreign occupation

History does repeat but for the people of Afghanistan, it has returned too soon. Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan began on May 15, 1988 and completed on February 15, 1989. While the people of Afghanistan were still celebrating their victory — different Afghan resistance groups started to fight for the control of Kabul which was firmly held by President Najibullah, with Soviet support. This infighting continued until 1992 when Najibullah decided to step down from the presidency. Subsequently, Najibullah was removed by his own generals, the Afghan civil war continued beyond 1992 with more and more groups joining with their battle-hardened and fearless soldiers. The continued rivalries and severity of the infighting led to the emergence of Taliban who ruled Afghanistan between 1996 to 2001. However, Taliban government was only recognised by Pakistan, Saudi Arab, and United Arab Emirates.

Without going into the details of US war in Afghanistan between 2001-2021, it is necessary to suggest measures to avert the return of the civil war of 1990s. As the situation stands, the repeat of the 1990s is inevitable, however, active intervention of the regional stakeholders may be able to circumvent the second civil war in Afghanistan, which the people can ill afford. The regional countries which may have some leverage over various Afghan fighting elements include Russia, China, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan. For the purpose, a multilateral conference was scheduled to take place in Istanbul-Turkey between April 24 to May 4, 2021, however, it was postponed due to Taliban’s boycott in protest of delayed US forces’ withdrawal from Afghanistan. Taliban categorically stated that they would not participate in any international conference on Afghanistan until all foreign forces have left the country.

While Taliban viewpoint was given the due consideration and the conference was postponed, the fighting continues between Taliban forces and the Afghan National Army. As expected, Taliban have started to gain ground and since captured the second biggest dam, Dahla, in Kandahar, which provides water irrigation canals as well as the drinking water for the provincial capital. Fierce clashes are also reported from Helmand province and reports of people migrating from the area are being confirmed by the sources.

Perhaps, time is running out for the regional countries to intervene, because Taliban have already rejected all peace deals offered by President Ghani. One needs to understand that Taliban have their roots amongst the people, and they will not accept any puppet setup of the era of foreign occupation. Ghani must not become Najibullah of the past and stop relying on the outgoing US support, before it is too late for him, personally. The avoidance of second civil war in Afghanistan is in the interest of regional states and not the US or NATO.

Dr Shamsi  is Director of Peace & Conflict Studies (CASS) and  the author of the book ‘Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan.’  The article was first published in Daily Times. He can be reached at [email protected]

Image source: Tanzeem, Ayesha. “Have Taliban Turned Tables on Ashraf Ghani? | Voice of America – English.” www.voanews.com, February 8, 2019. https://www.voanews.com/south-central-asia/have-taliban-turned-tables-ashraf-ghani.


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »