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 US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »