- Two topics dominating the visit
By Abdul Bari Nijrabi and R. Maxwell Bone
On June 25, US Secretary of State Mike Pomepo made an unannounced visit to Kabul. There he met with senior government officials along with representatives of the Afghan opposition and civil society. This was Pompeo’s second visit there since he became Secretary of State in end-April 2018. The atmosphere was different from that of his previous visit. First, there are ongoing negotiations between the USA and the Taliban and second, there is a rapid uptick in tensions between the USA and Afghanistan’s westernmost neighbour, Iran.
During Pompeo’s last visit, the Trump Administration was still adhering to the South Asia strategy it outlined the previous summer. It saw a marginal increase of US military in Afghanistan to bolster the Afghan government. While the USA has maintained its roughly 14,000 troops it is now investing more of its military and diplomatic capital in the ongoing negotiations with the Taliban. Secretary Pompeo’s visit coincided with the announcement of seventh round of talks in Doha after the sixth saw the two sides gridlock over the withdrawal of foreign troops. Further, there is much apprehension on how the negotiations will conclude and how they will coincide with the upcoming presidential elections in September. This is made more contentious given that the constitutional mandate of the sitting government expired several months ago due to delay in the elections.
Removal of troops by both the Bush and Obama administrations regarding saw Iranian-backed Shia militias become rapidly emboldened. These militias continue to wreak havoc on US interests in Iraq. Constructing such militias, or further aligning itself with the Taliban would be far from difficult for Iran
Similarly, while the Trump Administration had left the Iranian nuclear accord several months before, US-Iran tensions were relatively low. Tensions today have risen to a point not yet been seen in the 21st century. Pompeo’s visit to Afghanistan came directly after visits to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates where he was purportedly attempting to organize a new strategy to address Iran. Additionally, Pompeo had recently placed blamed Iran for an attack in late May on a US military convoy in Kabul.
Therefore, all visit these two topics dominated the agenda. This perception was consolidated during a brief press availability at the US embassy before leaving for India. Most was dedicated to the ongoing peace negotiations which he mentioned over 20 times. In comparison, the upcoming election was not even mentioned 10 times. Further, he drew attention to Iran’s involvement. Pompeo said that it is “not in Iran’s best interest to undermine this peace process”, and referenced its potential to destabilize Afghanistan.
The ongoing talks with the Taliban dominated the visit, specifically the seventh round starting on June 29. For the entirety of the visit Pompeo was not only flanked by US Ambassador to Afghanistan John Bass, but also by Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad. There was a specific aspect of the talks that was encapsulated in remarks by Pompeo in which he claimed the U.S. hoped to reach a peace settlement with the Taliban before September. However, he did not specify if this solution be before or after an inter-Afghan reconciliation process that would see the Taliban formally integrated into the Afghan government.
This raised the concern the USA may potentially be trying more for any settlement with the Taliban than a substantive, long lasting, and durable agreement. This concern was only built upon when Pompeo stated the USA was close to reaching an agreement with the Taliban on withdrawing foreign troops, previously a sticking point. Pompeo also mentioned the need to include women and youth. However, the notion of reaching an inclusive peace agreement in only two months causes scepticism for many. The two sides have not reached an understanding on key issues and the notion this could now be done in only a few months seems unlikely to many.
The concern that the USA will rush to a peace agreement to declare an end to what is now the longest war in US history is not illogical. This is because a majority of Americans believe that it is time for the USA to remove the overwhelming majority of its troops from Afghanistan. This sentiment is held on both ends of the political spectrum as is evident in remarks ranging from Donald Trump to Elizabeth Warren. However, while it may be politically expedient, it would be disastrous for both Afghanistan and the USA alike. For Afghanistan, a rush to withdraw foregin troops could lead to an accord not being properly implemented and see any attempt to integrate the Taliban into the Afghan National Army under a potential agreement ending in failure. For the USA, this could be a repeat of the 2014 withdrawal. This led to a rapid deterioration which forced the USA to redeploy. A repeat would have dire consequences for both the USA and Afghanistan.
The second aspect dominating the visit were the worsening US-Iran tensions. While it may appear they would not have much impact on Afghanistan, nothing could be further from the truth. Iran has been a main actor in Afghanistan for centuries,going back to the Safavis in 1500. Currently, Iran and Afghanistan share a 600-mile and poorly policed border. Additionally, their economies are interconnected in an array of fields including the illicit, such as poppy production. This is to say that Iran has been a stakeholder in Afghanistan for centuries, especially in its west. This influence could be utilized to assist Afghanistan, however it appears increasingly likely that the Islamic Republic will use its influence for nefarious means.
Specifically, Iran could use its leverage to further destabilize Afghanistan in order to directly threaten the shared aims of both the Afghan government and the USA. This is not only limited to accusations of support of the Taliban in attacks on US assets but includes direct actions by the Iranian government. For instance, the IIRGC has been accused of attacks on water infrastructure in Afghanistan’s Helmand province. This has purportedly been done both directly, and by providing tactical and material support to the Taliban and various Shia militias. Not only could this destabilize the country, but it also has the potential to greatly disrupt its water supply, a majority of which originates from the Helmand. Additionally, Iranian officials are widely believed to play roles in both narcotics and human trafficking.
The notion that Iran may disrupt the ongoing peace process and attempt to further destabilize Afghanistan is not irrational. Iran’s willingness is clear, if it achieves the aims of directly combating US interests. Such acts would not be illogical and Iran has already threatened to do so in the past. Specifically, Iran has threatened to expel Afghan asylum seekers. In the past year Iranian officials have stated the Taliban must have a role in the Afghan government. While such a position is widely accepted and believed to be necessary after a series of inter-Afghan dialogues, making such a statement at this point in time can easily be interpreted as Iran expressing a certain level of support for the Taliban. In doing so, Iran risks further destabilizing Afghanistan and jeopardizing an unprecedented opportunity to bring peace.
Further, it is imperative that the USA does not take actions that unintentionally give Iran leverage in Afghanistan. Rushing to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan to satisfy domestic political audiences, it could unintentionally embolden Iran. That is not without historical precedent, as can be seen from Iran’s western neighbour, Iraq.
Removal of troops by both the Bush and Obama administrations regarding saw Iranian-backed Shia militias become rapidly emboldened. These militias continue to wreak havoc on US interests in Iraq. Constructing such militias, or further aligning itself with the Taliban would be far from difficult for Iran, as a large number of Afghan Shias have travelled to Syria to fight alongside Iranian troops. Allowing this in Afghanistan would not only be detrimental for the USA’s direct interests of the U.S. but also for the Afghan people.
Abdul Bari Nijrabi is on twitter at @AbdulNijrabi
Maxwell Bone is on twitter at @maxbone55.
