Peace Agreement between Us and Afghanistan

The Taliban themselves are a divided house where their political leaders sign the deal, but commanders on the ground may not be on board. These commanders are younger and hardened in combat and have fought in difficult and remote parts of the country. They are the heart of the Taliban and many have their own agendas that could be at odds with the peace deal. The agreement, officially titled "Afghanistan PeaceMaking Agreement", is little more than 3 pages long and is written in three languages; Dari, Pashto and English. It consists of two parts; The Taliban agree that "Afghan soil will not be used against the security of the United States and its allies," and the United States accepts the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Afghanistan. The agreement was signed through a 7-day "violence reduction," a term used instead of a "ceasefire," a term the Taliban rejected, in part because a "ceasefire" signaled an end to hostilities to which the Taliban were unwilling to engage. Another problem is that the last Afghan presidential elections were contested and led to a divided and dysfunctional government in Kabul. Since two opposing candidates declare themselves winners, no one in Kabul is in charge. Given that the next step in the peace deal is to hold talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government, a divided and fragmented government in Kabul makes this next step more difficult. He also proposed a "transitional peace government" to guide the country through this precarious period, followed by national elections, as well as a UN-led peace conference in Turkey attended by foreign ministers and envoys from Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, India and the United States. Among the main concerns are the meaningful participation of all Afghans, especially women and minorities, in the peace process and the preservation of hard-won gains of the past two decades. There are a number of assumptions that the agreement makes that are problematic. On the one hand, the Afghan government was neither part of the negotiations nor a signatory to the final agreement.

Although US Ambassador Zalmay Khaililzad made an effort to keep Afghan President Ashraf Ghani informed and on board, the Afghan government became increasingly alarmed and angry during the talks that it was excluded from discussions about the future of his own country. The fact that the Afghan government or its representatives were not allowed to participate in the negotiations came at the urging of the Taliban, who argued that the current government in Afghanistan was not a legitimate government, but a puppet of the United States. Whether this is true or not is debatable, but the Taliban have prevailed over this issue. Khalilzad, the veteran diplomat who leads U.S. peace efforts and is himself from Afghanistan, has long insisted that the U.S. is not seeking a withdrawal agreement, but "a peace agreement that allows withdrawal." Referring to the stalemate in talks in Doha, Barakzai said Afghan officials, despite months of efforts, are unable to make progress toward peace because "the Taliban are not willing to talk to them." This nascent peace process could be a turning point in more than 40 years of conflict, which began with a communist coup in 1978. Various Afghan factions will try to negotiate a political agreement that balances power between different ethnic groups, religious visions, and economic and social perspectives that cover a gap between urban and rural areas. Although the Taliban derive their main wish from this agreement – the withdrawal of US troops – they have remained vague in their commitments to protect civil rights, which they brutally repressed when they were in power. Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. diplomat leading the ongoing intra-Afghan peace process, will meet Monday in Pakistan with Pakistani officials widely suspected of having influence over the Taliban.

On February 29, 2020, the United States and the Afghan Taliban signed a peace agreement in Doha, Qatar, aimed at ending the long war in Afghanistan. The deal contains largely the same terms that were agreed in September 2019 but were sunk by President Trump. Essentially, this agreement calls for the withdrawal of U.S. and coalition forces from Afghanistan in exchange for a promise that the Taliban would not allow terrorist groups to operate on Afghan soil. However, the agreement is based on several assumptions that will make its success problematic. The agreement presupposes a functioning Afghan government in Kabul with which to negotiate. The recent Afghan presidential election did not decide who was in charge, but actually polluted the water. The failure of the presidential election took place last September, but the process of counting the votes was so complicated and controversial that the winner was not announced until February 18, 2020, nearly five months after the election. The vicious and controversial elections led to a controversial and divided government in Kabul, which led to an impasse over accountability and made the implementation of the next stage of the peace agreement problematic. The result could be that the Taliban, with a weak or divided government in Kabul, will be in a stronger position to dictate the terms of an agreement on Afghanistan`s future that is favorable to their views. A year after the U.S.-Taliban deal, Afghan leaders say they are frustrated by the militant group`s continued rise in violence that has affected civilians.

"The increase in violence has disappointed Afghans," said Shukria Barakzai, a former member of the lower house of The Afghan parliament. "The Taliban promised that they would reduce the violence; and would make peace with the Afghan government, but unfortunately they did not. While the vote is likely to be postponed, Elie Abouaoun of USIP says frustration with Libya`s political and economic stagnation is high as the international community tries to "reach a new political agreement." just to ensure that elections can take place without a major outbreak of violence. As intra-Afghan talks stall and the deadline for the withdrawal of US troops expires, Foreign Minister Antony Blinken proposed new plans in a letter to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani to advance the peace process. The letter recommends several efforts to move things toward peace "more fundamentally and faster," including a conference of key regional actors convened by the United Nations, a high-level meeting between the Afghan government and the Taliban hosted by Turkey, and a 90-day reduction in violence to avoid the Taliban`s annual spring offensive. .