MOSCOW (Pakistan Point News / Sputnik - 03rd March, 2020) Washington has finally signed the historic agreement with the Taliban group, but the deal is still mute on many issues, and the Afghan president's refusal to release 5,000 Taliban prisoners may be a first sign that key pillars of the long-awaited accord are starting to crumble, analysts told Sputnik.
US Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad and Taliban political chief Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar signed the peace agreement in the Qatari capital of Doha on February 29. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo witnessed the ceremony.
The agreement, already hailed as a historic milestone, came after more than a year of US tense negotiations with the Sunni Islamic group and set the stage to terminate the longest war in the American modern history that started in 2001 and led to tens of thousands of dead. It lays out a timetable for the withdrawal of some 8,600 troops out of current 13,000 stationed in Afghanistan within 135 days. The full pullout is expected in 14 months. The war, which has lasted for nearly 19 years and vexed three presidential administrations, has already cost the lives of some 2,400 US servicemen and $900 billion.
However, a day after the signing of the deal cracks began to appear as Afghan President Ashraf Ghani objected to the arrangements within the agreement that would see Kabul release 5,000 Taliban prisoners as a clause for direct talks between the group and the government. According to the Afghan president, the release of the Taliban prisoners cannot be considered as a precondition for the talks, but as part of the dialogue.
According to Nazif Mohib Shahrani, Professor of Anthropology, Central Asian and middle Eastern Studies at the school of Global and International Studies of Indiana University, Ghani is merely playing his "nationalist card to show (falsely) his independence" from the US.
"But he will be forced to let the Taliban prisoners out very soon as Taliban will insist on the release and will not hold inter-Afghan meeting until it is done. There will be pressures from all sides to let the Taliban prisoners out. He will not prevail on this decision and will be made give in before long," Shahrani told Sputnik.
Ghani did not join the signing ceremony in Doha since the Afghan government was not directly involved in the deal. However, on Saturday he held a joint press conference on peace in Afghanistan in Kabul where he was joined by US Defense Secretary Mark Esper and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.
Shahrani painted a bleak future for Ghani and his negotiating team with the Taliban group.
"If he fails to satisfy many of his opponents and enemies to form an acceptable negotiation team, he is likely to be marginalized and a new interim government will replace him before too long," he said.
According to Bilquees Daud, Senior Research Associate at the O.P Jindal Global University, Ghani's response showed holes in the agreement between the US and the Taliban.
"In the light of this it seems like the deal is not negotiated accurately or the Afghan government is not consulted with this clause," she told Sputnik.
For Ghani, the agreement, which was struck shortly after the announcement of the official results of the highly contested presidential election, can be double-faceted, she suggested.
"For President Ghani, the deal is a gamble. On one side, if the deal proves to be beneficial for Afghanistan, Ghani will get the credits. On the other hand, if the deal brings more bloodshed and does not end the long war in Afghanistan, Ghani will take all the blame," Daud said.
According to Daud, the US-Taliban agreement is plagued with ambiguity and raises concerns and questions. In particular, the deal is "mute on many important issues", including women's rights, the role of "regional power specially Pakistan and Iran" as well as protection of religious and ethnic minorities.
"Most importantly, the deal does not mention anything about the Constitution of the country. These issues raise major concerns on how deal will be perceived by different groups in Afghanistan and how the ceasefire will be implemented if important values of democracy are not put on the table of negotiations," she told Sputnik.
Daud also expressed some doubts about the Taliban group abiding by the agreement.
"Taliban is not to be trusted since they are supported by Pakistan. Thus, I believe the Taliban will always put their masters benefit first more than Afghans which is very problematic considering the fact that the deal has no clause on the role of Pakistan in the country," she explained.
Shahrani also believes that the fulfillment of the terms of the deal will not be very good especially from the Taliban side since "they are not as coherent as they appear."
"They have people among them who may continue the violence against the wishes of Pakistan-based factions. If the Kabul government [falls] apart, which is likely to happen and US-NATO are unable to come up with an acceptable alternative government scheme in Kabul, the chances of violence will be very high. The situation has become very volatile at this point," he said.
Asked whether the deal would affect the level of opium production in the country, Shahrani doubted the success of the battle against illegal poppy cultivation and opium production in the country which increased significantly since the start of the 2000s.
"Very little or none since this illicit economy [opium production] is part and parcel of the global drug cartel and will flourish further, especially by the elements of the Taliban who are controlling it," he said.
Daud also believes that the situation with opium production will not improve if the Afghan authorities do not get enough support.
"If the country does not have the support of donor agencies or is not self-sufficient in term of proper taxing system by the government and providing services to the citizens, the level of opium production will increase," she said.
ANOTHER FORM OF SAME OLD 'GREAT GAME' IN CENTRAL ASIA
Daud believes that in the wake of the peace deal the number of US servicemen in Afghanistan will "decrease dramatically if not completely."
"I think US troops will only remain in border areas in order to ensure the US and the world is not in danger of any insurgency," she stated, adding that she believes that the role of the US troops will be confined "to the military bases only." However, she suggested that "the independent advisors" would still be stationed in the country.
According to the expert, the agreement is vital for Washington to get its servicemen out "without getting blamed."
Shahrani also believes that the US servicemen will be present in other forms and under other Names so that US interests and investments will remain protected.
"Empires do not leave, they will make sure they are 'invited' to stay and help rebuild the country! It is another form of the same old 'Great Game' in Central Asia," he noted, adding that the political system of Afghanistan was "no longer viable without the US support."
Meanwhile, the deal may be positive for US President Donald Trump in the light of his 2020 presidential bid, Daud believes. At the White House, he told reporters that Washington deserved credit for having helped Kabul to take a step toward peace in the country.
"I believe for Donald Trump it is the best opportunity to impress his fellow citizens since he will be able to initiate the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan. It was part of his domestic politics to end the US long war. So this deal will be [among] the highlights of his political campaign," she said.
However, Shahrani believes that while the deal may be flouted as fulfilling his presidential campaign vows, the outcome can be different than he expects by the November elections.
"If the situation in Afghanistan should deteriorate as it is very likely, this will become a liability for his campaign since many in the Congress are not happy and distrustful of Taliban and their ally, Pakistan," he said.
So far, a few details are known about further steps and decisions from the Taliban and the Afghan government. According to media reports, the talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government are scheduled for March 10.
