Michael Hughes: Legitimacy has long been king in Afghanistan. Without political legitimacy, there is chaos. This may be true in most countries but, as per history, the correlation in Afghanistan is stronger than in most. Hence, it is no accident that Afghanistan has been mired in civil war since the delicate ethno-sectarian-tribal balance was disrupted
Michael Hughes: The newly-inked U.S.-Taliban “peace” agreement – a pact that excludes the actual sitting internationally-recognized government of Afghanistan – will never bring peace to the war-torn country because it was never really designed to. The agreement and February 29 signing ceremony in Doha are all part of a publicity charade that will weaponize President Donald
Press TV February 27, 2020 The current situation in Afghanistan is very similar to what transpired in Vietnam prior to the US withdrawal, says Professor Dennis Etler, an American political analyst who has a decades-long interest in international affairs. Etler, a professor of Anthropology at Cabrillo College in Aptos, California, made the remarks in an
Al Jazeera: Two decades after its invasion of Afghanistan, the United States has come to the inevitable conclusion that it must end its military intervention there. The Americans may have finally learned their history lesson: all empires, from the Persian and the Mongol to the British and Soviet, have suffered defeat in Afghanistan. It is
Michael Hughes: A crackdown of Pashtun activists in Pakistan has drawn international opprobrium at an inconvenient time for Islamabad and Washington as they try to shape a public narrative to make a peace pact with the Taliban as palatable as possible. The Trump administration wants the U.S.-Taliban exit deal to be seen as a victory
Michael Hughes: It may seem enigmatic that during the same period the U.S. government and Taliban made unprecedented progress towards a peace agreement they unleashed unprecedented levels of violence. This is not a mysterious paradox, however, but a direct – and predictable – result of the so-called “fighting and talking” strategy that both sides have
Michael Hughes: There is clear evidence elements tied to Iran’s security apparatus in recent years have played a damaging role inside Afghanistan, especially in the country’s west, including by funding and arming militants – the Taliban among them. However, the Trump administration has grossly exaggerated the nature and extent of these operations in a bid to both make
Sayed Jalal Shajjan via The Diplomat: In Afghanistan, the death of General Suleimani left politicians divided. The government of Afghanistan opted for a neutral position; however, the second vice president of President Ashraf Ghani called Suliemani a “prominent figure in the fight against ISIS in the Middle East.” The Taliban are yet to issue any
Michael Hughes: Tehran is looking forward to enhancing trade ties with Afghanistan in the coming months once a railway project connecting the two countries is finalized. However, although the United States has refrained from interfering in the development of this endeavor, Washington may take action to ensure anti-Iranian sanctions are effectively isolating Tehran as tensions continue
The National Interest: It’s well past time to let Afghans decide Afghanistan’s future without foreign “assistance.” During the early days after the 9/11 attacks and the initiation of the U.S. intervention in Afghanistan, it was relatively common to reference the woeful Soviet experience in that country. Here was a clear paradigm of what not to do