After Washington-Taliban agreement: A map of expected unrest in Afghanistan
"The matter is comfortable for both
parties," a brief diplomatic statement in which the spokesperson for the
political office of the Afghan Taliban movement, Suhail Shaheen, responded to a
question asked by the American CNN network about the winner or the biggest
loser in the peace and withdrawal negotiations between the movement and
Washington and the controversial provisions it left.
On Saturday, February 29, 2020, the Taliban
signed a dialectical agreement with Washington stipulating the withdrawal of
the latter's forces and employees from Afghanistan within 14 months alongside
all foreign military forces, reducing the number of American soldiers in
military bases to 8,600 individuals, and the release of thousands of prisoners
from the movement, in exchange.
The Taliban pledged not to use the state's
lands as a terrorist station to harm the interests of any country, besides
entering into direct negotiations with all political factions in the country to
draw up a road map for the future.
Controversial theses
After 19 years of intense fighting between the
two sides, Washington decided to withdraw from Afghanistan and negotiate with
the party that originally came to fight it, and even entered into separate
negotiations with it from the political party that put it for years in power,
which is the Afghan government.
In light of that position, many of the angles
governing this latest agreement emerge. First, the items that some politicians
have classified as a shameful defeat for the United States or a temporary
withdrawal from the geography that it created to achieve strategic interests
that have expired, compared to another era, which means from the point of view
of political researcher Muhammad Faraj Abu Al-Nur in a statement.
He told The Reference that the Taliban was
primarily American industry, and later managed to control large parts of the
country in exchange for declining control by the government.
And through the items it is stopping in
Washington, it is still subject to its basic police condition.
Accordingly, it is possible that Afghanistan
will witness a kind of internal warfare between the forces supporting each
stream in light of the non-resolution of matters and the marginalization of the
government during the negotiations period and Washington abandoned it.
It is true that the terms of the agreement
include internal negotiations between the powers, but the outcome seems not
guaranteed, and this takes place as long as the Taliban controls the reins of
affairs on the ground as well as signing an agreement from one side.
Concerning the third angle, it is the regional
situation, as it is one of the major neighboring countries, namely Russia,
China and Iran, and it has strong ties to the Taliban.
In light of this, Reuters published on the
first of March 2020 news that the Iranian government rejected the agreement
signed between the two parties, considering it a loss of legal basis, noting
that the provisions are merely legalizing the conditions of the American forces
in the region.
The fourth corner remains subject to the
movement’s aid and its relations with other terrorist groups in the region,
specifically Al-Qaeda. Its territory to fight other countries is an enemy and
must be confronted.