• Monday, April 22, 2019

Is America’s “Deep State” Divided Over The Taliban Peace Talks?

Discussion in 'Central & South Asia' started by OsmanAli98, Feb 12, 2019.

  1. OsmanAli98

    OsmanAli98 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,264
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2018
    Ratings:
    +3 / 4,278 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Not everyone in America’s permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) is on the same page regarding the ongoing Taliban peace talks, especially when it comes to the official role of increasingly irrelevant Kabul in this process.

    Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan paid a surprise visit to Afghanistan at the beginning of the week where he spoke about the need to include increasingly irrelevant Kabul in the ongoing peace process, which was a reaffirmation of the US’ official position on the matter but one which isn’t being followed by Special Envoy Khalilzad in his latest peace push with the Taliban. The emerging differences over this topic between the military and diplomatic representatives of the US “deep state” highlight the diverging interests between these two bureaucratic factions when it comes to America’s possible withdrawal from Afghanistan and deserve to be explored a bit more at length in order to properly understand their competing visions.

    Shanahan represents the military’s traditionally conservative approach towards peace talks, which are usually approached with caution and interpreted by this institution as more of a political game than anything else. Over one hundred thousand Americans have fought for Kabul’s sake, roughly 20,000 of them have been wounded for it, and over 2,000 gave their lives to protect its writ, which is why it’s so humiliating for the military to see the State Department’s envoy dealing exclusively with the Taliban and negotiating their country’s withdrawal with it instead of with the internationally recognized authorities in the Afghan capital. Although the argument can be made that it’s better for America’s long-term military interests to “cut and run” from this quagmire, it can’t be overlooked how much prestige the military believes that it loses by doing so, especially in the context of a “negotiated surrender” to the Taliban.

    As for

    Zalmay Khalilzad
    , he’s not fazed by any of this since professional diplomats often understand conflicts much differently than their military counterparts do and are more concerned with the “bigger picture” than anything else. That being the case, Khalilzad might rightly believe that America’s international reputation can be somewhat improved by finally withdrawing from Afghanistan and responsibly allowing its most popular on-the-ground forces to progressively return to power as part of a “political transition”, which would show that “America First” is just as much about reaching pragmatic peace deals with hated foes as it is about increasing the pressure on Great Power rivals. In addition, it would therefore make sense to earn the Taliban’s trust in order to protect American investments after the withdrawal.

    Concerning the intelligence community, none of their high-level representatives have yet to hint at their stance towards the Taliban peace talks, but that’s to be expected since they’re only officially supposed to procure, analyze, and disseminate information to their country’s military and diplomatic leaders involved in this process than independently try to shape the outcome one way or another. That doesn’t mean that a few of them might not “go rogue” and try to subvert the President’s plans like some of their colleagues have been doing in other respects such as their nation’s relations with Russia, but just that this has yet to be evidenced and might not actually materialize since they’re probably more concerned with other operations instead, such as “containing” China.

    In conclusion, two of America’s three most relevant “deep state” factions are certainly at odds with one another, but the very nature of the diplomat-driven US-Taliban peace talks means that the military doesn’t have much of a say in this process. It’s not that the institution as a whole wouldn’t benefit from a withdrawal, or even that it’s entirely against such a move in the first place, but just that they’d prefer for it to be done in what they traditionally view to be a “dignified” fashion by at least going through the motions of involving the increasingly irrelevant authorities in Kabul who America’s servicemen fought, died, and were wounded to protect. They needn’t worry, however, because Khalilzad will probably rope them into this arrangement sooner than later, though likely only at the tail end for symbolism’s sake and under intense pressure to sign a pre-agreed Taliban peace deal.

    DISCLAIMER: The author writes for this publication in a private capacity which is unrepresentative of anyone or any organization except for his own personal views. Nothing written by the author should ever be conflated with the editorial views or official positions of any other media outlet or institution.

    Share this article
    Related
    Why is Kabul Trying to Sabotage Russia's Afghan Peace Conference?2018-08-27In "Asia"

    After Key China-Russia-Iran-Pakistan Meeting, Moscow Official Says Taliban Control 50% of Afghanistan2018-07-16In "Asia"

    Reading Between The Lines: India Has Sour Grapes Over America’s Afghan Peace Talks2019-02-06In "Analysis and Policy"


    [​IMG]
    Andrew Korybko

    Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare.
     
  2. Arsalan 345

    Arsalan 345 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,507
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2016
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,095 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    yes they are divided but it doesn't matter for trump.he do whatever he likes and i appreciate his decision.this decision can save many lives.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  3. Indus Pakistan

    Indus Pakistan PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    14,157
    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Ratings:
    +182 / 38,484 / -7
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    True, but you know he is facing resistence and time will tell how this ends. Was it up to Trump they would have pulled out within weeks.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  4. OsmanAli98

    OsmanAli98 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,264
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2018
    Ratings:
    +3 / 4,278 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    This is the enigma of domestic "American politics" bloody neo-con koshers around him always has his ears and the constant bull sh...t he is a Russian agent another reason I cant watch CNN or MSNBC no more

    to be fair if the Donald could meet Kim Jong Un he can meet the Taliban and the mullahs in Iran
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  5. Arsalan 345

    Arsalan 345 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,507
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2016
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,095 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    yes it's true that he is facing resistence.there are so many people in congress who supports indian stance on afghanistan.indian lobby is in large number but trump is a king.he is a successful businessman and now a fantastic president.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  6. Hakikat ve Hikmet

    Hakikat ve Hikmet SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,779
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Ratings:
    +8 / 9,669 / -1
    Country:
    Turkey
    Location:
    United States
    President Trump represents the US Deep Nation. And, they're extremely angry at the US Deep State....

    When the White folks are angry and hungry the Kristallnacht occurs...
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  7. Umair Nawaz

    Umair Nawaz BANNED

    Messages:
    12,536
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Ratings:
    +10 / 10,782 / -29
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    i think these talks and 'peace' process will again end in failure.
     
  8. cloud4000

    cloud4000 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,350
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2015
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,260 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    United States
    In contrast to Obama, who just handed Afghanistan to military/CIA to do as they saw fit. Obama was always week on foreign policy, otherwise he would've pulled out of Afghanistan long ago.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2