by New dynamics of Trump’s Afghan policy; Implications and Options for Pakistan (feb.2018)
Rizwan Layyah
Abstract
American policy regarding Afghanistan has consistently evolved. However, Trump’s confrontational stance towards Afghanistan not only exacerbates issues within the country but also raises concerns for Pakistan.
New dynamics of Trumps Afghan Policy
On August 21, 2017, during a speech at Fort Myer military base in Arlington, President Donald Trump outlined the United States’ policy regarding Afghanistan. Prior to his presidency, Trump consistently criticized the war in Afghanistan, deeming it a waste of resources and lives. However, he shifted his position and reaffirmed military engagement in the region. Trump condemned the previous Obama administration for its failures in Afghanistan and introduced what he referred to as a “new strategy” for South Asia and Afghanistan. Though Hassan Abbes argues that Trump’s goals—eliminating insurgent leaders, dismantling safe havens, and preventing a Taliban resurgence—mirror those established by Obama during his presidency. Despite this, there are several aspects where Trump has diverged from the policies of prior administrations.
The primary distinction lies in the transition from a time-based strategy to one that is contingent upon specific conditions. Trump emphasized the detrimental effects of pre-announcing military timelines, stating, “I’ve said it many times how counterproductive it is for the United States to announce in advance the dates we intend to begin or end military options.” This represents a significant shift in policy, as the artificial deadlines set during the Obama administration proved costly, particularly following the 2014 exit strategy. Various analysts and policymakers underscore the significance of this change, arguing that established timelines enabled the Taliban to strategize against a weakened political landscape. The Taliban’s reluctance to engage in political solutions with the national government stemmed from their awareness of the power vacuum that would follow a U.S. withdrawal. The lessons learned from a rapid exit from Afghanistan echo those from Iraq, where the emergence of ISIS was a direct consequence. In Afghanistan, there is a prevailing concern that the Taliban and other groups threatening U.S. interests in the region could seize control.
The second aspect is President Trump’s policy statement asserting that “we are not nation building again, we are terrorist killing.” He emphasizes military success and advocates for an increase of approximately 4,000 troops in Afghanistan. U.S. Commander in Afghanistan, General John Nicholson, has also requested additional forces to address the stalemate with the Taliban. Trump believes that winning the war necessitates the integration of various power instruments, including economic, diplomatic, and military efforts. However, some scholars argue that military force alone cannot resolve the issue, suggesting that a political solution is essential. P.J. Crowley contends that the only viable path forward in Afghanistan is through nation building.
The third aspect involves granting the armed forces greater authority to engage in warfare against adversaries decisively and promptly. Reports suggest that commanders in Afghanistan have expressed significant apprehension regarding the overarching management from Washington, DC. Trump has empowered field operatives with increased authority, stating that “retribution will be swift and formidable as we remove restrictions and broaden authorities.”
Last is a ‘changed approach towards Pakistan and ‘strategic partnership with India in Afghanistan. President Trump acknowledged Pakistan as a valued partner but emphasized that its provision of safe havens to adversaries cannot be overlooked. Trump warned that Pakistan must alter its conduct or face consequences. While Washington has previously pressured Pakistan to take action against these groups, the phrase “Do more” has become well-known in this context; however, Trump’s delivery of this message appeared particularly concerning. Additionally, President Trump urged India to increase its involvement in Afghanistan, commending its contributions to development, peace, and sustainability in the region.
Challenges for Pakistan
The Afghan policy implemented by Trump has garnered significant support from both India and Afghanistan, particularly due to his decision to maintain military engagement and adopt a confrontational stance towards Pakistan. In his address, he emphasized the need to address Pakistan’s provision of safe havens for terrorist organizations, including the Taliban. Echoing the sentiments of his predecessor, Trump urged Pakistan to sever its connections with the Taliban, highlighting the potential repercussions of non-compliance. He said in his speech “We can no longer be silent about Pakistan’s safe havens for terrorist organizations, the Taliban and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond.” Najibullah azad, spokesperson to President Ashraf Ghani said “This is the first time the US government is coming with a very clear-cut message to Pakistan to either stop what you’re doing or face the negative consequences.” This analysis aims to explore the potential challenges Pakistan may encounter in light of the evolving U.S. policy towards Afghanistan.
Foreign Policy Challenge to Pakistan
The primary challenge facing Pakistan pertains to its foreign policy. A decline in relations with the United States could adversely affect Pakistan across various platforms. While some may contend that Pakistan should strengthen its connections with Russia and China to counterbalance Western influence, it is evident that there is no viable substitute for the United States. Both Pakistan and the U.S. have mutual dependencies that necessitate continued engagement.
Drone Strikes and Sanctions
Relations between the United States and Pakistan were positive in the initial years following the September 11 attacks. However, tensions escalated after the Jacobabad operation targeting Osama Bin Laden. The U.S. has expressed dissatisfaction with Pakistan’s efforts to curb the scourge of terrorism. U.S believes that Pakistan supports terror activities and at the same time it is waging war against them. U.S in last 16 year could not decide either Pakistan is an ally or a hurdle to their interests in Afghanistan. They believe that rather than using funds against the culprits “Pakistani armed forces spent most… on acquiring or upgrading various conventional weapons systems … to deter India.” Recently, Washington has stopped the Coalition Support Fund of 350 million dollars to Pakistan. Trump warned Pakistan for keeping its ties with the groups working against US interests and if not then a tough approach towards Pakistan may include sanctioning Pakistan official of their ties with terrorists, a US government Official said.
Drone strikes in Pakistan which were significantly declined since 2010 again started rising. The peak occurred in 2010 with 122 strikes, which diminished to just three in 2016. Following Donald Trump’s assumption of the presidency, he granted the CIA greater authority to conduct strikes, a policy that had been curtailed in 2016. U.S. officials reported that Trump instructed the CIA Director to adopt a more aggressive approach, which presents a heightened challenge for Pakistan, as the U.S. continues to view it as a key factor in its setbacks in Afghanistan. One potential strategy for the U.S. to deter Pakistan is the resumption of drone strikes within its borders, a tactic previously employed after the rescue of an American-Canadian family. This year, the number of drone strikes has risen to five, compared to only three in 2016. Trump said in his speech “We can no longer be silent about Pakistan’s safe havens for terrorist organizations, the Taliban and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond.” Like its predecessor trump also demanded Pakistan to cut its ties with Taliban as it has much to lose in case of non compliance. Najibullah azad, spokesperson to President Ashraf Ghani said “This is the first time the US government is coming with a very clear-cut message to Pakistan to either stop what you’re doing or face the negative consequences.” This section is intended to examine the possible challenges Pakistan may face due to change in U.S policy towards Afghanistan.
Instable Afghanistan=instable Pakistan
President Obama’s assertion that the future of Afghanistan is closely tied to that of Pakistan underscores the critical need for stability in Afghanistan for the benefit of its neighbor. An unstable Afghanistan poses significant challenges for Pakistan, as conflicts often have spillover effects across borders. Sadbir Singh emphasizes that violence in Afghanistan is likely to affect Pakistan due to shared ethnic and religious ties. Furthermore, Trump’s aggressive military strategy may exacerbate the situation in Afghanistan, as his focus on eliminating terrorists rather than nation-building could lead to further instability. Syed Ikram warns that a lack of transparency in the mining sector under Trump’s administration could intensify existing tensions. Former Afghan President Hamid Karzai has expressed concerns that the new policy may undermine Afghanistan’s interests and lacks a comprehensive peace process, advocating instead for efforts aimed at fostering peace and prosperity rather than conflict. The absence of a clear mission and criteria for success in the new policy could worsen the situation in Afghanistan, ultimately resulting in adverse effects for Pakistan.
Security Implications due to increased Indian influence
The policy adopted by President Trump to bolster India’s position in Afghanistan adds further complexity to the already intricate dynamics faced by Pakistan. A thorough examination of India’s foreign policy indicates a consistent preference for coercive tactics, which include employing threats, undermining adversaries, and destabilizing the internal affairs of rivals to advance its national interests. Pakistan firmly contends that India exploits Afghan territory to orchestrate malevolent activities within its borders. It is alleged that the Indian embassy and consulates in Afghanistan are actively involved in funding, coordinating, and sponsoring subnational groups in Balochistan, as well as facilitating international travel through the issuance of passports. This conviction was reinforced by remarks from Indian National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, who suggested a focus on exploiting Pakistan’s vulnerabilities, including undermining its policies in Afghanistan. The national committee of Pakistan dismisses the notion that India, a nation with contentious regional relations, can play a constructive role in Afghanistan’s development.
Moreover, India is reportedly providing training to Afghan national armed forces on its own soil and has supplied Afghanistan with eight MI-25 attack helicopters, signaling a commitment to increased security involvement in the region and a potential for greater influence over future Afghan governments. Should the United States adopt a more stringent stance towards the Taliban, analysts like Sourina Bej suggest that India may consider military support. Such developments are viewed with alarm by Pakistan, as heightened Indian engagement in Afghanistan could lead to the establishment of a pro-Indian government along its western frontier. This scenario poses significant challenges for Pakistan, which would find it increasingly difficult to manage conflicts on both sides of its border. Furthermore, the emergence of a pro-Indian and pro-Western administration in Afghanistan could have dire consequences for Pakistan’s economic initiatives, particularly threatening the stability of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Kugelman said Pakistan supports groups ‘that help promote Pakistan’s interests of keeping India at bay.’ Though the Indian presence in Afghanistan will make Pakistan nervous and with an unsatisfied Pakistan situation in Afghanistan will be more vulnerable. Relations between India-Pakistan and Pakistan-U.S will be worse and will halt peace-building process in Afghanistan.
Dr. Noor Ul Haq contends that India possesses no genuine security interests in Afghanistan; rather, its involvement is primarily aimed at encircling Pakistan. By establishing a foothold in Afghanistan, India seeks to exploit the instability in Baluchistan for its own strategic advantage. This ongoing engagement serves a dual purpose: it distracts from India’s own human rights violations in Kashmir and aims to undermine Pakistan to the extent that it becomes incapable of addressing its internal challenges independently.
Challenge to China Pakistan Economic Corridor
The United States and India share concerns regarding China’s expanding influence in the region, which has led them to oppose the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The U.S. recognizes that the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative could alter the strategic power dynamics in the area. India’s apprehensions stem from the CPEC traversing disputed territories and the potential for China to dominate the Arabian Sea, thereby gaining significant control over the Strait of Hormuz. Recently, India received backing from Washington during Prime Minister Modi’s visit, and Afghanistan’s president indicated that Kabul would limit Pakistan’s access to Central Asia unless it is granted access to India via the CPEC, highlighting the growing Indo-U.S. influence in Afghanistan. The increased presence of India and the U.S. in the region poses a threat to Pakistan’s interests associated with the CPEC.
Policy options for Pakistan
The focus should not be solely on concentrating resources in one area but rather on fostering and managing bilateral relations with various nations. The emergence of ISIS and other militant organizations, along with the U.S. presence in Afghanistan, has heightened concerns among regional powers, particularly Iran, China, and Russia. Pakistan and Russia have a unique opportunity to collaborate due to their mutual interests and similar perspectives on Afghanistan. Additionally, Russia is keen on economic engagement through the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative, driven by its energy challenges. The relationship between Pakistan and Russia has strengthened in the 21st century, encompassing military, economic, and political dimensions. Russia expressed its support for Pakistan during the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in 2011, with General Shoigu emphasizing the desire for a peaceful resolution to regional issues and the international community’s interest in engaging with Pakistan. Russia views Pakistan’s political approach to the Afghan situation favorably and is extending its support accordingly. It is essential for Pakistan to recognize Russian interests in Afghanistan and to pursue strategies that align with those interests.
Iran seeks a political resolution to the ongoing issues, similar to its regional counterparts. The actions of Trump have created a unique opportunity for both Iran and Pakistan to align their interests. His withdrawal from the nuclear agreement has provoked Tehran, while his aggressive stance on the Afghan situation has raised concerns in both Tehran and Islamabad. Consequently, Iranian Foreign Minister M. Javed Zarif has expressed a commitment to enhancing relations with Pakistan, and Pakistani Foreign Minister Khawja Asif has emphasized the necessity for neighboring countries to unite in addressing the Afghan conflict. Additionally, the situation in Baluchistan requires collaborative efforts, as there is substantial evidence of Indian involvement along the Tehran border, highlighting the need for improved border management between Pakistan and Iran.
Pakistan, as a neighboring country to Afghanistan, has consistently prioritized the stability and peace of Afghanistan due to the significant repercussions that instability in the region has on its own national security. The turmoil in Afghanistan has historically led to a substantial influx of refugees, exacerbated ethnic tensions, and contributed to instability within Pakistan. The U.S.-led war on terror has further complicated this situation, intensifying issues of ethnicity, sectarianism, and political instability, as noted by Asif Haroon Raja. To address these challenges, Pakistan must assert its authority in border regions and focus on domestic measures to combat extremism, thereby strengthening its position to tackle external threats. A robust internal framework, both politically and economically, is essential for enhancing Pakistan’s standing on the international stage, as a fragile state structure invites adversarial actions.
To improve relations with the United States, Pakistan should engage in diplomatic efforts aimed at rebuilding trust. It is crucial for Pakistan to present itself as a nation committed to countering terrorism rather than exacerbating it, especially given the current internal and external threats it faces alongside U.S. interests in Afghanistan. While both nations seek a resolution to the Afghan conflict, their approaches differ significantly; the U.S. has favored military solutions, which have proven ineffective, whereas Pakistan advocates for a political resolution through dialogue with the Afghan Taliban. Pakistan must communicate its concerns and clarify any misconceptions regarding its role in the Afghan issue, recognizing that the U.S. cannot overlook Pakistan’s influence and needs its cooperation for a successful exit from Afghanistan. Reviving collaborative frameworks such as the Quadrilateral Coordination Group or the Six + One formula is essential for pursuing a more effective resolution to the ongoing challenges.
Strengthening regional coordination by trust building for a lasting peace
Mistrust in South Asia significantly undermines the stability of the region. Pakistan, India, and Afghanistan frequently accuse one another of fostering lawlessness within their borders, each presenting evidence to support their claims. This pervasive lack of trust hampers potential cooperation on critical issues. Regional organizations, such as SAARC, also suffer from this atmosphere of suspicion. While resolving disputes between India and Pakistan remains challenging, there is potential for collaboration at regional forums. Pakistan should prioritize strengthening its relations with Afghanistan, as the positive overtures from Ashraf Ghani are encouraging, yet a realistic and open-minded approach is essential. Both nations must enhance cooperation across all facets of inter-state relations and ensure their territories are not exploited against one another. Pakistan’s perception of its relationships with Afghanistan, Iran, and the United States is often clouded, necessitating a shift in perspective. Many accusations are unfounded and stem from self-imposed narratives.
Conclusion
The shift in American policy towards South Asia and Afghanistan has become a prominent topic of discussion. The assertive stance taken by the Trump administration suggests that the United States intends to maintain its presence in Afghanistan for the foreseeable future, potentially extending the conflict. This approach indicates either a reluctance to resolve the situation or a desire to do so under its own terms. The resulting aggressive posture has significant repercussions for both Pakistan and Afghanistan, particularly with the encouragement of India’s involvement in Afghanistan, the cessation of the Coalition Support Fund, and the continuation of drone strikes in Pakistan. In response, Pakistan should seek to bolster its relationships with Iran, Russia, Turkey, Central Asian nations, and China, while also engaging diplomatically with the United States, as severing ties is not a viable option. The future of the region presents a mix of optimism and pessimism; optimism stems from potential economic growth through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, while pessimism arises from the entrenched mistrust and misperceptions among Pakistan, India, and Afghanistan, which could impede positive progress.
Bibliography
Abdul Sattar, “Afghanistan: Past, Present and Future, From Jihad to Civil War”, The Institute of
Regional Studies, Islamabad, 1997
Amina Ejaz Rafi, “Terrorism, India and CPEC,” Pakistan Observer, 16 Sept. 2017.
Asif haroon raja Pakistan’s Foreign Policy and Current Challenges 13 august http://paktribune.com/authors/Asif-Haroon-Raja-220.html
Chidanand Rajghatta, “Trump resumes and intensifies drone strikes on Pakistan after hostage rescue,” Times of India, 20 Oct. 2017, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/trump-resumes-and-intensifies-drone-strikes-on-pakistan-after-hostage-rescue/articleshow/61156551.cms (accessed 12 Nov. 2017)
Hamid Karzai,. Twitter Post. 22 Aug. 2017, 6:36 AM. https://twitter.com/KarzaiH/status/899988626708320257
Hassan Abbas, “Why President Trump’s New Afghanistan Policy Is ‘More of the Same’,” Asia Society, 24Aug. 2017, https://asiasociety.org/blog/asia/why-president-trumps-new-afghanistan-policy-more-same (accesses 6 Nov. 2017)
Hein Kiessling, “Faith, Unity, Discipline: The Inter-Service-Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan,” Oxford University Press, 2016, p.250
Jonah Shepp, “Trump’s Bold New Afghanistan Strategy: Neither Bold, Nor New, Nor a Strategy,” New York, 21 Aug. 2017, http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/08/trumps-bold-new-afghanistan-strategy-isnt-bold-nor-new.html (accessed 12 Oct. 2017)
Kelley Magsamen, “Afghanistan Is Now Trump’s War,” 21 Aug. 2017, http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/21/afghanistan-is-now-trumps-war-10-questions/
Ken Dilanian and Courtney Kube, “Trump Administration Wants to Increase CIA Drone Strikes” NBC News, 18 Sept. 2017, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/trump-admin-wants-increase-cia-drone-strikes-n802311 (accessed 9 Nov. 2017)
Mahrukh khan, “Issue Brief; Understanding Trump’s Policy Approach to Pakistan,” Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad, 10 Aug. 2017
Maliha lodhi https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/246481-us-pakistan-reset-ties-amid-changing-world-order-maleeha
Mattis Signs Orders to Send More Troops to Afghanistan.” Afghanistan News | Al Jazeera, 31 Aug. 2017, www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/08/mattis-signs-orders-send-troops-afghanistan-170831181600042.html (accessed 8 Oct. 2017)
Muhammad Asim, “China pakistan economic corridor; its regional and global dynamics,” The CITADEL, vol. XXXV, No. 1, 2016 command and staff college quetta, Pakistan p. 54
Mushahid Hussain, ‘’Trump’s Afghanistan policy: The view from Islamabad’’ cnn, August 23, 2017, http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/22/opinions/pakistan-view-on-trump-afghan-hussain-opinion/index.html
Naeem Lodhi, Interviewed by Author. Personal Interview. Islamabad, 6 Dec. 2017.
Najam Rafique, “Issue Brief, Trump’s new strategy for Afghanistan and South Asia: A recipe for disaster,” Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad, 22 Aug. 2017, p.2
No to CPEC unless Pakistan provides trade access to India: President HYPERLINK “https://www.dawn.com/news/1366168/no-to-cpec-unless-pakistan-provides-trade-access-to-india-president-ghani”Ghani,” Dawn news, 25 Oct. 2017
Noor Ul Haq, Dr. “Management of Pakistan-India Relations; Resolution of Disputes,” Paper 18, Islamabad Policy Research Institute, p. 17
P. j. Crowley, “Nation-building is the only way out of Afghanistan,” Washington Post, 25Aug. 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/nation-building-is-the-only-way-out-of-afghanistan/2017/08/25/2f99a410-890b-11e7-961d-2f373b3977ee_story.html?utm_term=.628fc720a521 (accessed 1 Nov. 2017)
Pakistan: Reported US strikes 2017” The Bureau of Investigative journalism, https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/drone-war/data/pakistan-covert-us-reported-actions-2017 (accessed 28 Nov. 2017)
Phil Stewart, “Trump’s Afghan decision may increase U.S. air power, training, “Reuters, August 22, 2017, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-afghanistan-airforce-exclusidUSKCN1B22GY
Rashid Saddique, “Prospects for Russia Pakistan rapprochement,” Quarterly Journal Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad, summer issue, vol. 37. no. 2, p.
Remarks by President Trump on the Strategy in Afghanistan and South Asia.” White House, 21 Aug. 2017, www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/08/21/remarks-president-trump-strategy-afghanistan-and-south-asia . (accessed 28 Aug. 2017)
Rick Klein, “In reversing position on Afghanistan, Trump gives himself an out,” ABC News, August 22, 2017, http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/reversing-position-afghanistantrump/story?id=49357131
Riffat Hussain, Dr. “Pakistan’s Relations with Afghanistan: Continuity and Change” Vol. XXII
Winter No.4, Strategic Studies, A quarterly Journal of Institute of Strategic Studies. [Online] Available
http://www.issi.org.pk/strategic_studies_html, 2002
Robert William, “Trump’s Afghan escalation and the Pakistan conundrum,” Al Jazeera, 7 Sept. 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/09/trump-afghan-escalation-pakistan-conundrum-170906233307685.html , (accessed 12 Nov. 2017)
Shamila Chaudhary, “Omar Samad: Home work to Do: The Afghanistan-Pakistan Peace Talk Tipping Point”, The Daily Beast, April 26th 2013. https://www.thedailybeast.com/homework-to-do-the-afghanistan-pakistan-peacetalk-tipping-point
Sourina bej, “What Trumps Afghanistan policy means for India,” 15 july 2017, The Diplomat, https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/what-trumps-afghanistan-policy-means-for-india/ (accessed 12 Dec. 2017)
Statement for the Record by General John W. Nicholson Commander of U.S. Forces-Afghanistan before the Senate Armed Services Committee on the Situation in Afghanistan,” U.S Senate, 9 Feb. 2017, https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Nicholson_02-09-17.pdf (accessed 11 Nov. 2017)
Sudhir Singh, “India in Emerging Asia,” Pentagon Press, 2015 p
Sune Engel Rasmussen and Michael Safi “Trump’s Afghan shift praised in Kabul but leaves Pakistan wary,” The Guardian, 22 Aug. 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/22/donald-trump-kabul-praises-fight-to-win-afghanistan-strategy (accessed 17 Nov. 2017)
Thomas Merritt, “Abdullah Yusuf, and Joseph Royce Trumps New Afghan Policy; A Critique,” CABLE Magazine, issue 4, 1Oct. 2017, http://www.cablemagazine.scot/trumps-new-afghanistan-policy/ (accessed 18 Nov. 2017)
Tim Bird and Alex Marshal”, Afghanistan; how the west lost its way,” Orient Black Swan, 2012, p.195
US may sanction Pakistan officials with ties to terrorists: White House” Hindustan Times, 23 Aug. 2017, http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-may-sanction-pakistan-officials-with-ties-to-terrorists-white-house/story-Aq27D94Rm7DRPx8nhULMlI.html, (accessed 9 Nov. 2017)
William Robert, ‘’Trump afghan escalation Pakistan conundrum,’’ September 07, 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/09/trump-afghan-escalation-pakistan-conundrum-170906233307685.html
