Trump to ignite proxy war with China in Afghanistan

In the Presidential campaign, Donald Trump promised to be harsher on China. Today, President Trump's actions are beginning to match his campaign rhetoric.

More US pressure has been exerted on China from a number of fronts. First of these is North Korea, with President Trump pushing for President Xi Jinping to reel in its unstable neighbor. As well as this is increased relations between Taiwan and the US, largely unnoticed in the American media.

But perhaps the most serious challenge to China is President Trump's ambition to continue the Afghan War. The US has long backed the Afghan government, previously headed by President Hameed Kharzai and now headed by President Ashraf Ghani. China, on the other hand, backs Pakistan who, in turn, back the Taliban. And Al-Qaeda leader, Ayman Az-Zawahiri, pledges allegiance to the Taliban leader.

Trump's aim is to expose Chinese tacit support of terrorism in Afghanistan. China is a staunch ally of Pakistan, and Pakistan arms and gives safe haven to the Taliban. For Trump, exposing Chinese support for the Taliban would allow the US to monopolize on the minerals which lie at the heart of Afghanistan.

Over the last 15 years, US has been unable to win either Afghanistan or Iraq, and has also accrued enormous levels of debt. The Iraq War decreased support for America globally and distracted the US from the Afghan War. George W. Bush also increased government spending while increasing tax breaks for American workers, resulting in a 5.8 trillion dollar increase to the US national debt.

Under President Obama, relations between select allies was strained by several contradictory policies, such as support for the Arab Spring, the overthrow of Qaddafi, support to Syrian rebels and the Iran nuclear deal. Obama policies on Afghanistan and Iraq allowed the Taliban to resurge and ISIS to proclaim a Caliphate. And under Obama, the debt soared to even greater heights, an addition of a staggering 11 trillion dollars.

For Donald Trump, Afghanistan is more than just a terror safe haven needing to be eradicated. US influence internationally is waning; Chinese and Russian influence is growing. One way to sustain US influence internationally is by monopolizing on the minerals in Afghanistan, of which some estimates conclude are up to 3 trillion dollars in worth. But should the US fail to win the war, China would have total dominion over all major mineral reserves, and the US' status as a superpower may be challenged as never before.

For US strategy in Afghanistan, there are worrying signs from key members of President Trump's staff. Rex Tillerson, the Secretary of State, has stated that the US may not win on the battlefield, but neither will the Taliban, undermining Trump's rhetoric of winning in Afghanistan, and Trump's suggestion that the Taliban may not even want to negotiate. Both Tillerson and General Nicholson have stated they wish to push the Taliban to the negotiating table, a flawed strategy and counter to Trump's own Afghan policy speech.

In Afghanistan, President Trump wants to defeat the Taliban - and, by extension, Pakistan and China - which is why he has brought India into the forefront. India, like China, is an emerging superpower. Letting India have more influence in Afghanistan is more likely to achieve a lasting victory.

Since the Iraq War, the US has been unable to score many lasting victories in their foreign policy. Should the US lose the Afghan War, it would add to their long list of military disasters which have transpired over the last 14 years.

Trump laments failures in Afghanistan

According to a report by NBC news, Trump has been unwilling to sign off the new Afghanistan strategy because it does not represent a sizable enough shift from the Bush-Obama era:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-says-u-s-losing-afghan-war-tense-meeting-generals-n789006

He lamented bitterly, complaining that though US troops were fighting and dying there, China was making the most profit out of the conflict, while Trump continually called for the firing of General John Nicholson, in charge of the war in Afghanistan. He also complained about the use of NATO and the incompetency of the generals to win the war after 16 years. Amusingly, he compared the generals' strategies to a business proposal in a failing New York restaurant, and said that the veterans of the Afghan war had given him more sound advice than the generals had.

Trump is right to be critical of US policy in Afghanistan. Obama's strategy has been rightly called wanting to 'not lose the war' and including absurd policies like announcing surges and withdrawals simultaneously. At its height, 100,000 troops were in Afghanistan under Obama, but due to announcing their withdrawal at the same time, the Taliban just hid and waited them out. The only positive which happened under Obama in Afghanistan was the killing of Bin Laden in neighboring Pakistan.

Bush's strategy on Afghanistan was one of negligence. The first two years of war showed remarkable success against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, but this was all wasted by the Iraq War, which saw Afghanistan fall into the background. With ISIS almost defeated in Iraq and Syria, Trump will likely do the opposite: Iraq will fall to the background and Afghanistan will be brought to the foreground.

Trump's own ideas behind Afghanistan are remarkable. His ideas include taking control of the mineral reserves which bankroll the Taliban - while this would likely require a significant troop surge, the goal of securing the mineral reserves offers something tangible to both Afghan and US troops: economics.

What is paramount is that Trump needs to make a decision soon. Morale among Afghan troops is waning, the Taliban continues to win the war, and many Afghan war veterans are worried that their sacrifice will be in vain. Winning the Afghan War is crucial for stability in the Middle-East and for Trump's own credibility. Trump cannot afford another Vietnam.