Saturday 5 September 2020

Why the US will return to Afghanistan


As the United States continues to strategically relocate assets to the Pacific, China, Iran and the Taliban will move to take down the Afghan government. As with Iraq in 2014, the situation in Afghanistan will become so untenable that the United States will have no choice but to return.

The impending US withdrawal from Afghanistan is only temporary, and that because of China and Iran.

In defeating its strategic adversaries, the Trump Administration has proven itself effective. With Iran, the US has withdrawn from the 2015 nuclear deal and measured sanctions against the nation, as well as against its proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen. The US' top regional priority - apart from preventing Iran's nuclear capabilities - is to force Iran out of Iraq and to realign Iraq completely with US' interests, which is likely to be achieved in the long-term - but only if President Trump is reelected in November.

With China, the Trump Administration has backed up tough talk with tough actions. President Trump angered Beijing by calling Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen after his 2016 election win and has bolstered America's position in the South China Sea, with its Pacific allies and with Taiwan. While hostility between the US and China was largely contained to a trade war, the outbreak of Covid-19 now threatens to push the two superpowers to the brink of Cold War. If the two economies decouple and a Second Cold War ensues, it will bring several global hot spots to breaking point.

Nowhere is this more evident than Afghanistan. The Taliban and Afghan government are close to beginning negotiations, and if the Taliban play along, within 14 months the United States could completely withdraw from Afghanistan. While the United States is in Afghanistan it is unlikely the Taliban will push too far militarily - but once the Americans have withdrawn, the Taliban will fight to take down the Afghan government.

Adding China and Iran to the geopolitical calculus makes this outcome even more likely. In addition to sanctions, the assassination of Qassem Soleimani has humiliated and weakened Iran, and threatens its assets in Iraq, Lebanon and Syria as never before. China, too, is growing increasingly alarmed by the movement of US military and sanctions against it, and has touted a strategic partnership with Iran to counter the emerging US threat.

Should President Trump be reelected in November, China and Iran would move ahead on a strategic partnership and, after this, China would apply pressure on Tehran to unilaterally support the Afghan Taliban. Though a Salafi Sunni extremist group, the Taliban has been used at various times by Iran to send its message to the Afghan government and to the US. With a China-Iran strategic partnership sealed, Iran would be required by China to withdraw its support for the Afghan government, to force the United States' hand.

For the US and Afghanistan, Iran's appointment of Esmail Qaani as new Quds Force commander ought to serve as another clear warning. Esmail Qaani has a long history of funnelling Iranian weapons into Afghanistan for both the Taliban and the government - with Iran vowing vengeance against the US for assassinating Qassem Soleimani, Qaani's predecessor, supporting the Taliban to bring down the US allied government in Kabul would be one of the easiest ways to send that message.

For China and Iran, the benefits to US re-engagement with Afghanistan would be substantial. The Taliban is a security threat to both China and Iran - initially funding them to compel the US to return allows two of their enemies to be preoccupied with each other. It gives Iran and China more favourability with Pakistan; it gives the Trump Administration less room for military maneuver in support of Taiwan; it proves Iran is capable of striking back against the US for the death of Soleimani and, most importantly of all, it provides China and Iran with new opportunities for Middle-Eastern dominance.

President Trump is an unpredictable adversary - but one thing both Iran and China can count on is his America First approach. Both nations know that, after Iraq and Afghanistan, the American people would almost under no circumstances support another sizable Middle-Eastern war, and President Trump is beholden to that national mood. Worse still: because of the sacrifices already made in Iraq and Afghanistan, they remain foremost regional priority for the Trump Administration.

Lebanon is most immediately at risk. The current Lebanese ruling class are likely to be overthrown by the protesters; after this occurs Hezbollah, with Chinese and Iranian support, will sit in waiting for the right opportunity to take over the country. With the US occupied in Afghanistan and Iraq, only Israel would stand in the way of Hezbollah taking control of Lebanon.

On the other hand, if Saudi Arabia erupts in civil war, the United States would be unable to help and would be forced to rely on Egypt, the GCC and Israel to intervene in its stead. Should Mohammed Bin Salman be made king and also make rapprochement with Israel, there is a good chance Pakistan would stay neutral in a Saudi civil war. Pakistan is not only indebted to China and moving away from US influence; the strengthening Indian-Saudi ties also plays a significant factor.

But should China and Iran punish the Trump Administration in Afghanistan, President Trump's unpredictability would work against them. President Trump might decide to bring its Indo-Pacific partners with it into Afghanistan, to serve as a training ground. Giving Pacific nations like Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and India battle experience in Afghanistan could be one way to send a message to China about the potential cost for invading Taiwan.

The Trump Administration also might, additionally, thaw relations with Russia, through mutual partners India and Turkey. A thaw in US-Russian relations could lock Iran and China out of Afghanistan, while the US and Russia would divide influence between them. Then Afghanistan would no longer be the front line in the war on terror, but a new and deadly battleground in the Second Cold War.

No comments:

Post a Comment