fghanistan stands at a precarious crossroads, teetering between collapse and a stagnating recovery under the Taliban, which lacks both internal legitimacy and external recognition. However, the country’s political elite—both at home and abroad—remain mired in unproductive cycles of debate, failing to address the nation’s immediate and profound crises. Afghans endure displacement, insecurity, gender apartheid, and economic devastation, yet their leaders continue to entrench ethnic divisions and politicize identity rather than take meaningful steps toward tangible solutions. While rhetorical discussions may be intellectually stimulating, they do nothing to feed the hungry, protect women’s rights, or restore state legitimacy. Afghanistan urgently needs decisive leadership—one that prioritizes action over endless polarizing deliberation.
For years, Afghanistan’s political discourse has been dominated by debates that offer no relief to the suffering population or facilitate the conditions necessary for sustainable peace and development. Although these discussions hold historical and intellectual significance, they fail to address the daily struggles of millions. The nation is sinking deeper into chaos as critical challenges are overshadowed by political posturing devoid of substantive progress toward national goals. Afghan leadership must shift focus from discussions that must wait to real-world solutions today. Several key reminders underscore the urgency of this shift:
The Durand Line: The long–standing Afghanistan–Pakistan border dispute remains a sensitive issue. Yet revisiting this century–old territorial conflict does nothing to alleviate hunger, displacement, or suffering. Until Afghanistan builds a robust political and economic infrastructure, such debates merely divert attention from more immediate challenges. Stability must come first; only then can territorial disputes be addressed meaningfully.
Federalism: Discussions on federalism present a theoretical solution to a dysfunctional state. This remains theoretical because without a legitimate government, a functioning economy, or a national consensus, this idea remains impractical. While debates over governance models are crucial for long–term stability, the immediate need is economic and security interventions, not polarizing constitutional debates. These must be postponed until state legitimacy is restored and an inclusive government, recognized by the international community, is formed.
Neutrality: Some Afghan leaders advocate a position of geopolitical neutrality for Afghanistan, with Switzerland as a model. While appealing in these turbulent times, neutrality for Afghanistan is ultimately unrealistic. Neutrality is not a mere declaration; it requires economic and military strength to enforce it. Switzerland, the only armed and developed neutral nation, stands as a stark reminder. A weak and divided Afghanistan will remain vulnerable to foreign interference, regardless of its aspirations for neutrality. Thus Afghan leaders must prepare for what foreign interference means for the country, rather than touting the illusion of neutrality, which for now remains an unachievable ideal without the means to sustain it.
Loya Jirga: Afghanistan’s traditional Loya Jirga, or grand assembly, has historically played an important role in decision making. However, convening such gatherings without genuine representation or legitimate authority serves no practical purpose. Symbolic gestures will not rebuild the economy, restore security, or address the country’s humanitarian needs. True legitimacy can only be achieved when democratic institutions and pluralism are reestablished through free and fair elections. Shortcuts or empty gestures are doomed to fail before they gain any momentum toward success.
Silence on Peace Spoilers: Remaining silent in the face of disruptive neighbors is a dangerous misstep with far–reaching consequences. While avoiding conflict may seem like the path of least resistance, turning a blind eye to provocative actions only allows them to fester. Appeasement—whether through tolerating inappropriate behavior or attempting to placate belligerent neighbors—rarely leads to meaningful change or earns respect. Afghan leaders must engage constructively with Pakistan and Iran, focusing on both short– and long–term national security interests. Failing to do so is not only a betrayal of the Afghan people but also a neglect of the suffering these neighbors have caused.
The Way Forward
Afghanistan’s crises demand urgent and decisive leadership—one that is responsive, organized, and capable of efficiently mobilizing both domestic and international resources. The immediate priority must be survival, stability, and security, achieved through effective conflict resolution and robust peacebuilding efforts. Afghanistan risks slipping from global consciousness, condemning its people to suffer in silence. To prevent this, Afghan leaders must rise above personal, political, ethnic, and sectarian divides. They must set aside past grievances and work cohesively to secure the international support necessary to resolve Afghanistan’s legitimacy crisis, the root cause of its ongoing challenges.
For this vision to become reality, the few committed Afghan leaders must unite under a single, cohesive national platform dedicated to sustainable peace. Strategic outreach to the United States, particularly the Trump Administration—given Trump’s stated desire to be known as a peacemaker—is essential. Afghan leaders must demonstrate unity and cohesion. U.S. and European leadership for years have pointed to a lack of unity of purpose among Afghan anti–Taliban factions as the reason Western governments do not exert more meaningful pressure on the Taliban. A long–term peace settlement in Afghanistan offers a mutually beneficial outcome: a transformative resolution to decades of Afghan suffering, stabilization of the broader region, and fulfillment of America’s national security interests, creating a win–win–win scenario.
The Vienna Process, which recently convened for a fifth time, is one among growing Afghan initiatives for sustainable peace in Afghanistan. It provides Afghan leaders with a critical opportunity to engage in an inclusive platform for peace—one that brings all Afghan factions, including the Taliban, to the table. Coming together under this platform is not just an opportunity; it is a responsibility that no serious Afghan side should ignore. The success of the Vienna Process could transform it into an all–encompassing umbrella for meaningful intra–Afghan dialogue, one that, with robust international support and regional cooperation, can pave the way for a sustainable political settlement. This would lead to the formation of a truly inclusive government with both national legitimacy and global recognition, fulfilling the most pressing aspirations of the Afghan people.
a global affairs media network
Five signposts Afghanistan can follow toward sustainable peace
Image by 🌼Christel🌼 from Pixabay
April 4, 2025
Afghanistan remains on the brink of collapse, but Afghanistan’s anti–Taliban political elite remain unnecessarily divided on views for the country’s future. M. Ashraf Haidari identifies five ways these leaders can find consensus and bring about progress.
A
fghanistan stands at a precarious crossroads, teetering between collapse and a stagnating recovery under the Taliban, which lacks both internal legitimacy and external recognition. However, the country’s political elite—both at home and abroad—remain mired in unproductive cycles of debate, failing to address the nation’s immediate and profound crises. Afghans endure displacement, insecurity, gender apartheid, and economic devastation, yet their leaders continue to entrench ethnic divisions and politicize identity rather than take meaningful steps toward tangible solutions. While rhetorical discussions may be intellectually stimulating, they do nothing to feed the hungry, protect women’s rights, or restore state legitimacy. Afghanistan urgently needs decisive leadership—one that prioritizes action over endless polarizing deliberation.
For years, Afghanistan’s political discourse has been dominated by debates that offer no relief to the suffering population or facilitate the conditions necessary for sustainable peace and development. Although these discussions hold historical and intellectual significance, they fail to address the daily struggles of millions. The nation is sinking deeper into chaos as critical challenges are overshadowed by political posturing devoid of substantive progress toward national goals. Afghan leadership must shift focus from discussions that must wait to real-world solutions today. Several key reminders underscore the urgency of this shift:
The Durand Line: The long–standing Afghanistan–Pakistan border dispute remains a sensitive issue. Yet revisiting this century–old territorial conflict does nothing to alleviate hunger, displacement, or suffering. Until Afghanistan builds a robust political and economic infrastructure, such debates merely divert attention from more immediate challenges. Stability must come first; only then can territorial disputes be addressed meaningfully.
Federalism: Discussions on federalism present a theoretical solution to a dysfunctional state. This remains theoretical because without a legitimate government, a functioning economy, or a national consensus, this idea remains impractical. While debates over governance models are crucial for long–term stability, the immediate need is economic and security interventions, not polarizing constitutional debates. These must be postponed until state legitimacy is restored and an inclusive government, recognized by the international community, is formed.
Neutrality: Some Afghan leaders advocate a position of geopolitical neutrality for Afghanistan, with Switzerland as a model. While appealing in these turbulent times, neutrality for Afghanistan is ultimately unrealistic. Neutrality is not a mere declaration; it requires economic and military strength to enforce it. Switzerland, the only armed and developed neutral nation, stands as a stark reminder. A weak and divided Afghanistan will remain vulnerable to foreign interference, regardless of its aspirations for neutrality. Thus Afghan leaders must prepare for what foreign interference means for the country, rather than touting the illusion of neutrality, which for now remains an unachievable ideal without the means to sustain it.
Loya Jirga: Afghanistan’s traditional Loya Jirga, or grand assembly, has historically played an important role in decision making. However, convening such gatherings without genuine representation or legitimate authority serves no practical purpose. Symbolic gestures will not rebuild the economy, restore security, or address the country’s humanitarian needs. True legitimacy can only be achieved when democratic institutions and pluralism are reestablished through free and fair elections. Shortcuts or empty gestures are doomed to fail before they gain any momentum toward success.
Silence on Peace Spoilers: Remaining silent in the face of disruptive neighbors is a dangerous misstep with far–reaching consequences. While avoiding conflict may seem like the path of least resistance, turning a blind eye to provocative actions only allows them to fester. Appeasement—whether through tolerating inappropriate behavior or attempting to placate belligerent neighbors—rarely leads to meaningful change or earns respect. Afghan leaders must engage constructively with Pakistan and Iran, focusing on both short– and long–term national security interests. Failing to do so is not only a betrayal of the Afghan people but also a neglect of the suffering these neighbors have caused.
The Way Forward
Afghanistan’s crises demand urgent and decisive leadership—one that is responsive, organized, and capable of efficiently mobilizing both domestic and international resources. The immediate priority must be survival, stability, and security, achieved through effective conflict resolution and robust peacebuilding efforts. Afghanistan risks slipping from global consciousness, condemning its people to suffer in silence. To prevent this, Afghan leaders must rise above personal, political, ethnic, and sectarian divides. They must set aside past grievances and work cohesively to secure the international support necessary to resolve Afghanistan’s legitimacy crisis, the root cause of its ongoing challenges.
For this vision to become reality, the few committed Afghan leaders must unite under a single, cohesive national platform dedicated to sustainable peace. Strategic outreach to the United States, particularly the Trump Administration—given Trump’s stated desire to be known as a peacemaker—is essential. Afghan leaders must demonstrate unity and cohesion. U.S. and European leadership for years have pointed to a lack of unity of purpose among Afghan anti–Taliban factions as the reason Western governments do not exert more meaningful pressure on the Taliban. A long–term peace settlement in Afghanistan offers a mutually beneficial outcome: a transformative resolution to decades of Afghan suffering, stabilization of the broader region, and fulfillment of America’s national security interests, creating a win–win–win scenario.
The Vienna Process, which recently convened for a fifth time, is one among growing Afghan initiatives for sustainable peace in Afghanistan. It provides Afghan leaders with a critical opportunity to engage in an inclusive platform for peace—one that brings all Afghan factions, including the Taliban, to the table. Coming together under this platform is not just an opportunity; it is a responsibility that no serious Afghan side should ignore. The success of the Vienna Process could transform it into an all–encompassing umbrella for meaningful intra–Afghan dialogue, one that, with robust international support and regional cooperation, can pave the way for a sustainable political settlement. This would lead to the formation of a truly inclusive government with both national legitimacy and global recognition, fulfilling the most pressing aspirations of the Afghan people.
