Trump’s Afghanistan Policy Threatens Chaos in South Asia

After several reports of disagreements between the White House and top military officials, the Trump administration finally gave in to Pentagon requests to increase U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan. A core component of President Trump’s speech outlining the new Afghanistan policy is the manipulation of the role key South Asian players, India and Pakistan, can play in the conflict. The policy also purposefully lacks a commitment to nation-building efforts in Afghanistan, which will make achieving stability in a country that has suffered from almost two years of constant warfare much harder. The proposed policy for Afghanistan, in its current state, attempts to manipulate India and Pakistan to comply with U.S. interests while lacking a comprehensive, long-term approach to eliminate deeply entrenched terrorist networks. Though Trump is correct to call out Pakistan’s protection of terrorist safe-havens and promotion of violence in Afghanistan, he should understand the implications of his actions in South Asia. Making a public statement regarding the Pakistan government’s ineffectiveness at combatting terrorism harms the Pakistani government’s credibility with other international partners and its own population. Terrorist organizations can manipulate anti-Pakistan rhetoric from the west for recruitment, convincing Pakistanis that the United States does not service Pakistan’s best interests and acts as an imperial power. Moreover, stability in Afghanistan is heavily dependent on Pakistani involvement in the country, as Pakistan’s linkages with the Afghan Taliban and Haqqani Network linger. The United States alone cannot bring Afghan government officials and Taliban leadership to the table to conduct peace talks; Pakistan plays an integral role in convincing the Taliban leaders to engage with U.S and Afghan officials and facilitating compromises to end the decades-long war. The White House’s strategy should not be to remove Pakistan from the Afghanistan strategy, but rather to more effectively utilize diplomatic pressure or leverage U.S. foreign aid commitments to Pakistan to convince the Pakistani government to host the peace talks. More troubling, Trump’s request for India to play a larger role in Afghanistan can upset the fragile political dichotomy of South Asia. Pakistan has already made clear its opposition to greater Indian involvement in Afghanistan, stating that India’s presence would harm both U.S.-Pakistan and India-Pakistan relations. Pakistan worries that Indian military presence in Afghanistan would make Pakistan vulnerable on two fronts; one along its eastern border with India and the other along Afghanistan with easy access for the Indian army to attack Pakistan in the case of conflict. In addition to upsetting the Pakistanis, Trump’s desire for Indian involvement is unrealistic. The likelihood of India deploying troops to Afghanistan is low, as the Indian foreign policy agenda, casually known as non-alignment 2.0, forbids military presence in any country that would violate sovereignty. India’s foreign policy is deeply influenced by post-colonialism, which preaches non-intervention.  Despite Trump’s overtures, India understands the delicate balance it has with Pakistan and would not engage in any actions that could upset the relative peace the two countries have been able to maintain in the last two decades. India’s military works on a defensive basis, and if Pakistan’s reactionary politics permits a military attack on India, both countries will engage in another bloody, and costly war. The same could result if a terrorist actor in Pakistan gets provoked from India’s engagement in Afghanistan and plans a devastating attack in India. It is also important to note that though India has a no-first-use nuclear policy, Pakistan does not. Agitating the situation between India and Pakistan could result in worsening conditions in the subcontinent. Most importantly, the Trump administration’s Afghanistan policy may have dangerous results once the U.S. presence in Afghanistan eventually comes to an end. Trump specifically stressed that the United States would not engage in nation-building efforts in Afghanistan, which is vital in eradicating terrorism. Terrorists thrive on instability and lack of rule of law, and without strengthening those infrastructures in Afghanistan, the country is susceptible to another violent resurgence of terrorism. When the eventual U.S. military withdrawal finally comes to fruition, there must be systems in place in Afghanistan that can support democratic governance in the country. An unstable Afghanistan, following U.S. troop withdrawal, will have dire consequences on Pakistan and India. Anti-Pakistan terrorist organizations such Al Qaeda, Tehreek-i-Taliban, and Laskar-i-Jhangvi, could use a collapsed Afghan state for training camps that promote violence against the Pakistani government. In addition to harming India’s economic partnerships with Afghanistan and damaging joint-infrastructure projects, a weak Afghanistan can be a breeding ground for anti-India terrorist organizations such as Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba, or worse, an unstable Pakistan that is unable to control state-sponsored terrorist networks. As the world keeps a close eye on the future of Afghanistan, the United States must take another look at the proposed policy for Afghanistan and ensure a comprehensive approach is utilized. The U.S. presence in Afghanistan cannot continue to be treated lightly: in addition to both American and Afghan lives at stake, a bad policy could upset the fragile South Asian peace. The Trump administration is stepping into a fragile region, one plagued with mistrust, contentious history, and nuclear uncertainty, thereby making it imperative that the United States does not disrupt the regional dynamics. The U.S. is hoping to end the Afghanistan war, but now threatens to start a new one in South Asia. About the author: Angel Sharma is the South Asia Fellow at Young Professionals in Foreign Policy (YPFP). She works in the international development sector focusing on the rule of law and human rights at an international NGO. Angel received her MA in International Security from American University. The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of any of the organizations with which the author is affiliated. Photo: DVIDSHUB via Flickr