Politics of International relations

Topic:

Security dynamics in Afghanistan

Submitted To:

Ma’am Sadia Rafiq

Submitted By:

Mehboob Ali (4374-BS-PS-21)

Class: B.A. (Hons.) POLITICAL SCIENCE
(Semester 5th).
Introduction :
Afghanistan stands at the crossroads of various geopolitical interests, making it a focal point
in international relations. Its strategic location has historically made it a battleground for
conflicting powers vying for influence in the region. Understanding the security dynamics in
Afghanistan is imperative not only due to its intrinsic significance but also for its implications
in broader global politics. IN the realm of International Relations (IR), analyzing
Afghanistan’s security dynamics provides critical insights into several interconnected factors.
Firstly, the nation’s internal conflicts, ethnic diversity, and tribal divisions have played a
pivotal role in shaping its security landscape. These internal dynamics often intertwine with
external influences, contributing to a complex web of challenges. Secondly, the historical
legacy of foreign interventions, from the Soviet invasion in the 1980s to the more recent
U.S.-led military involvement, has had profound consequences on the country’s security
situation. These interventions have left enduring impacts on governance structures, societal
stability, and regional stability.
Moreover, Afghanistan’s geostrategic significance cannot be understated. Its location between
Central Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East renders it a crucial node in trade routes and
regional power dynamics. The nation’s stability or instability can directly impact
neighbouring countries, potentially exacerbating regional tensions or fostering collaboration
among nations. Additionally, the resurgence of extremist groups like the Taliban poses threats
not only within Afghanistan but also internationally, impacting global security dynamics. A
comprehensive analysis of Afghanistan’s security dynamics must consider multifaceted
factors such as socio-cultural complexities, historical legacies, regional power struggles, and
the role of external actors. The thesis statement underlying this study could highlight the
interplay between internal conflicts, historical interventions, geopolitical significance, and the
influence of external actors as the primary determinants shaping Afghanistan’s security
landscape. Understanding these factors is indispensable for formulating effective policies
aimed at fostering stability, peacebuilding efforts, and mitigating the risks of regional and
global insecurity emanating from Afghanistan.

Historical context :
Soviet -Afghan war :
The Soviet–Afghan War, spanning 1979 to 1989, was a prolonged conflict fought in the
Soviet-controlled Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. This conflict, a pivotal moment in the
Cold War, involved intense battles between the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA)
supported by the Soviet Union and allied paramilitary groups against the Afghan mujahedeen
and their foreign supporters. The mujahedeen received substantial backing from various
nations and organizations, primarily from Pakistan, the United States, the United Kingdom,
China, Iran, and Arab states of the Persian Gulf. This external involvement turned the conflict
into a proxy war between the United States and the Soviet Union. The warfare,
predominantly in rural Afghanistan, caused immense devastation, resulting in the deaths of an
estimated 562,000 to 2,000,000 Afghans. Additionally, millions fled as refugees, seeking
safety in neighbouring Pakistan and Iran. This exodus accounted for around 6.5% to 11.5% of
Afghanistan's population as per the 1979 census. The war's destructive impact significantly
contributed to the dissolution of the Soviet Union and marked a significant chapter in the
conclusion of the Cold War.
The conflict began with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan to bolster the pro-Soviet
government established during Operation Storm-333. This invasion led to global
condemnation, with the international community imposing sanctions and embargoes on the
Soviet Union. Soviet forces occupied major Afghan cities and communication routes, while
the mujahedeen engaged in guerrilla warfare across the mountainous countryside, which was
largely beyond Soviet control.
The Soviets employed harsh tactics, such as laying millions of landmines, using aerial power
against both the resistance and civilians, and destroying infrastructure, including villages and
irrigation systems, to hinder mujahedeen operations. Initially intending a swift stabilization
and withdrawal within six months to a year, the Soviets encountered fierce opposition and
operational challenges in Afghanistan's rough terrain. By the mid-1980s, the Soviet troop
presence increased to around 115,000, intensifying fighting across the country. This
prolonged engagement took a toll on the Soviet Union's military, economic, and political
resources, leading to increased exhaustion. By mid-1987, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev
announced a phased withdrawal, culminating in the complete exit by February 1989. Despite
this, the PDPA government continued to fight the mujahedeen, leading to the Afghan Civil
War following the Soviet Union's dissolution. With the withdrawal of external support, the
PDPA's government collapsed in 1992, marking the onset of another phase of the Afghan
Civil War.

Impacts and aftermath

The combined confirmed death toll of the Soviet Armed Forces, frontier, and internal security
troops was 14,453, with alternative estimates suggesting a higher count of 26,000 killed
soldiers. Specifically, losses included 13,833 from Soviet Army formations and units, 572
from KGB sub-units, 28 from MVD formations, and 20 from other ministries and
departments. Additionally, 312 servicemen were either missing or captured, with 119
eventually freed, 97 returning to the USSR, and 22 relocating to other nations. Among
deployed troops, 53,753 suffered injuries, wounds, or concussions, while a staggering
415,932 fell ill. The predominant cause of casualties was illnesses due to unfavorable local
climate and sanitation conditions, leading to swift spread of acute infections among the
troops. Notably, there were 115,308 instances of infectious hepatitis, 31,080 cases of typhoid
fever, and 140,665 cases of various other diseases. Out of the 11,654 individuals discharged
from the army due to wounds, injuries, or severe illnesses, 10,751 were left disabled.

Casualties and destruction in Afghanistan:

The war in Afghanistan caused immense civilian suffering and devastation. Reports on
Afghan civilian deaths range from 562,000 to 2,000,000. Approximately 800,000 Afghans
lost their lives during the Soviet occupation, with millions more fleeing to Pakistan and Iran,
constituting one of the largest refugee crises in history. In the 1980s, Afghan refugees made
up half of the world’s refugee population. Specific data from 1985 revealed 32,755 civilian
deaths, destruction of 1,834 houses, 74 villages, and the loss of 3,308 animals. The
population of Afghanistan dropped from 13.4 million in 1979 to 11.8 million in 1989, as
indicated by World Bank data, depicting the grim toll of the decade-long Soviet presence.
Aftermath : The fall of Soviet Union
Scholars Rafael Reuveny and Aseem Prakash suggest that the war in Afghanistan played a
role in the downfall of the Soviet Union by challenging the perception of the invincibility of
the Red Army, diminishing Soviet legitimacy, and introducing new forms of political
engagement. However, they argue that the financial burden on the Soviet Union from the war
wasn't significantly high compared to its other expenses, with the CIA estimating the costs at
around 2.5 percent of the annual military spending. Historian Sergey Radchenko contests the
notion that the Afghanistan conflict led to the USSR's bankruptcy, highlighting that the $7.5
billion spent between 1984 and 1987 was a small fraction of the massive annual military
budget, which was approximately $128 billion. Radchenko indicates that the decision to
withdraw was influenced by various political considerations. While historians Stephen
Kotkin and Vladislav Zubok acknowledge the Afghanistan war, they primarily attribute the
dissolution of the Soviet Union to internal factors, mentioning the war's impact only briefly.

Taliban Rule in Afghanistan:

The Taliban, an Islamist extremist group, rose to power in the mid-1990s amid Afghanistan's
civil war. Their rule from 1996 to 2001 was characterized by strict interpretation of Sharia
law, harsh enforcement of social codes, suppression of women's rights, and harbouring of
terrorist organizations, most notably providing safe haven to Al-Qaeda.Under their regime,
Afghanistan became a breeding ground for extremism, resulting in a fractured society, limited
economic development, and rampant human rights abuses. Women were severely restricted,
barred from education and employment, and subject to oppressive treatment.
Implications on Afghanistan's Security:
The Taliban's reign adversely affected Afghanistan's security fabric. Internal stability was
compromised due to their authoritarian rule and brutal enforcement tactics, leading to deep-
seated social unrest and resistance among certain segments of the population. The
suppression of dissent and the harsh implementation of their interpretation of Islamic law
further fuelled resentment among various ethnic groups and tribes, exacerbating internal
conflicts.Simultaneously, the Taliban's association with Al-Qaeda and other extremist groups
posed a significant threat not only to Afghanistan but also to global security. Their harboring
of these organizations resulted in the planning and execution of the infamous 9/11 terrorist
attacks, leading to catastrophic consequences worldwide.
International Response Post-9/11:
The 9/11 attacks served as a catalyst for an extensive international response. The United
States, supported by NATO allies and other countries, launched Operation Enduring Freedom
in October 2001. The primary objective was to dismantle the Taliban regime and root out Al-
Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan.This military intervention succeeded in toppling the Taliban
from power relatively swiftly. However, the subsequent nation-building efforts faced
challenges due to the complexities of Afghan society, deeply ingrained tribal dynamics, and
the absence of a stable government infrastructure.
Consequences of International Intervention:
The aftermath of the intervention brought both positive and negative consequences. On one
hand, the removal of the Taliban provided a window for democratic reforms, improvements
in human rights, and advancements in education and healthcare. Women regained some
freedoms, and there were efforts to establish a more inclusive political system.However, the
prolonged military presence, coupled with a lack of cohesive long-term strategies, resulted in
a protracted conflict. The resurgence of the Taliban insurgency, fueled by discontentment and
external support, hindered the establishment of sustainable peace and stability in the region.

Role of regional actors:

Pakistan’s Role in Afghanistan
Pakistan has long been a crucial player in the Afghan security landscape. The Afghan-
Pakistan relationship is complex, often characterized by mutual suspicion and periodic
cooperation. Pakistan’s influence primarily stems from its historical ties to certain Afghan
factions, notably the Taliban.The relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan has been
multifaceted, influenced by historical, cultural, and geopolitical factors. The Durand Line
issue, unresolved border disputes, and refugee influx from Afghanistan have strained ties
while trade and shared ethnic ties have provided some common ground.
Pakistan’s alleged support to the Taliban has been a subject of international concern. While
Pakistan officially denies supporting the Taliban, evidence suggests that certain factions
within Pakistan’s intelligence agencies have provided sanctuary, training, and logistical
support to elements of the Taliban. This support has been seen as a strategic tool to maintain
influence in Afghanistan and counter perceived Indian influence there.
Iran’s Involvement in Afghanistan
Iran, like Pakistan, holds significant strategic interests in Afghanistan. Its involvement is
shaped by concerns over border security, refugees, and the broader regional power
dynamics.Iran seeks stability in its eastern border areas and aims to prevent the spread of
extremist ideologies. It has historically supported certain Afghan factions, including elements
within the Hazara community, to counter the Taliban and safeguard its interests in the region.
Iran has provided limited support to certain Afghan factions, leveraging its influence to
ensure a degree of control and safeguarding its interests. This involvement has been carefully
calibrated to prevent the ascension of groups that might challenge Iran’s strategic interests.
Central Asian States’ Concerns and Involvement:
The Central Asian states have a vested interest in Afghan stability due to shared borders and
concerns over spillover effects from conflict, including terrorism, drug trafficking, and
refugee influx.Central Asian countries, including Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan,
have expressed concerns about border security due to the porous nature of the Afghan
borders. They fear the infiltration of extremist groups, narcotics trafficking, and the potential
for regional instability affecting their own territories. These states are also interested in
preserving stability in the region to foster economic growth, as instability in Afghanistan has
the potential to spill over and affect regional trade and development projects.the security
dynamics in Afghanistan are deeply influenced by the actions and interests of neighbouring
countries. Pakistan’s historical ties to the Taliban, Iran’s strategic interests, and Central Asian
states’ concerns over border security and regional stability collectively shape the complex
landscape of Afghan security dynamics. Balancing these interests while fostering stability in
Afghanistan remains a significant challenge for regional and international stakeholders.

Role of NATO:
For nearly 20 years, NATO Allies and partner countries had military forces deployed to
Afghanistan under a United Nations (UN) Security Council mandate. NATO Allies went into
Afghanistan after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, to ensure that the country
would not again become a safe haven for international terrorists to attack NATO member
countries. Over the last two decades, there have been no terrorist attacks on Allied soil from
Afghanistan.Under a UN Security Council mandate, NATO Allies and partner nations
stationed military personnel in Afghanistan for almost two decades. Following the terrorist
attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, NATO Allies entered Afghanistan in
order to prevent the nation from serving as a shelter for foreign terrorists planning strikes
against other NATO members. There haven’t been any terrorist strikes from Afghanistan
against Allied territory in the previous 20 years.
An agreement to remove foreign soldiers from Afghanistan by May 2021 was struck by the
US and the Taliban in February 2020. The decision to remove all Allied forces from
Afghanistan in a few months was made by the Foreign and Defense Ministers of NATO in
April 2021.
NATO concentrated on guaranteeing the safe departure of personnel from Allied and partner
countries, as well as NATO-affiliated Afghans, in the summer of 2021, following the fall of
the Afghan government and the Afghan National Defence and Security Forces. Around 2,000
Afghans who worked for NATO and their families were among the more than 120,000
individuals that were evacuated in August 2021 as part of the coalition effort via the Allied
airlift from Kabul airport. A large number of them have already been relocated to partner and
ally nations. For a few more,While plans are being finalized for further relocation to Allied
and partner nations, NATO is collaborating with Allies to offer housing, care, and assistance
IN..
1.In 2001, NATO Allies invaded Afghanistan. NATO assumed command of the UN-mandated
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in August 2003. The force’s objectives were
to develop the capabilities of the Afghan national security forces, particularly in the battle
against international terrorism, and to establish the framework necessary for the Afghan
government to exercise its authority throughout the nation. When the Afghan National
Defence and Security Forces took full control of national security in December 2014, ISAF
came to an end..
2.NATO’s Resolute Support Mission (RSM) was established in January 2015 with the goal of
assisting Afghan security forces and institutions in their efforts to combat terrorism and
safeguard their nation. Early in September 2021, the Mission was concluded after all RSM
forces had completed their pull-outs in August of that same year.
3.NATO has halted all assistance to Afghanistan because to the current situation. Any future
Afghan government must respect the rule of law, honour Afghanistan’s international
commitments, protect everyone’s human rights, especially those of women, children, and
minorities, permit unrestricted humanitarian access, and make sure that Afghanistan is never
again used as a terrorist haven.
4.NATO Foreign Ministers reviewed a thorough political and military analysis of the lessons
learnt from the Alliance’s involvement in Afghanistan in December 2021 evaluation that
included important findings and suggestions
According to the study, crisis management should continue to be a top priority for NATO in
light of the organization’s growing complexity and the military prowess of NATO’s
involvement in Afghanistan. The report also came to the conclusion that the ambition of the
international community in Afghanistan went far beyond eliminating terrorist havens, and
that going forward, Allies should constantly evaluate strategic objectives, establish realistic
goals, and be mindful of the risks associated with mission extension. Other recommendations
from the evaluation included preserving interoperability with operational partners and taking
political and cultural norms into consideration.of the host countries, as well as their aptitude
for training and capacity-building; guaranteeing prompt reporting and fruitful consultations.
Additionally, it recommended that NATO think about ways to improve its capacity to carry
out large-scale, emergency evacuation operations on short notice in the future. The main
findings and suggestions of the study are meant to assist NATO’s military and political
authorities in planning and directing their future crisis management activities.

USA and Afghanistan :

Following the devastating September 11 attacks, the United States initiated the war on terror,
launching a multinational invasion of Afghanistan, then ruled by the Taliban. The primary
objective was to dismantle al-Qaeda, responsible for the attacks under Osama bin Laden's
leadership, and to dismantle the Taliban government, denying Islamist militants a secure base.
The United Kingdom provided crucial support from the outset. The invasion significantly
reinforced the Northern Alliance, which had struggled against the Taliban in the Afghan Civil
War. Before the US intervention, the Taliban held about 85% of Afghanistan, including
Kabul, limiting the Northern Alliance to Badakhshan Province. Starting on October 7, 2001,
the invasion marked the beginning of the 20-year-long War in Afghanistan and formally
initiated the War on Terror. President George W. Bush demanded that the Taliban surrender
Osama bin Laden and expel al-Qaeda militants from Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks.
Bin Laden, wanted by the FBI since the 1998 embassy bombings, had a long history in
Afghanistan. The Taliban refused to hand him over or shut down terrorist bases, prompting
the US to commence Operation Enduring Freedom on October 7, 2001, in collaboration with
the UK and later joined by a multinational force and the Northern Alliance. The coalition
swiftly advanced, capturing Kabul by November 13 and overthrowing the Taliban by
December 17. However, key figures like bin Laden managed to evade capture during the
Battle of Tora Bora, escaping to Pakistan or remote areas within the Hindu Kush. .

China Interest:
China has long held significant economic and security interests in Afghanistan, with its
primary focus on economic investments and regional stability, especially concerning its Belt
and Road Initiative (BRI). Afghanistan's strategic location and potential as a gateway to
Central Asia make it a crucial component in China's larger geopolitical ambitions.
Economic Interests:
China's economic interests in Afghanistan revolve around the BRI, a massive infrastructure
and economic development initiative aiming to connect Asia with Europe and Africa.
Afghanistan's inclusion in the BRI is vital for establishing a corridor that facilitates trade and
energy transportation between China and the wider region. China sees Afghanistan as a
potential link in the BRI's China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), offering access to
Central Asian markets and resources. Investment in infrastructure, particularly in road and
rail networks, benefits China by creating trade routes that bypass maritime chokepoints,
reducing transportation costs and securing alternative access to markets. Furthermore,
Afghanistan's rich mineral resources, including lithium, copper, and rare earth elements,
present economic opportunities for Chinese companies in mining and resource extraction,
contributing to China's industrial growth.
Security Interests:
China's security interests in Afghanistan primarily revolve around maintaining stability and
preventing the spread of extremism and terrorism in the region. Instability in Afghanistan
directly impacts China's Xinjiang province, which shares a border with Afghanistan and faces
its own challenges with Uighur separatism and extremism. China fears that a destabilized
Afghanistan could serve as a safe haven for Uighur militants and terrorists, posing a direct
security threat to its western regions. Moreover, China aims to prevent the spillover of
radicalism into neighbouring Central Asian countries. The potential influx of refugees and the
spread of extremist ideologies from Afghanistan could disrupt the stability of these nations,
impacting China's regional influence and economic endeavours.
Actions Taken by China:
China has pursued a cautious but active approach in Afghanistan, balancing economic
investments with diplomatic engagements. It has engaged in talks with various Afghan
stakeholders, including the Taliban, seeking assurances that its economic projects will be
safeguarded and that Afghanistan won't become a breeding ground for extremism.China's
participation in multilateral platforms, such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)
and the Quadrilateral Cooperation and Coordination Mechanism in Counterterrorism (China,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Tajikistan), highlights its commitment to regional security
cooperation. Through these forums, China seeks to address security concerns and promote
stability in Afghanistan and the wider region.
Challenges and Future Prospects:
However, several challenges hinder China's ambitions in Afghanistan. The volatile security
situation, lack of infrastructure, and political instability pose risks to Chinese investments.
The shifting political landscape with the Taliban's resurgence adds uncertainty to China's
engagement, raising concerns about the protection of its economic interests and the potential
backlash from dealing with a controversial regime. Despite challenges, China remains
committed to engaging with Afghanistan, recognizing the country's significance for its
economic and security interests. Moving forward, China is likely to adopt a pragmatic
approach, focusing on economic cooperation while simultaneously working with regional
partners and international organizations to address security challenge’s.
International relations with the Taliban:
Over the course of the previous 30 years, the Taliban, a violent Islamist group, has repeatedly
established a theocratic emirate over Afghanistan. The country was overthrown by the
Taliban in August 2021, who then installed a new administration that totally replaced the
previous one. Though there has been some acknowledgment of their de facto rule over the
nation, as of late 2022, no nation recognized them as the legitimate government of
Afghanistan.Al-Qaeda, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, and the Haqqani network were
among the armed groups who backed the Taliban. Numerous nations, including China, Iran,
Pakistan, Qatar, and Russia, are purportedly in favor of the Taliban. All of their governments,
nonetheless, insist they are not supporting the Taliban in any way. The Taliban likewise
disputes having any outside assistance from any nation.[1] Three countries recognized the
Taliban’s authority formally and diplomatically during its height: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and
the United Arab Emirates. It was also previously claimed that Turkmenistan and the United
Arab Emirates had supported the Taliban. Some nations have classified it as a terrorist group.

Countries :
China, Russia, and the United States have gotten in touch with Taliban representatives since
the group took over the Afghan government, but all have voiced misgivings about the group's
commitment to fighting terrorism.Fights between the Taliban forces and its neighbours,
Pakistan, Iran, and Turkmenistan, have also resulted in hostilities. IN order to develop an
investment strategy cantered on infrastructure, mining, and power in February 2023, the
administration led by the Taliban has assembled a group of businesses, some of which are
located in Pakistan, Iran, and Russia.

China:
Although China has been providing financial and political support to the Islamic Republic of
Afghanistan government in Kabul, Malek Setiz, an international relations adviser to the
former Afghan Foreign Ministry, believes that China maintains unofficial ties with the
Taliban.The encounters were acknowledged by the Chinese Foreign Ministry. Beijing has,
however, consistently urged the Taliban to uphold its obligations to the international
community. Following the Taliban’s comeback to power, China has continued to maintain
formal relations with the interim Afghan government.

*India*
India refused to acknowledge the Afghan Taliban regime. Rather, in order to restrain the
Taliban’s ascent in the 1990s, India kept strong military and strategic relations with the
Northern Alliance. India, which was among the closest allies of the late Afghan president
Mohammad Najibullah, vehemently denounced the Taliban’s death of him in public. Terrorist
groups headquartered in Pakistan and Kashmir that are allegedly affiliated with the Taliban
have a history of involvement in the insurgency in Kashmir and have attacked Indian security
forces on multiple occasions.Indian Airlines Flight 814 was hijacked in December 1999 while
it was traveling from Kathmandu to Delhi, and it was transported to Kandahar. In an apparent
attempt to stop Indian special forces from storming the plane, the Taliban deployed their
militias close to the hijacked aircraft. This caused the negotiations between India and the
hijackers to stall for several days. Subsequently, the New York Times revealed that there
existed genuine connections between the hijackers and the Taliban. India released three
militants as part of the agreement to free the aircraft. The hijackers and the militants who
were freed were allowed safe passage by the Taliban. India stepped up its attempts to support
Massoud after the hijacking, sending an armaments store to Dushanbe, Tajikistan. In addition,
India supplied a large range of medical services, tactical guidance, helicopter technicians, and
high-altitude warfare equipment. One story claims that in 2001, Indian military assistance to
anti-Taliban forces amounted to US$70 million, including US$8 million in high-altitude
equipment and five Mil Mi-17 helicopters. India was the largest regional donor to
Afghanistan by 2001, having spearheaded multiple reconstruction initiatives and provided
substantial support to the country’s new regime
*Iran*
The Taliban have historically faced opposition from Iran. But Iranian officials referred to the
Taliban as part of their “Axis of Resistance” once ties between the two countries worsened
with the US.After assaulting Mizar-i-Sharif in early August 1998, Taliban soldiers butchered
thousands of people as payback for the warlords who opposed them and assassinated 11
Iranian diplomats inside the Iranian consulate. According to rumored radio intercepts, Mullah
Omar personally sanctioned the executions.Up to 70,000 regular troops were gathered by the
Iranian government on the Afghan-Iranian border during the subsequent conflict involving
Iran and the Taliban. In the end, war was avoided. A number of prominent US military
figures, including David Petraeus, Stanley McChrystal, Robert Gates, and others, think that
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps provided some assistance to the Taliban in the first
ten years of the twenty-first century. Since 2004 or 2005, reports have surfaced in which
NATO states have accused Iran of providing some Taliban terrorists with supplies and
training.The relationship between Iran and the Taliban appears to have improved in the
2010s, according to multiple reports. This includes shifts in the Taliban’s internal leadership:
Mullah Akhtar Mansoor, the second emir of the Taliban, was especially interested in
strengthening relations with Iran[42] before he was assassinated by an American drone strike
while traveling back from Iran to Pakistan. Media sources that support Iran have also claimed
that the Taliban has recruited fighters from the Shia Hazara community.Attacks against the
Hazara Shia minority, linked to the Islamic State, have been denounced by the Taliban.Iran’s
“relationship with the Taliban now spans the economic, security, and political realms and is
likely to grow as the Taliban asserts itself again,” according to a Washington Post article from
August 2019.US intelligence officers determined in August 2020 that Iran had paid the
Haqqani network, which is associated with the Taliban, bribes to assassinate foreign military
personnel in Afghanistan in 2019—including Americans.According to US intelligence, Iran
provided Taliban rebels with bounties in exchange for their 2019 assault on Bagram
Airport.As to CNN, the administration of Donald Trump has refrained from mentioning Iran’s
involvement in the bombing, a decision that both current and former officials attribute to the
country’s focus on the peace agreement and its exit from Afghanistan..

*Pakistan*

Human Rights Watch states that senior officials from Pakistan’s army and intelligence agency
were involved in the planning of military operations, and that Pakistani planes helped the
Taliban with troop rotations during combat operations in late 2000.Pakistan supplied military
hardware, aid with recruitment, instruction, and strategic counsel.[Reference required]
Pakistan officially denied providing military support to the Taliban.The Taliban allegedly had
“unprecedented access” to Pakistan’s interest organizations and lobbyists, according to author
Ahmed Rashid. Additionally, he says that they were occasionally able to “play off one lobby
against another and extend their influence in Pakistan even further”. As early as 1998–1999,
Taliban-style organizations were “banning TV and videos... and forcing people, particularly
women, to adapt to the Taliban dress code and way of life” throughout Pakistan’s Pashtun
belt and, to a lesser extent, in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. The Afghan Taliban leadership
is said to have gone to Pakistan following the September 11, 2001 attacks and the US
invasion of Afghanistan, where they reorganize and establish multiple shuras to organize their
insurgency in Afghanistan.The Indian embassy was attacked by the Taliban in July 2008, and
Afghan officials suggested that the Pakistani ISI was involved. Several US officials have
charged that the ISI provides support to terrorist organizations, including as the Taliban in
Afghanistan. Robert Gates, the US Defense Secretary, and others propose that the ISI keep
ties with organizations such as the Afghan Taliban as a “strategic hedge” to assist Islamabad
in gaining sway in Kabul when US forces withdraw from the area. Described as a “veritable
arm of Pakistan’s ISI” in 2011, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike
Mullen referred to the Haqqani network, the most potent component of them Afghan Taliban.

*USA*:
The Taliban regime in Afghanistan was never acknowledged by the US. According to Ahmed
Rashid, between 1994 and 1996, the US indirectly backed the Taliban through its partner in
Pakistan because Washington saw the Taliban as possibly pro-Western, anti-Shia, and anti-
Iranian. Washington also hoped that the Taliban would back economic projects that Unocal,
an American oil corporation, had planned. For instance, it remained silent when the Taliban
took control of Herat in 1995 and drove thousands of girls out of the educational system. Late
in 1997, US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright started distancing the US from the
Taliban, and the US-based oil giant Unocal pulled out of talks to build a pipeline from
Central Asia.Bin Laden followers bombed two US embassies in Africa one day before Mazar
was captured in August 1998, resulting in 4,500 injuries and 224 deaths, the majority of
which were Africans. In retaliation, the US launched cruise missiles on alleged terrorist bases
in Afghanistan, killing over twenty people but not killing bin Laden or any significant
number of Al-Qaeda members. Both US President Bill Clinton and the missile strike were
denounced by Mullah Omar. The Taliban ambassador was sent out of Saudi Arabia in
retaliation for not handing over bin Laden and for what Saudi Arabia claimed to be insults to
the Saudi royal family from Mullah Omar. The UN Security Council unanimously decided in
mid-October to prohibit commercial aircraft travel to and from Afghanistan and to block the
country’s bank accounts globally.] In October 2009, the US revealed that it was going to
modify its counterinsurgency tactics and pay the Taliban fighters to switch sides.President
Hamid Karzai stated that there is a “urgent need” for discussions with the Taliban in an
interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on November 26, 2009. He also made it plain
that the Obama administration has opposed these talks. The United States did not respond in
kind.Asian Times Online stated in December 2009 that there had been no official US reaction
to the Taliban’s offer to provide the US with “legal guarantees” that they would not permit
Afghanistan to be used as a launchpad for attacks on other nations.US officials stated on
December 6 that they had not ruled out holding negotiations with the Taliban. It was revealed
a few days later that Gates believed there was room for improvement with the Taliban but not
with Al-Qaeda. Moreover, he asserted that political reconciliation would put an end to the
war and insurgency. However, he insisted that the Taliban must submit to the authority of the
Afghan government and that reconciliation must take place on its terms.General McChrystal
claimed in 2010 that talks for peace with the Taliban may result from his troop
surge.According to American professor Dr. Jonathan Cristol, in an interview with Palgrave
Macmillan concerning US-Taliban ties, Taliban officials “have been eager to discuss, but
from a position of relative strength and their goal is no longer a warm relationship with the
US—that ship sailed long ago.”