Has the US run out of patience with the 'game of thrones' in Kabul?

Knowing the problem but finding it hard to resolve.

According to DW, Washington and the Taliban signed what was hailed as a historic agreement, aiming to end the 19-year-long conflict in Afghanistan on February 29th. However, since then, little progress has been made in implementing the terms of this document.

Celebrating the agreement signed between the US and the Taliban in Afghanistan in February. Photo: Reuters

One of the notable points is that the agreement requires Afghan authorities to release up to 5,000 Muslim prisoners in exchange for approximately 1,000 pro-government prisoners.

The release of prisoners is a prerequisite for a lengthy and complex internal dialogue within Afghanistan, which was initially planned for March 10th.

However, the Afghan government has so far shown little enthusiasm, even reluctance, towards releasing Taliban prisoners. They have set another precondition: the group of militants must immediately cease all attacks.

On the other side of the conflict, the Taliban argued that reducing violence was sufficient to secure the release of their detained fighters. Suhail Shaheen, spokesman for the Taliban's political office in Qatar, argued that the Afghan government was simply making excuses to delay the prisoners' release.

Not wanting to be outdone, Shaheen emphasized: "But let me make it clear: intra-Afghan negotiations will not begin until Kabul releases all of our prisoners."

Taliban gunmen. Photo: AFP

Earlier this week, President Ashraf Ghani's government released 100 Taliban prisoners; however, this move was not enough to satisfy the insurgents. Media sources revealed that the Taliban hoped Kabul would release 15 of their commanders, who are currently being held captive, in the first phase.

Matin Bek, a negotiator representing the local government, also spoke to the press, stating that they do not want to release those who have "murdered the people," and do not want these individuals to "return to the battlefield and seize territories."

Analyzing the dire situation at hand, Michael Kugelman, a South Asia expert at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Studies for Scholars, based in Washington, argues that the problem lies within the agreement between the US and the Taliban itself.

He analyzed that the problem lies in the fact that the bilateral agreement between the US and the insurgents in Afghanistan is demanding "unrealistic" things, or in other words, expecting to achieve too much in too short a period of time.

Of course, according to Kugelman, the "major obstacle" is none other than the issue of prisoner release. "And the problem is that neither side is willing to compromise."

Amid the stalemate, the Taliban added fuel to the fire, accusing the US of violating the Doha agreement by targeting their fighters. Spokesman Shaheen said: “The Doha agreement clearly states that the US can only defend itself in certain circumstances…”

The U.S. military will not attack our Muslim fighters or conduct nighttime raids. Such actions could jeopardize the agreement.”

Negotiations between the US and Taliban forces in Doha, Qatar. Photo: Al Jazeera

Furthermore, the Taliban leadership is reportedly unhappy with what they see as Washington's failure to get the Afghan government to implement the agreement. The group wants the next phases of the signed agreement to be completed as soon as possible.

In this respect, expert Kugelman analyzes the difference: “The US-Taliban negotiations are different, because in that case each side has a clear objective: to negotiate an agreement leading to a US troop withdrawal plan. With internal Afghan dialogue, things are much more complex and have many different dimensions.”

Will the US act unilaterally?

Objectively speaking, implementing the Doha agreement with Washington is not an easy task, especially given the worsening political crisis in Afghanistan since both Ashraf Ghani and his rival Abdullah Abdullah declared themselves presidents after last year's elections.

Recently, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned leaders in Kabul that Washington could cut financial aid to the war-torn country if Ghani and Abdullah do not reach an agreement soon.

From an expert's perspective, it seems that Ghani fears he will not be able to remain in power after initiating a formal peace process.

Because it might require an interim government to oversee the peace process, or even a new political arrangement, Ghani risks being marginalized.

“For these reasons, Ghani will do everything he can to protect his hold on the presidency during this period of instability – and that requires absolutely no concessions to Abdullah.”

Michael Kugelman - South Asia expert, Woodrow Wilson International Centre

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo meets with Afghan President Ghani in Kabul on March 23. Photo: DPA

As mentioned, the current situation may force US President Trump to consider and act on his own. The US leader wants to withdraw all troops before the presidential election in November, and observers believe the Oval Office occupant's patience is running out.

To put it simply: if the peace process remains stalled and intra-Afghan negotiations do not begin, it is not out of the question that the Washington administration will abandon its mediation efforts, narrow its scope of involvement, and possibly even accelerate the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan.

For many, it seems that the success or failure of the peace process in Afghanistan now rests in the hands of President Ghani and his team.

That's also the view of expert Naseer Weyar, who lives in Kabul: "If Ghani manages to achieve peace with Abdullah and at the same time keeps the US on the same side, the peace process can move forward. Otherwise, Washington may look for another partner in Afghanistan."