Pak play in Afghanistan

President Donald Trump's policy responses to the new global terror that arose out of a faith-based motivation range from an unequivocal denunciation of the countries that provided safe havens to Islamic radicals to an announcement of withdrawal of American troops from the two theatres of 'war on terror'- Afghanistan and Syria. His decision on ending the deployment of US soldiers there is significantly rooted in his intrinsic aversion to the idea of US playing 'the policeman of the world' when others were not doing their bit - the businessman in him apparently getting the better of a supposed world statesman. Also, the US President was somewhere feeling the 'comfort of distance' and therefore seeking even some patchwork solution of a decidedly messy situation in Afghanistan so long as it reduced the threat of an attack from Islamic extremists on American soil.

It is ironic that Pakistan, criticised by the entire democratic world for harbouring terrorists on its soil and even reprimanded by Trump by way of the suspension of aid given to it earlier as an ally in the 'war on terror', is now likely to emerge as the biggest beneficiary of the US policy on Afghanistan. A half-baked truce struck by the US with the Taliban - in its impatience to see a phased withdrawal of American soldiers in Afghanistan in quick time - would be relished by the Pak army which had an intrinsic bonhomie with the radical outfit dating back to the victory of Afghan Jehad against the Soviet occupation. A Taliban-friendly dispensation in Afghanistan would tend to bring in Pakistan there and shut out India from its affairs.

A new situation is developing in Afghanistan posing an added strategic challenge for India. President Trump has no reason to remain stuck with the geo- politics of the Cold War- he already views Russia as a country at par with the European nations and regards China not so much as an ideological adversary as an economic rival. Although he had a visceral dislike of Islamic extremism- he ended the artificial divide between 'good terrorists' and 'bad terrorists' in relation to the groups active within Pakistan- he has changed the contours of the 'war on terror' by emphasising on the obligation of the Islamic countries - particularly members of the OIC chaired by Saudi Arabia- to come forth to counter radicalism for their own future interest, calling upon other countries having stakes in a peaceful Afghanistan to share the military burden in that troubled territory and gravitating towards a workable agreement between Taliban and the Ashraf Ghani government in Afghanistan for return of peace howsoever temporary.

The main point of assurance that the US Special Envoy for Afghan peace talks, Zalmay Khalizad, has sought from the Taliban leadership during the six-day long parleys at Doha in January is that no attack will be made on US targets. The Taliban has sensed an advantage in pursuing its prime objective of getting the US troops to leave Afghanistan in return for some kind of a cease-fire being announced by the former. The Taliban, which had an unalienable axis with Al-Qaeda, is now being acknowledged by the US in these talks as a rightful shareholder in Afghan ruling dispensation notwithstanding the history of its Emirate that had run the country from 1996 till 2001 with a brutal show of Islamic revivalism and gross fundamentalism.