Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan
"Our commitment to a stable and free and peaceful Afghanistan is a long-term commit- ment." President Bush Statement with Afghanistan's President Karzai (George. W. Bush, 2009)
Afghanistan has been referred to as the “graveyard of invaders”. Following the withdrawal of US military forces in August, Taliban fighters assumed control of practically all of Afghanistan. The Taliban swiftly took control of major cities, and by the 15th of August, the Taliban had taken control of Kabul, and the Afghan government had collapsed. The evacuation of many at-risk Afghans from Kabul's airport was hampered by chaos and violence. The Taliban's military triumphs in rural regions were expected and foreseen, but the conquest of Kabul and the immediate submission of the official Afghan authorities became the regional geopolitics' "black swan." Women’s rights and freedom as well as media and journalistic freedom was curtailed. Not only was it a big shock to the international political arena but to all of us watching news on TV in the comfort of our homes.
Analyzing the Afghanistan takeover by Taliban through the theoretical lens and further talking about the anarchy problématique, firstly we need to understand what one means by anarchy within the context of international relations? The reality that states are self-interested entities is signaled by anarchy in the international system. Because nation states are commonly seen as the primary actors in international affairs, an anarchical world would be one in which the state is the greatest authority. The state exists as a full sovereign over its people and territory, with total self-determination serving as its ultimate authority.
Realists see nations as the primary players in international affairs because they are concerned about their own security, pursue their own national interests, and compete for power. They also recognise that interests define power, and that power is defined as man's dominance over man. Viewing this from the realist perspective, the Afghanistan takeover would be considered an event that was bound to happen eventually because of the anarchic world order. Furthermore, Taliban acting as the state and fulfilling its very functions would also contribute to the realist understating of state and military. The US intervention can also be seen as interventionist within the state of Afghanistan. And therefore, from a realistic standpoint, the loss of Afghanistan is not a strategic disaster. In a new era of great-power confrontation, preventing any country from controlling the center of Eurasia or the Persian Gulf should be a goal of American grand strategy. A Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, emboldened by its victory over the US to expand its insurgency, is likely to sabotage Russian, Chinese, and Iranian ambitions for such dominance.
Liberalism is a naturally upbeat philosophical school that emphasizes the need for collaboration. It asserts that individuals and states have the right to self-determination and is founded on the fundamental ideas of liberty, fairness, and tolerance. It is a school of thought that emphasizes the significance of non-state actors as well as the impact domestic problems have on a country's international behavior. Human rights and international institutions are both regarded to be deserving of respect, and any liberal policy alternatives will reflect this. A liberalist perspective would argue and criticize the fall of a liberal democratic order and condemn the autocratic government of the Taliban government. Since the referent object here would be the free standing individual, it would be essential to note the oppression of the Taliban state towards its individuals. Furthermore, despite the Taliban's claim that it would form an inclusive government with all parties and ethnic groups represented, the interim acting government announced by the Taliban and supported by Pakistan is made up of members of a single ethnicity, formed solely at the Taliban's discretion, and shows no sign of inclusivity which further contributes to the liberalist understanding.
Constructivism basically emphasizes the significance of state identity, viewing foreign policy as an expression of that identity. These identities emerge socially as a result of interactions between nations and other international actors.Viewing the takeover from a constructivist perspective,they would try to rationalize why the takeover happened in the first place and intersubjectively try to find out an answer to that. Seeking aid from multilateral institutions and arranging for diplomatic talks would also be a constructivist understanding of the same.
In conclusion, all schools of thought look at the situation in Afghanistan differently and here I would also lean towards the liberalist perspective because curtailment of basic human rights of the citizens of Afghanistan, especially women.
References
“Afghanistan Peace Process.” n.d. United States Institute of Peace. Accessed May 6, 2022. https://www.usip.org/programs/afghanistan-peace-process.
Akhunzada, Haibatullah. 2022. “Taliban supreme leader urges world to recognise 'Islamic Emirate.'” Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/29/taliban-supreme-leader-urges-world-to-recognise-islamic.
“Everything you need to know about human rights in Afghanistan - Amnesty International Amnesty International.” n.d. Amnesty International. Accessed May 6, 2022. https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/asia-and-the-pacific/south-asia/afghanistan/report-afghanistan/.
Jawad, Hayatullah. 2021. “Afghanistan: The Consequences of Taliban Takeover in Afghanistan.” Friedrich Naumann Foundation. https://www.freiheit.org/south-asia/consequences-taliban-takeover-afghanistan.
Roth, Kenneth. n.d. “World Report 2022: Afghanistan.” Human Rights Watch. Accessed May 6, 2022. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/afghanistan.
“War in Afghanistan | Global Conflict Tracker.” n.d. Council on Foreign Relations. Accessed May 6, 2022. https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/war-afghanistan.
The Taliban's rise to statehood is no doubt a very crucial development and begs for further theoretical study.
ReplyDeleteI believe another dimension to perhaps add to the constructivist understanding you put forth could centers around state-identity. In case of the Afghan state, we must look at the Talibani agenda and what they themselves represent. To that end, we can sense a prevalence of anti-imperialist, Islamist nationalism which drives their policy. These identities, however are not natural to the Taliban. They only exist through binary opposites. The projection of said identity is reactionary to the influence of the US and their history. To the West, particularly to Afghanistan's former invaders, Taliban's rise in not just a "defeat" as far as power is concerned, but they represent a set of values and culture that the West sees as a threat. The meaning assigned to the Taliban 's rise by the American state is not that of a revolution to be celebrated but a rogue organization taking over a nation that could've very well joined the free world. The "othering" of the Taliban by the USA, i.e. calling them a threat, also influences greatly how we perceive their policy. So while the liberal world does harp about the human rights violations, a constructivist would see these narratives as constructed by the US.