OPINION — For the reason that starting of the warfare in Ukraine, I’ve discovered the acquainted rhetoric supporting Ukraine’s proper to self-defense towards Russian aggression harking back to the discourse that adopted America’s engagement in Afghanistan. From the outset, I nervous that Ukraine may expertise the identical trajectory: beneficiant help early on, adopted by political fatigue and eventual “abandonment.” The sample of improvement of dependency—the place the supported authorities is unable to maintain itself with out steady help—might be deeply damaging and go away a nation susceptible.
Regrettably, as a substitute of totally leveraging America’s affect to pursue an early diplomatic decision to the Ukraine battle, the Biden administration targeted totally on navy help—an method that, whereas essential in serving to Ukraine survive the preliminary invasion, could have contributed to the warfare’s prolongation. To make certain, U.S. management in rallying allies and delivering weapons enabled Ukraine to face up to the darkest days and push again towards Russia on a number of fronts. But the absence of a severe diplomatic initiative in parallel left untested whether or not a negotiated settlement may need been potential earlier than the battle escalated. Whereas it’s unclear whether or not Putin would have engaged in good-faith talks, neglecting diplomacy altogether restricted strategic choices and ceded the initiative to the battlefield.
Because the warfare progressed, this method not solely extended the battle but in addition started to institutionalize Ukraine’s dependency on Western weapons and monetary help. Ukraine has since develop into closely reliant on U.S. monetary help, weapons, and intelligence. But this help has usually appeared unstable, often threatened by inside U.S. politics. Notably, President Donald Trump has repeatedly signaled a willingness to halt help, a place that intensified following political tensions between his administration and President Volodymyr Zelensky. This rising reliance locations Kyiv in a susceptible place—strikingly just like the scenario Kabul confronted through the U.S.-Taliban negotiations beneath President Trump’s first time period. The U.S. held huge leverage in each conflicts and thus bore a major accountability for his or her outcomes. As somebody who was concerned within the Afghanistan peace course of and follows Ukraine peace efforts carefully, I see a troubling resemblance between Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad’s dealings with the Taliban, and the way in which American politics at the moment are shaping Ukraine’s destiny.
President Trump has expressed robust curiosity in resolving the warfare in Ukraine and has forged himself as a “President of Peace.” Because the chief of essentially the most highly effective nation on the planet, he does possess the power to affect the warfare’s trajectory. Nevertheless, the essential query stays: what sort of peace is being pursued? Will it mirror the end result in Afghanistan, the place the U.S. successfully handed over energy to the very group accountable for the 9/11 assaults, sidelining its allies and undermining their legitimacy? The U.S. should proceed with authority—not one other “Doha-style” deal which might ship harmful alerts globally, about America’s reliability as a peace maker, negotiator and eventually associate.
Specialists are gathering at The Cipher Transient’s NatSecEDGE convention June 5-6 in Austin, TX to speak about the way forward for warfare. Be part of the dialog.
Parallels in Negotiation Dynamics:
There are a number of notable parallels between the U.S. method to the Afghanistan peace course of and its present involvement within the Ukraine battle. Whereas the contexts differ, the patterns in negotiation techniques, therapy of allies, and use of leverage reveal hanging similarities. These shared dynamics provide vital classes—classes that, if ignored, may result in repeated strategic failures. Three key parallels stand out:
1. Russia’s Insistence with the U.S. Led Talks:
President Putin’s refusal to interact straight with President Zelensky in Istanbul, insisting as a substitute on first reaching an understanding with the U.S., mirrors the Taliban’s place through the Doha talks. The Taliban demanded negotiations solely with the USA earlier than any engagement with the Afghan authorities. This tactic successfully marginalized the nationwide authorities, granting the Taliban larger legitimacy. In Ukraine’s case, ought to Russia safe a cope with Washington that renders the U.S. impartial or much less engaged, it might possible tilt the battlefield dynamics in Moscow’s favor. We witnessed the same shift in Afghanistan, the place repeated Afghan objections to their exclusion had been dismissed as obstructionist to the peace talks. I recall a number of conferences on the presidential palace in Kabul, the place Ambassador Khalilzad emphasised that “the U.S. doesn’t want anybody’s permission to barter with the Taliban or to withdraw its troops.” This narrative grew to become a rhetorical weapon to close down legitimate considerations about an orderly and inclusive peace course of.
2. Public Discrediting of Allies:
One other shared sample is the notion of “undermining allies.” In Afghanistan, Ambassador Khalilzad publicly criticized the Afghan authorities—particularly President Ashraf Ghani—for being an impediment to peace, moderately than acknowledging legit considerations. Ghani’s polarizing management fashion made him a simple goal, permitting Khalilzad’s narrative to achieve traction amongst Afghan elites and the general public. In Ukraine, the tone of public discourse from U.S. officers, together with the President, has at instances appeared dismissive or essential of the Ukrainian authorities. This public framing might be damaging. It echoes the strain confronted by the Afghan authorities to make main concessions—corresponding to the discharge of 5,000 Taliban prisoners—regardless of warnings from Afghan management. In each instances, U.S. rhetoric has eroded the morale of associate forces and given adversaries the higher hand in psychological warfare. In Afghanistan, this contributed on to the collapse of state constructions and navy cohesion. Language issues. Classes from Afghanistan ought to inform a extra cautious, respectful U.S. posture in Ukraine.
3. Conditioning Assist and Misusing Leverage:
Threats to droop help for Ukraine don’t advance peace. They embolden adversaries and sow uncertainty. American leverage ought to be used to finish violence, not threat enabling it. Any withdrawal of help ought to be tied to the profitable cessation of hostilities and institution of a viable simply peace. In any other case, efforts at diplomacy threat failing, and President Trump’s envisioned “peace legacy” could as a substitute be remembered as a geopolitical failure.
Join The Cipher Transient’s Nightcap publication: one of the best ways to unwind every single day whereas nonetheless staying on top of things on nationwide safety.Join as we speak.
Suggestions:
Based mostly on the teachings realized from Afghanistan, the next suggestion is essential for avoiding comparable pitfalls in Ukraine:
Firstly, the U.S. should keep away from the essential mistake made through the Afghanistan peace course of—negotiating straight with adversaries whereas sidelining legit nationwide governments. Within the case of Afghanistan, excluding the Afghan authorities and the Afghan individuals from early phases of the U.S.-Taliban talks severely weakened its authority, emboldened the Taliban, and contributed to the collapse of the Afghan state. This method not solely demoralized U.S. allies but in addition delegitimized them within the eyes of their very own individuals and the worldwide group. In Ukraine, the USA should undertake a distinct course. Any peace initiative should place the Ukrainian authorities and the individuals of Ukraine on the heart of negotiations—not as a passive recipient of selections made elsewhere, however as an energetic, equal stakeholder. Peace achieved with out the consent and management of each side of the battle—the Ukrainian individuals and its adversaries—will probably be fragile, not sustainable, and short-lived.
Secondly, public messaging should mirror respect and unity. Criticizing allies in public, whereas signaling tolerance or engagement with aggressors behind closed doorways, undermines belief, morale, and credibility. Strategic ambiguity might be exploited by adversaries to sow discord, because it was by the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Ukraine deserves a peace course of that’s inclusive, dignified, and respectful of its sovereignty. The world can’t afford a repeat of the Kabul situation—the place allies had been sidelined, and adversaries gained the upper-hand. The U.S. management as all the time, have to be principled, constant, and anchored in classes realized from previous missteps. If managed properly, the peace course of in Ukraine may certainly mark a transformative legacy for American diplomacy, not solely because the associate to depend on however as a negotiator with making the best deal.
Learn extra expert-driven nationwide safety insights, perspective and evaluation in The Cipher Transient as a result of Nationwide Safety is Everybody’s Enterprise.