Move Swiftly Run Inside To Make Advances: Do you know what is behind the Taliban’s rapid rise? a leading authority on the Taliban’s rise and the ramifications it will have on Afghanistan. The August 15th, 1:30 p.m., editor’s note: Sunday saw the Taliban seize control of Kabul as Afghanistan’s president fled and the country’s government disintegrated. Here’s where you can keep up with the most recent Developments.
Large swaths of Afghanistan are falling under the control of the Taliban. Nine provincial capitals have apparently been taken seized by Taliban fighters in the last few days. It is the culmination of a months-long campaign that has stretched Afghan government soldiers to the limit. About half of Afghanistan’s 400 districts have been taken over by the Taliban since the United States began removing its soldiers from the nation at the beginning of May. As the United States draws to a close on its two-decade campaign in Afghanistan, the atmosphere is tense. It’s hard to know what the future holds for this country, but the conflict and humanitarian crisis will continue.
In spite of the US’s long-awaited exit, the Taliban’s rapid gains and the retreat of Afghan forces cannot be fully explained by this. I chatted with Andrew Watkins, Afghanistan’s senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, to get his take on the Taliban’s progress and what it means for the country’s future. As he indicated, the Taliban were able to seize these provincial capitals because of the mistakes made by the US and Afghan governments, as well as other factors. Our chat has been modified and reduced to make it easier to understand.
Jen Kirby is the Person in Question: The Taliban’s seizure of provincial capitals has been widely reported in the media.
Where do things stand right now, A big Question?
Andrew Watkins: The question is enormous, but it’s a good place to start. What is the current state of affairs? To get caught up in the fall of provincial capitals would be a mistake because this week’s events are nothing more than a continuation of the past three months. Three months ago, the Taliban launched an offensive campaign that has spread across the country at an unparalleled rate since the United States invaded in late 2001.
The nitty-gritty of who has control of what land is a hot-button issue, and it’s a hot-button one that everyone nitpicks over appropriately. Measurement of the Afghan government’s grip over district centers is an imperfect one. Nearly all of Afghanistan’s districts have what’s known as a district administrative center, out of the country’s total of just under 400. It’s a small town with a square mileage that rivals that of states like Rhode Island in the United States.
This district center map has been used by the Afghan government for a long time to demonstrate their control, but in reality, they may just have a few buildings in a district center that are defended by a tiny military or police force, or perhaps just a militia that the government outfits and pays. There you have it. For miles around in either direction, this is the only kind of governance that exists in that territory.
These districts have been taken over by the Taliban. However, to assert that the Taliban now control all of the districts they’ve taken is inaccurate, as many of these areas do not have a shadow government in place. A garrison of their troops has not been left in the region. The Afghan army or police may flee, surrender, retreat, or just return home as a result of them. What matters most is not how much control the Taliban has!
Do you think the Afghan Govt has a loss
Andrew Watkins’s
If you draw the map so that every time the government goes, the Taliban take control of the entire area, the picture becomes incredibly deceiving. The government’s losses may be measured, though. More than 200 of the country’s 400 districts have either been booted out or abandoned by the administration. Just three months ago, that happened. How did we end up here? is a natural question to ask. Why did nine out of 34 provincial capitals suddenly fall to the Taliban in a single week?
Jen Kirby is a writer
There are significant swathes of Afghanistan that are not under the full control of the Taliban, but rather, they are under the Taliban’s influence. It’s merely that the Taliban are closing in on the cities because the little village outposts have all been wiped off one by one.
Andrew Watkins’s
That is the case. You can’t simply look at what’s going on, but you have to look at its significance as well. If there are fewer roadblocks to their progress in the country’s rural areas, they will have fewer speed bumps on their trip to the city’s doorstep, which is where they are currently. There is a “nuclear deal insight” with Iran, according to the United States, but it must be completed quickly. Unless a deal is reached in the next several weeks, Iran’s “ongoing nuclear achievements” will make it hard to restore the 2015 accord, the State Department says as talks restart.
U.S. negotiators said Monday that a deal with Iran on its nuclear program was conceivable, but that an accord had to be reached quickly as Tehran continues to enhance its capabilities. Negotiations will restart in Vienna after being suspended at the end of last month with the participation of China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, Iran, and the United States. Parties have recently touted progress in their efforts to resurrect the 2015 agreement that was designed to prevent Iran from attaining an atomic bomb, a goal it has long rejected.
US State Department spokesperson: “A deal that solves both parties’ key concerns is in sight, but if it is not reached in the coming weeks, Iran’s continuous nuclear advancements will make it difficult for us to return to the JCPOA” referring to the 2015 framework agreement. There have been negotiations in Vienna since the beginning of the year, with the United States playing a minor role.
‘It’s the Moment of Truth’
On the other hand, according to experts, Iran has already strayed so far from the terms of the 2015 agreement that they are just weeks away from acquiring the raw materials needed to build an atomic bomb. Israel thinks that even if the nuclear agreement is restored, Iran might have enough fissile material within a few months to build a nuclear bomb, according to an Israeli television broadcast over the weekend. The initial agreement aimed to prevent Iran from accumulating enough nuclear material for a bomb for at least a year.
President Obama’s national security adviser said Monday that Iran might return to an agreement on its nuclear program, which would mean that the United States would lose its leverage in pushing for a “longer and stronger” accord with Iran. “We need to be prepared for every possible outcome, whether or not an agreement is struck,” he said. At the same time, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said that even if an agreement is struck with the United States, Israel will continue to use its right to self-defense. In this last stretch, the United States has wanted direct negotiations, while Iran has requested that they stay indirect.
In 2018, after Trump removed the United States from the agreement and put new sanctions on Iran, the country began to renegotiate its agreement and increase its nuclear operations. When we can reach an agreement will be determined by the responses that the United States provides to Vienna tomorrow, according to Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh.” There has been a lot of progress in several areas of the Vienna negotiations, Khatibzadeh told reporters, including guarantees that Iran desires that a future US government would not breach the agreement once again.
