OPINION — Because the starting of the conflict in Ukraine, I’ve discovered the acquainted rhetoric supporting Ukraine’s proper to self-defense in opposition to Russian aggression harking back to the discourse that adopted America’s engagement in Afghanistan. From the outset, I apprehensive that Ukraine may expertise the identical trajectory: beneficiant assist early on, adopted by political fatigue and eventual “abandonment.” The sample of growth of dependency—the place the supported authorities is unable to maintain itself with out steady support—will be deeply damaging and go away a nation susceptible.
Regrettably, as an alternative of totally leveraging America’s affect to pursue an early diplomatic decision to the Ukraine battle, the Biden administration centered totally on army assist—an strategy that, whereas crucial in serving to Ukraine survive the preliminary invasion, could have contributed to the conflict’s prolongation. To make certain, U.S. management in rallying allies and delivering weapons enabled Ukraine to resist the darkest days and push again in opposition to Russia on a number of fronts. But the absence of a critical diplomatic initiative in parallel left untested whether or not a negotiated settlement might 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 conflict progressed, this strategy not solely extended the battle but additionally started to institutionalize Ukraine’s dependency on Western weapons and monetary support. Ukraine has since grow to be closely reliant on U.S. monetary support, weapons, and intelligence. But this assist has typically appeared unstable, often threatened by inside U.S. politics. Notably, President Donald Trump has repeatedly signaled a willingness to halt assist, 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 state of affairs Kabul confronted throughout the U.S.-Taliban negotiations below President Trump’s first time period. The U.S. held huge leverage in each conflicts and thus bore a big duty 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 are actually shaping Ukraine’s destiny.
President Trump has expressed robust curiosity in resolving the conflict in Ukraine and has solid himself as a “President of Peace.” Because the chief of probably the most highly effective nation on the planet, he does possess the power to affect the conflict’s trajectory. Nevertheless, the crucial 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 chargeable 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 indicators globally, about America’s reliability as a peace maker, negotiator and eventually associate.
Specialists are gathering at The Cipher Temporary’s NatSecEDGE convention June 5-6 in Austin, TX to speak about the way forward for conflict. Be part of the dialog.
Parallels in Negotiation Dynamics:
There are a number of notable parallels between the U.S. strategy to the Afghanistan peace course of and its present involvement within the Ukraine battle. Whereas the contexts differ, the patterns in negotiation techniques, remedy of allies, and use of leverage reveal putting 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 have interaction instantly with President Zelensky in Istanbul, insisting as an alternative on first reaching an understanding with the U.S., mirrors the Taliban’s place throughout the Doha talks. The Taliban demanded negotiations solely with america earlier than any engagement with the Afghan authorities. This tactic successfully marginalized the nationwide authorities, granting the Taliban higher legitimacy. In Ukraine’s case, ought to Russia safe a take care of Washington that renders the U.S. impartial or much less engaged, it might seemingly tilt the battlefield dynamics in Moscow’s favor. We witnessed the same shift in Afghanistan, the place repeated Afghan objections to their exclusion have 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, fairly than acknowledging reliable 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 crucial of the Ukrainian authorities. This public framing will be damaging. It echoes the stress confronted by the Afghan authorities to make main concessions—equivalent to the discharge of 5,000 Taliban prisoners—regardless of warnings from Afghan management. In each circumstances, 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 buildings and army 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 assist 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 support 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 an alternative be remembered as a geopolitical failure.
Join The Cipher Temporary’s Nightcap publication: one of the best ways to unwind every single day whereas nonetheless staying on top of things on nationwide safety.Join at this time.
Suggestions:
Primarily based on the teachings discovered from Afghanistan, the next suggestion is essential for avoiding related pitfalls in Ukraine:
Firstly, the U.S. should keep away from the crucial mistake made throughout the Afghanistan peace course of—negotiating instantly with adversaries whereas sidelining reliable 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 strategy not solely demoralized U.S. allies but additionally delegitimized them within the eyes of their very own individuals and the worldwide neighborhood. In Ukraine, america should undertake a unique course. Any peace initiative should place the Ukrainian authorities and the individuals of Ukraine on the middle of negotiations—not as a passive recipient of choices made elsewhere, however as an energetic, equal stakeholder. Peace achieved with out the consent and management of either side of the battle—the Ukrainian individuals and its adversaries—will likely 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 will 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 have been sidelined, and adversaries gained the upper-hand. The U.S. management as at all times, have to be principled, constant, and anchored in classes discovered from previous missteps. If managed correctly, 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 correct deal.
Learn extra expert-driven nationwide safety insights, perspective and evaluation in The Cipher Temporary as a result of Nationwide Safety is Everybody’s Enterprise.