The sudden breakdown of potential peace talks on Afghanistan just a day after the Taliban triumphantly announced the opening of an office in Qatar that was to be the hub of those efforts raises a more profound question: does the United States want a negotiated peace more than either of the parties?

Taliban peace talks
Photo courtesy of NY Times

Whatever one’s thoughts on the likelihood of a peace process, the agreement to open the political office in Doha seemed like a triumph of American diplomacy, which had shown persistence, discretion, and flexibility in ultimately attaining the objective officials had sought for the past 2 1/2 years.

But several hours later, everything was in heaps. Not only had Karzai backed away from talks with the Taliban, he suspended negotiations with the U.S. over the post-2014 troop presence. This both signaled the extent of his displeasure and will raise the costs of resuming both processes.

The reason for the sudden breakdown was a press conference that the Taliban gave to announce the opening of the office. They called it the “political office of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan,” hung a banner saying the same behind them, and appeared with the Qatari deputy foreign minister, whose presence appeared to endorse a de facto embassy. As I wrote in my blog post last week, this is precisely what Karzai feared the office would become.

Karzai does not trust a U.S.-brokered peace process that excludes his government, and he was afraid that the Taliban office would be used more to legitimize the Taliban by granting it international recognition than to advance negotiations. His fears were immediately justified.

On the weekend of June 8 in Doha, on the sidelines of the U.S.-World Islamic Forum, U.S. diplomats had failed to secure President Karzai’s agreement to recognize the office in Doha, which was first proposed at the end of 2011. It was to serve as a venue for negotiations between the Taliban and the Afghan government to find a political solution to the war.

On June 18, the White House announced that the Doha office would open. The spur was a statement by the Taliban that they supported a peace process and opposed the use of Afghan territory to threaten other countries. Qatar also made a statement. There was no statement from Kabul, but Karzai had obviously finally provided his consent.

U.S. and Qatari diplomats are apparently scrambling to repair the damage. But it will be that much harder now to secure Karzai’s consent and active cooperation, as well as his cooperation on other issues.

If the U.S. wants an agreement more than either of the parties, and it expends political and other capital to get the parties to the table, then it may run out of capital long before the parties even approach agreement.

Scott Smith is deputy director of USIP’s Afghanistan program.

Related Publications

Baghdad Is Ready for a New Chapter in U.S.-Iraq Relations

Baghdad Is Ready for a New Chapter in U.S.-Iraq Relations

Thursday, April 25, 2024

Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani met last week with U.S. President Joe Biden at the White House as part of a weeklong visit aimed at strengthening bilateral relations. The visit occurred amid several historic anniversaries and dangerous developments in the Middle East. April marks the 21st anniversary of the toppling of Saddam Hussein. Since 2003, the U.S.-Iraq relationship has witnessed many ups and downs. Even as tensions persist, particularly in relation to the U.S. troop presence in the country, al-Sudani’s visit — which featured the largest delegation Iraqis have brought to Washington — demonstrates Iraqi will to start a new chapter in the strategic partnership that goes beyond security.

Type: Analysis

Democracy & GovernanceGlobal Policy

USIP Explains: Community Dialogue in Northern Sinjar

USIP Explains: Community Dialogue in Northern Sinjar

Thursday, April 11, 2024

Ten years after ISIS’ genocide against them, the wounds of the Yazidi community in Iraq’s Sinjar district remain fresh as thousands remain displaced and even more await justice for the crimes perpetrated against them. Meanwhile, despite living in peaceful coexistence prior to ISIS’ campaign, the conflict planted seeds of division among Sinjar’s various tribes and communities — resulting in tensions that threatened to tear the district apart even after ISIS’ defeat.

Type: Blog

Mediation, Negotiation & DialoguePeace Processes

Iraq’s Provincial Council Elections: The Way Forward in Nineveh Province

Iraq’s Provincial Council Elections: The Way Forward in Nineveh Province

Wednesday, December 13, 2023

On December 18, Iraqis will elect members of the provincial councils, the highest oversight bodies of subnational government and key providers of public services. The elections are the first at the provincial level in over a decade and come in the wake of the 2019 anti-government protests that resulted in the dissolution of the provincial councils following demands from the protesters who accused them of corruption. Recent findings from the U.S. Institute of Peace’s Conflict and Stabilization Monitoring Framework in Nineveh Province reveal that candidates are facing a distrustful electorate that is lacking confidence in state institutions.

Type: Analysis

Democracy & Governance

View All Publications