On August 15, 2021, the Taliban retook control of Afghanistan nearly 20 years after the United States ousted its previous regime and the movement regrouped as a formidable insurgency. The Taliban’s military victory occurred amid the final stages of the withdrawal of U.S. and international forces. The Taliban quickly appointed an exclusive government comprised solely of its own leadership. Their rank and file began to enforce harsh social restrictions amid reports of abuses and reprisal killings. As the Taliban entered Kabul, the Afghan economy collapsed after foreign aid withdrew along with international troops. The Taliban resisted Western conditions on human rights and inclusive governance, complicating diplomatic engagement and efforts to deliver desperately needed foreign aid.

Afghanistan

The United States’ attempts to sustain a formal peace process between the Taliban and the former Afghan government grew defunct when the insurgent movement marched on Kabul. But even after the collapse of the Islamic Republic and the re-establishment of the Islamic Emirate, peacebuilding efforts remain critical in Afghanistan.

The country has entered an unpredictable new phase in the decades-long, elusive effort to achieve peace and stability. The Taliban’s takeover ended the war associated with their insurgency, but the country’s underlying drivers of conflict remain unresolved. The Taliban’s nascent government has marginalized ethnic and political groups outside of its own core membership, excluded women from politics and increasingly from the public sphere, alienated the country’s largest foreign donors, committed war atrocities and continues to harbor international terrorist groups. Violent resistance has percolated across the country, with ousted former military leaders, ethnic militia commanders and extremist groups like the local branch of the Islamic State all keen to contest the Taliban’s authority.

Supporting an inclusive and sustainable peace in Afghanistan therefore remains a key priority of the USIP Afghanistan program. Our goal is to encourage efforts to help Afghans establish inclusive political structures that bring an end to over four decades of violent conflict, protect human rights and improve access to basic services. Achieving a stable peace also has clear national security benefits for the United States. Greater stability leads to fewer safe havens that terrorists can use to plan and organize attacks.

A sustainable peace will need to address at least five key categories of issues that have been heavily contested over the past decades of conflict: 

These factors are common keys to success or failure in other post-conflict and fragile states, and some comparative lessons can be drawn, but each has unique attributes in the Afghan context. USIP has conducted research in each of these issue areas, drawing on top subject matter experts and consultations with diverse Afghan and international stakeholders. The resources on each page are offered to Afghans and others with an interest in Afghanistan to help facilitate positive political and civic discourse and a peaceful future.

Related Publications

Can Blinken’s Letter Jump-start the Afghan Peace Process?

Can Blinken’s Letter Jump-start the Afghan Peace Process?

Thursday, March 11, 2021

By: Belquis Ahmadi;  Scott Smith;  Johnny Walsh;  Ambassador Richard Olson

With intra-Afghan talks gridlocked and the U.S. troop withdrawal deadline looming, Secretary of State Antony Blinken proposed new plans to advance the peace process in a letter to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. The letter recommends several efforts to “move matters more fundamentally and quickly” toward peace, including a U.N.-convened conference of key regional actors, a senior-level meeting between the Afghan government and the Taliban hosted by Turkey and a 90-day reduction in violence to head off the Taliban’s annual spring offensive. Blinken also recommended an interim power-sharing government composed of Taliban and other Afghan leaders.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

Afghan Peace Talks: Could a Third-Party Mediator Help?

Afghan Peace Talks: Could a Third-Party Mediator Help?

Thursday, February 18, 2021

By: Scott Smith

At present, the Afghan peace negotiations (APN) between the Afghan government and the Taliban do not involve any third-party presence beyond hosting and supporting roles. The parties to the conflict and members of the international community might consider the benefits of a neutral, third-party mediator to help resolve the impasses that have dogged and delayed the negotiations so far. While the presence of a mediator does not guarantee success, there are very few examples of a significant peace agreement that has been reached without some sort of third-party facilitation or mediation.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace ProcessesMediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

How to Prevent Fresh Hostilities as Afghan Peace Talks Progress

How to Prevent Fresh Hostilities as Afghan Peace Talks Progress

Tuesday, February 9, 2021

By: Meghan L. O’Sullivan;  Vikram J. Singh;  Johnny Walsh

Many peace processes experience at least short-term reversions to violence. Even a successful Afghan peace process will be at risk of the same, especially in the likely event that the United States and its allies continue to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. Ideally, such troop reductions would move in parallel with de-escalatory measures by the Taliban and other armed actors on the ground. A healthy dose of realism is in order, however. Though the Taliban and others in Afghanistan are unlikely to ever fully disarm or demobilize, persistent resources and attention from the United States and its allies can help prevent any regression to full-scale violence during the years of any peace agreement’s implementation.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

View All

Latest Publications

Mary Glantz on the G20 Summit

Mary Glantz on the G20 Summit

Wednesday, November 23, 2022

By: Mary Glantz, Ph.D.

The joint leaders’ statement at the G20 Summit, while largely symbolic, showed that “Russia [is] a lot more isolated than perhaps we’d been led to suspect,” says USIP’s Mary Glantz, adding that Russia’s anti-imperialist justification for the war in Ukraine is “not getting the traction we thought it was.”

Type: Podcast

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Event Extra: Syria’s Brutal Civil War and the Elusive Quest for Justice

Event Extra: Syria’s Brutal Civil War and the Elusive Quest for Justice

Monday, November 21, 2022

By: Adam Gallagher

In 2016, the U.N. General Assembly established the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism for Syria (IIIM), after vetoes in the U.N. Security Council prevented referral of the Syrian situation to the International Criminal Court. IIIM Head Catherine Marchi-Uhel discusses the obstacles to this work, the progress made to date and what lessons it can provide for delivering accountability and justice in other conflicts.

Type: Podcast

Justice, Security & Rule of Law

Three Key Takeaways from the Biden-Xi Summit

Three Key Takeaways from the Biden-Xi Summit

Thursday, November 17, 2022

By: Rosie Levine;  Jennifer Staats, Ph.D.;  Alex Stephenson

With the U.S.-China relationship at its lowest point in decades, the American and Chinese leaders met this week on the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Indonesia for their first face-to-face summit since Joe Biden was elected. The deteriorating bilateral relationship became particularly concerning in August when China cut key lines of communication between Washington and Beijing, including on critical military and climate issues, following House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Global Policy

Losing Facts to Fiction: Nationalism, Misinformation, and Conspiracy Theories in Pakistan

Losing Facts to Fiction: Nationalism, Misinformation, and Conspiracy Theories in Pakistan

Thursday, November 17, 2022

By: Asfandyar Mir, Ph.D.;  Niloufer Siddiqui, Ph.D.

Misinformation and conspiracy theories have become staples of mainstream politics in numerous countries around the world—democracies and autocracies alike. Pakistan is no exception. This report examines the causes of pervasive belief in misinformation in Pakistan—particularly nationalistic misinformation—and the consequences for the country’s relations with its neighbors, the risk of international or domestic conflict, and attitudes toward Pakistan’s many ethnic minority groups. The report also discusses steps that policymakers can take to counteract misinformation.

Type: Special Report

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications