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

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

Peace Processes

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

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

Thursday, February 18, 2021

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

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

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

Peace Processes

View All

Latest Publications

How the India-China Border Deal Impacts Their Ties and the U.S.

How the India-China Border Deal Impacts Their Ties and the U.S.

Thursday, October 31, 2024

Since a 2020 clash between Indian and Chinese troops along their countries’ long disputed border, known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC), friction has mounted between the two Asian powers. But the two sides reached a deal in late October to de-escalate tensions. Although the details remain murky, India and China have already pulled back troops from two key flashpoint areas on the Himalayan frontier. Still, it remains to be seen what this means for the broader, frosty India-China relationship. The U.S. and India have significantly strengthened security ties in recent years, in part responding to China’s rise and aggressive behavior in the region. So, Washington will be watching closely to see what comes next.

Type: Question and Answer

Global Policy

The Latest on Southeast Asia’s Transnational Cybercrime Crisis

The Latest on Southeast Asia’s Transnational Cybercrime Crisis

Wednesday, October 30, 2024

Increasing scrutiny and exposure of global internet scams based in Southeast Asia has sparked fast-moving developments to quash the schemes and countermoves by the organized gangs behind them. Recent months have seen crackdowns, arrests and internet cutoffs by law enforcement agencies and regional governments. Meanwhile, Cambodia and Myanmar continue to be the most egregious havens for criminal operations, while Laos seems to be demonstrating early signs of concern for the impact of organized crime on its sovereignty.

Type: Analysis

EconomicsGlobal PolicyHuman Rights

Kiribati’s President Wins Reelection: What Does it Mean for the U.S. and China?

Kiribati’s President Wins Reelection: What Does it Mean for the U.S. and China?

Wednesday, October 30, 2024

Kiribati President Taneti Maamau, reelected last week, will probably use his third term to continue strengthening ties with China. U.S. relations with Kiribati, however, remain less well established. Since last year, the number of U.S. embassies in the Pacific Islands has leapt from six to nine, reflecting the region’s higher priority to the United States as its concerns have grown about China’s engagement. But efforts to build a U.S. embassy in Kiribati — the closest country to Hawai‘i — have stalled because of Maamau’s government.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

Mona Yacoubian on the Middle East’s Dangerous Escalation Dynamic

Mona Yacoubian on the Middle East’s Dangerous Escalation Dynamic

Wednesday, October 30, 2024

Amid the latest exchange of strikes between Israel and Iran, the Middle East is “a region that really is on fire,” says USIP’s Mona Yacoubian. “There are no guardrails anymore … all of these different players are testing and probing each other to see what they can get away with. And that’s where the danger lies.”

Type: Podcast

What’s Next for Israel, Iran and Prospects for a Wider Middle East War?

What’s Next for Israel, Iran and Prospects for a Wider Middle East War?

Wednesday, October 30, 2024

Early Saturday morning in Tehran, Israel carried out what it called a series of “precise and targeted” airstrikes on Iranian military targets. This was the latest in a series of direct exchanges between Isarel and Iran in recent months. Israel Defense Forces struck 20 sites, including air defense batteries and radar, factories for missile and drone production, and weapons and aircraft launch sites. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that the attack had "severely damaged Iran’s defense capability and its ability to produce missiles.” The Iranian government announced the deaths of four military personnel and one civilian, but otherwise took a more measured response than might be expected.

Type: Question and Answer

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications