Almost 20 years after the United States ousted the Taliban regime, the first direct peace talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government began in Doha, Qatar in September 2020. The Taliban, Afghan government, and international forces have fought to a deadly stalemate, with both battle deaths and civilian casualties near record highs in recent years. The United States agreed to remove combat forces by May 2021 in exchange for Taliban guarantees on counterterrorism and the opening of formal negotiations with the Afghan government and other political stakeholders about a peace agreement and a path toward a ceasefire. After many delays, these negotiations opened this fall.

Afghanistan

This nascent peace process could be an inflection point in more than 40 years of conflict that started with a communist coup in 1978. Diverse Afghan factions will try to negotiate a political agreement that balances power among different ethnic groups, religious visions, and economic and social outlooks that span a rural-urban divide.

The last time Afghans sat down to renegotiate a structure for governance was the 2001 Bonn Agreement, which established the current democratic political order but excluded the Taliban. This time, the Taliban are part of the negotiation, but Afghanistan has changed dramatically since the Taliban were in power in the late 1990s. It is now a sovereign nation with a citizenry whose expectations have evolved over the past 20 years of development, fledgling democratic politics, and engagement with the international community.

Supporting an inclusive and sustainable peace process is a key priority of the USIP Afghanistan program. USIP is directly engaged in top-down, bottom-up, and international efforts to help Afghans achieve a political settlement that brings an end to over four decades of violent conflict. USIP has supported Afghan leaders with comparative lessons learned and negotiation tools that can help identify and overcome the main sticking points in talks. At the same time, USIP has worked to empower local peacebuilders and activists across Afghanistan to engage in direct action for peace. USIP also provides research and recommendations to U.S officials and other key international stakeholders on ways to address the main drivers of conflict and reduce threats to national security.  

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:  

Many of these are common to other peace processes, 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 stakeholders. The resources on each page are offered to negotiators and others with an interest in Afghanistan to help facilitate a political agreement 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: Scott Smith; Johnny Walsh; Belquis Ahmadi; 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 Processes; Mediation, 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

India, Pakistan Watch Warily as Taliban Move to Takeover

India, Pakistan Watch Warily as Taliban Move to Takeover

Monday, August 2, 2021

By: Vikram J. Singh; Ambassador Richard Olson; Tamanna Salikuddin

The Taliban’s rapid advances have caught the region and the United States off guard. The deterioration in security has forced India, along with many other countries, to retrench its diplomatic presence in the country, closing consulates outside of the capital of Kabul. There have been conflicting reports over the past month over whether or not Indian officials have engaged in talks with Taliban representatives in Qatar. Afghanistan’s neighbors all prefer a negotiated political settlement to the conflict but are preparing for the worst and could look to armed Afghan factions to protect their interests. Meanwhile, Kabul and Islamabad are blaming each other for the spiraling security situation.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Is there a Negotiated Path to Democratic Coexistence in Venezuela?

Is there a Negotiated Path to Democratic Coexistence in Venezuela?

Monday, August 2, 2021

By: Keith Mines

The scale of the Venezuela crisis is unique in recent history, with wartime indicators of hunger, refugees, and human rights abuses but conventional violent conflict largely absent. At the heart of the crisis is a 20-year struggle between the Chavista regime and the democratic opposition, characterized for most of these two decades by each side attempting to eliminate the other from the political map. Negotiations are seen by most outside observers as the only way the conflict will definitively end and there have been consistent efforts to bring the two sides to the table, most recently in Barbados and Oslo in 2019.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

Four Years After ISIS, Iraq’s Tal Afar Remains Riven by Communal Divisions

Four Years After ISIS, Iraq’s Tal Afar Remains Riven by Communal Divisions

Monday, August 2, 2021

By: Osama Gharizi; Joshua Levkowitz

Iraq is a country beset by a host of political, security, economic and social challenges, including addressing the human legacy of the Islamic State’s (ISIS) rampage through the country just a few years ago. Almost four years after the liberation of Nineveh’s Tal Afar district from ISIS control, feelings of marginalization, neglect and exclusion persist among communities in the region, epitomizing how such feelings have driven ethnic and sectarian tensions and conflict in post-2003 Iraq. Recognition of these sentiments and an understanding of the factors underpinning them, can help communities in the district allay these drivers of tension and move forward together.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Reconciliation; Fragility & Resilience

Beyond Security: The Quest for a Sustained, Strategic U.S.-Iraq Partnership

Beyond Security: The Quest for a Sustained, Strategic U.S.-Iraq Partnership

Thursday, July 29, 2021

By: Sarhang Hamasaeed

On Monday, President Joe Biden received Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi at the Oval Office to strengthen bilateral relations and discuss matters of mutual interest, key among them being the future of U.S. troops in Iraq. Despite widespread thinking that Iraq and the Middle East do not rank high in the mix of the Biden administration’s priorities, there have been clear signals that Iraq remains important enough to the United States and that Kadhimi and his government are partners that the United States can work with and should support. While most of the media attention focused on the announcement of the change in U.S. force posture in Iraq, the key takeaway from this week’s meeting is that the United States and Iraq seek to maintain their strategic partnership — and build on it.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Global Policy; Fragility & Resilience

View All Publications