Recent positive developments in the Afghan peace process have renewed hopes that the country’s 17-year-old conflict could come to a close. Direct negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban, however, are likely to involve complex constitutional questions. This Special Report provides a practical resource to guide Afghan and international policymakers’ thinking on crucial aspects of a possible peace agenda.

Summary

  • Following several months of US-Taliban talks on the international dimensions of the Afghan conflict, attention is expected to increasingly turn to the goal of intra-Afghan negotiations.
  • During 2018, the Afghan government and the Taliban separately released their most detailed visions for peace to date. A key sticking point is likely to be the possible review of Afghanistan’s constitution offered by the Afghan government.
  • Key questions include who would draft constitutional amendments, how these amendments would be approved, and how existing amendment procedures might be followed. These questions are likely to become proxy battlegrounds in the political contest over the legitimacy of the existing constitutional order.
  • The main substantive issues that could be raised in a constitutional review include the organization of the Afghan state; the fundamental rights of Afghan citizens, especially women; and Afghanistan’s foreign policy orientation.
  • The role of the Taliban in the Afghan political system immediately following the signing of a potential peace agreement will also be a fulcrum point for negotiations. This issue broadly comes down to the government’s proposal for the demobilization and integration of the Taliban into the current order and the group’s controversial calls for an interim government.
  • Afghan stakeholders should devote early efforts to developing common positions on these key procedural and substantive issues. They should also seek to ascertain to what extent Taliban positions on political and social issues have evolved since they ruled Afghanistan.
  • If and when intra-Afghan peace talks begin, preparation on these key issues could reap important strategic benefits for Afghanistan relative to security, stability, national cohesion, and social uplift.

About the Report

The Afghan government has expressed a conditional willingness to negotiate a review of the nation’s constitution and to integrate the Taliban into the Afghan polity as part of potential peace talks. Supported by USIP’s Asia Center, this report provides Afghan and international policymakers with a practical resource to address procedural and substantive issues implicated by this part of an intra-Afghan peace process.

About the Author

Sean Kane worked for the United Nations in Afghanistan from 2012 to 2014. He was also an adviser to the 2006–7 Iraqi constitutional review process and facilitated local constitutional dialogues in Libya. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations or any other organization.

Related Publications

Afghanistan: Can Central Asia Help Spur Peace with the Taliban?

Afghanistan: Can Central Asia Help Spur Peace with the Taliban?

Tuesday, July 28, 2020

By: Adam Gallagher

Afghanistan’s peace process could be taking a major step forward in August with the potential commencement of intra-Afghan talks, said the U.S. chief negotiator on Friday. “This is an important moment for Afghanistan and for the region—perhaps a defining moment,” said Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad. Peace in Afghanistan would redound to the benefit of the entire region. As the peace process stumbles forward, one critical but often overlooked element is the role of Afghanistan’s Central Asian neighbors.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

Legislature and Legislative Elections in Afghanistan: An Analysis

Legislature and Legislative Elections in Afghanistan: An Analysis

Wednesday, July 8, 2020

By: A. Farid Tookhy

Afghanistan’s newest Wolesi Jirga—the lower house of the National Assembly—boasts a younger and more educated membership than those elected in either 2005 or 2010. Its representativeness, however, is uneven and problematic. This report offers a comparative profile of the Wolesi Jirgas elected in 2005, 2010, and 2018, highlighting issues salient to the reforms Afghanistan needs to undertake if it is to hold credible national elections that yield truly representative elected institutions.

Type: Special Report

Democracy & Governance

U.S., Russian interests overlap in Afghanistan. So, why offer bounties to the Taliban?

U.S., Russian interests overlap in Afghanistan. So, why offer bounties to the Taliban?

Tuesday, July 7, 2020

By: Andrew Wilder

Recent intelligence reports indicating that Russian bounties paid to the Taliban to kill U.S. troops have bolstered American and Afghan officials long-held allegations that Moscow has been engaged in clandestine operations to undermine the U.S. mission in Afghanistan. Russia’s support for the Taliban, however, has largely been tactical in nature. Both Washington and Moscow ultimately have a converging strategic interest in a relatively stable Afghanistan without a long-term U.S. presence that will not be a haven for transnational terrorists. USIP’s Andrew Wilder looks at what this means for the decades-long Afghan conflict.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Global Policy

View All Publications