Donald Trump, the President of the United States, has emphasized the necessity of reclaiming American military equipment from the Taliban twice in the past week during two important meetings. He had previously made such remarks on one occasion, but this time, he issued the warning with clearer language and more details. He even assigned a person named “Dock” to carry out this mission. Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC),” Trump referred to Dock, saying, “He can do this job. He is an entrepreneur.” Although Dock’s full identity remains unclear, Trump’s remarks suggest that, being a businessman himself, he is meticulous in financial transactions.
More significantly, in the first cabinet meeting of his administration, Trump explicitly discussed the need to reclaim American weapons, expressing deep regret over the loss of Bagram Air Base and China’s alleged presence there. He also described Afghanistan under Taliban rule as the second or third largest arms seller in the world after the United States, a noteworthy and intriguing claim. In all three instances where Trump has mentioned reclaiming weapons, he has tied the issue to the delivery or non-delivery of funds to the Taliban, implying that the group cannot benefit from both privileges simultaneously and must choose between money or weapons. Both are considered vital lifelines for the Taliban.
Why does Trump repeatedly raise the issue of American weapons?
- Since mid-August 2021, Trump has consistently criticized the manner of the U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan and mocked Joe Biden, the former U.S. President. His persistent criticism had fueled speculation that if he returns to the White House, his approach to the Taliban will differ from Biden’s and will place the group under pressure. This speculation grew stronger when Trump appointed several Afghanistan war veterans to high government positions and called for the prosecution of generals involved in the Kabul airport evacuation. In the cabinet meeting, he also stressed the dismissal of generals who played a role in the evacuation process. To meet the expectations he has created, Trump has resorted to a policy of verbal pressure against the Taliban to keep the atmosphere heated and engaging. Given his fiery nature and distinctive way of speaking, even his minimal remarks are perceived by many as tantamount to sanctions or military action, disrupting the Taliban’s peace of mind.
- Since returning to power, the Taliban have paraded through the streets in American tanks, repeatedly claiming they have humiliated NATO and liberated Afghanistan from occupation. Even senior Taliban officials, including those considered “pragmatists,” have participated in these parades, chanting harsh slogans against the United States. However, the reality is clear to everyone, making discussions of victory and defeat meaningless. Trump admitted in his speech that he cannot bear the sight of the Taliban parading with American weapons, which enrages him. This confession is particularly significant given Trump’s unique personality traits, which lower his tolerance for even minor criticism, as demonstrated by his outburst against Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Therefore, Trump aims to discipline the Taliban to silence their rhetoric and halt their street parades. The importance of Trump’s warning will become evident if the Taliban refrain from holding a military parade this year to mark their takeover of Kabul and the U.S. troop withdrawal.
- Trump is highly sensitive about financial matters, making the reclamation of military equipment conditional on the cessation of financial aid to the Taliban—similar to his approach with Ukraine, where continued support is tied to access to rare mineral resources. Although comparing stockpiles of rusty, obsolete weapons with rare minerals is not entirely fair, Trump’s financial sensitivity is clear. The question arises: Why doesn’t Trump permanently block financial aid to the Taliban instead of imposing conditional measures? The issue appears to stem from the fact that the Taliban benefit from U.S. funds under the guise of “humanitarian aid,” which could limit Trump’s options. The presence of powerful non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and the demands of judges and Congress representatives further complicate matters. Even the 90-day suspension of aid has sparked a wave of criticism and legal challenges. Consequently, Trump uses the American weapons issue as leverage to pressure the Taliban into offering other concessions to fulfill his promises.
- Trump may use the American weapons issue as a tool to pressure the Taliban in the fight against ISIS and al-Qaeda. For example, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio admitted that the United States coordinates with the Taliban in the fight against ISIS, although the Taliban’s cooperation varies. By leveraging the weapons issue, Trump and his team might compel the Taliban to intensify their fight against ISIS or at least cut ties with al-Qaeda. This strategy could benefit both sides, as the Taliban secretly desire to highlight the terrorism threat to gain international support while outwardly projecting self-sufficiency.
- The story of Bagram Air Base is also noteworthy. Every time Trump talks about reclaiming military equipment, he highlights the significance of Bagram Air Base and considers the withdrawal from it a disgrace for the United States. He consistently claims that China has now anchored itself in Bagram, without providing evidence to support his assertion — just as he avoids presenting proof when inflating the value of military equipment, claiming it to be over 80 billion dollars instead of the actual seven billion dollars. Therefore, it is not far-fetched to think that Trump may seek to strike a deal with the Taliban over Bagram, although the likelihood is minimal for several reasons: First, the Taliban, whose slogans and claims are consistently contradicted, would not agree to the renewed presence of the United States in Afghanistan; second, reclaiming Bagram and deploying military forces there, which would require enormous costs, does not align with Trump’s rhetoric and claims; and third, regional countries such as Russia, China, Iran, and others would become sensitive to the situation and might go as far as openly supporting war against the Taliban.
In summary, after Trump entered the White House, congressional efforts to halt the transfer of funds to the Taliban have intensified more than ever. The “No Tax Dollars for Terrorists Act” was recently approved by the House of Representatives and sent to the Senate, where its approval would turn it into law. In that case, the Taliban’s operations will become more difficult. Trump, who is constantly seeking new pretexts, could benefit from Congress’s move. The bill has been proposed by individuals who criticize the Taliban and praise the military fronts opposing the group. They aim to permanently cut off the Taliban’s access to U.S. financial aid. Therefore, given Congress’s actions and the White House’s repeated warnings, it can be said that Trump has become a nightmare for the Taliban.
You can read the Persian version of this analysis here:
