It is undeniable that the United States has been the most influential country in Afghanistan’s affairs, at least since 2001, and continues to hold that position today. As a result, any changes in the U.S. government attract significant attention and concern, both within Afghanistan and among its diaspora, since these shifts directly or indirectly impact the lives of millions worldwide. During the Cold War, the rivalry between the two superpowers stirred turmoil in Afghanistan. Looking ahead, the rising influence of China and Russia, alongside their growing competition with the U.S. and its allies, threatens to plunge Afghanistan into new challenges. However, no country has played as decisive a role in shaping Afghanistan’s situation as the United States.
Some Afghan analysts argue that the key to Afghanistan’s transformation does not lie abroad or in developments far from its borders. They believe that unless the people of a country achieve a certain level of awareness, maturity, and the ability to overcome severe divisions, no external events can change their fate. From this perspective, constantly emphasizing the roles of the U.S., China, Pakistan, India, Iran, Russia, or other nations offers misleading narratives and prolongs the suffering of the people of Afghanistan. They see tying Afghanistan’s future to external factors as a sign of inferiority, a lack of confidence in domestic dynamics, and submission to external powers.
While this analysis holds some truth, reducing all of Afghanistan’s challenges to internal factors and seeking solutions solely within its society oversimplifies the complex reality. In today’s interconnected world, the situation in one country can significantly affect others. The U.S., during its election period, drew global attention, with major powers watching developments closely. This highlights that Afghanistan, like many other nations, whether adversaries or allies of the U.S., cannot remain unaffected by U.S. policies. Therefore, exaggerating the role of internal factors while minimizing the influence of global power structures is misguided.
Afghanistan is a nation burdened by poverty, underdevelopment, ethnic tensions, low literacy rates, and many other challenges. Any country facing such circumstances remains heavily dependent on neighboring states and influential global powers until its internal factors can drive change—a long journey indeed. Over the past 150 years, Afghanistan’s major transformations have largely been driven by external forces, with internal factors playing secondary or subordinate roles. Ignoring or misinterpreting history does little to resolve the many issues facing a crisis-stricken nation. Modern history shows that since the intrusion of major empires like Britain and Tsarist Russia, internal factors have lost their centrality, and, despite ideological rhetoric, the people of Afghanistan have had limited influence in shaping events. This is not to suggest that such a situation should continue indefinitely; efforts must be made to overcome this vulnerability. However, until that is achieved, it is essential to recognize the external factors influencing the country’s fate and align political actions accordingly.
This reality explains why, as the U.S. election campaign began, many Afghans, both inside and outside the country, closely followed developments to understand who would take office, what policies they would adopt, and how these policies might impact Afghanistan and its people. Now that the U.S. election results are clear, politically engaged individuals in Afghanistan are waiting for the formation of the new cabinet and the articulation of the U.S.’s grand strategy for the next four years. Afghanistan’s response is neither marked by absolute optimism nor pessimism, but rather a mix of fear and hope that stirs the minds of political and social actors.
On one hand, some fear that the new U.S. administration might recognize the Taliban despite their bloody past and dark record, thereby undermining the sacrifices of thousands of U.S. soldiers and the immense suffering of the people of Afghanistan in the fight against terrorism. Such a decision would subject Afghanistan’s democratic forces, civil society groups, moderate elements, and, most importantly, millions of women to dire circumstances. On a broader scale, it would strengthen adversaries like China and others opposed to U.S. values, while emboldening extremist religious groups to impose new waves of crisis and oppression on already vulnerable populations.
On the other hand, some remain hopeful that the new U.S. administration will take a stronger stance against its adversaries and hold accountable a group responsible for the deaths of thousands of brave soldiers. While no one expects the U.S. to launch another military intervention to dismantle the ruling regime, many anticipate an end to the current ambivalence toward the Taliban and a decisive policy aligned with democratic values. These hopeful voices advocate ending generous support for the Taliban and at least providing political backing for groups that champion pluralism, human rights, democracy, and progress. Their optimism is bolstered by the fact that nominees for key positions in the new administration are familiar with Afghanistan’s situation and history, which could help shape a clearer policy that aligns the interests of Afghan citizens and the United States. It remains to be seen whether fear will prevail over hope or whether hope will ultimately dispel the prevailing fears.
You can read the Persian version of this editorial here:
اداره جدید کاخ سفید و موج بیم و امید در افغانستان | روزنامه ۸صبح
