A new United States strategy for combating terrorism has recently been drafted and signed by Donald Trump, the president of the country. The strategy discusses counterterrorism efforts in the farthest corners of the world: Africa, Europe, Asia, Central America, and beyond. Among these, the fight against Al-Qaeda and Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISIS-K) stands at the top of the agenda. It has been stated that Al-Qaeda is supported by the Islamic Republic against American interests, an allegation that has long been raised due to the hostile relationship between Tehran and Washington. Although the headquarters and supporters of ISIS-K remain unclear, there are claims that the group is active on Pakistani soil, an allegation the Taliban highlight more than others. The situation in Afghanistan under Taliban rule is clearer than daylight: a haven for regional and global terrorists, especially Al-Qaeda and ISIS-K. The Taliban maintain close ties with Al-Qaeda and, in some cases, even demonstrate obedience to the group. Yet despite extensive ideological and behavioral similarities with ISIS, they outwardly appear hostile toward it, a tactic that has deceived some countries and international organizations.
In the section on combating terrorism in Asia, the arrest of Mohammad Sharifullah, the alleged perpetrator of the Kabul airport attack, is cited as a prime example, and images of his capture are included across several pages. He was handed over to the United States by Pakistan, and Trump has repeatedly described the incident as a major achievement. The development has helped warm his administration’s relationship with Pakistan, particularly with the country’s current rulers. Whether Sharifullah is truly the main suspect, however, remains unclear. Recently, one Western media outlet reported that Pakistan may have handed over the wrong person to the United States, arguing that the prosecution’s evidence appears weaker when compared with the defense presented by Sharifullah’s lawyer. Whatever the case, Trump is currently using the arrest to claim political success, while Pakistan portrays itself as a partner in the fight against terrorism.
More importantly, the section on counterterrorism in Asia states: “The United States is rebuilding relations with Asian partners to confront radicalism.” When the United States speaks of combating radicalism and terrorism in Asia, Al-Qaeda is the primary target, followed by ISIS-K, two groups that have been observed in South Asian countries. With this in mind, when cooperation with partners is discussed, Pakistan is the first country that comes to mind; a country that, by handing over Sharifullah to the United States and now mediating between Washington and the Islamic Republic of Iran, has secured a favorable position in the eyes of the White House leadership. Of course, the United States has not only now, but also in the distant past, repeatedly praised Pakistan as an ally in the fight against terrorism, despite Islamabad itself being accused of supporting terrorism. Secondly, the headquarters of ISIS-K has still not been clearly identified. This means that some countries and organizations claim the group is based in Afghanistan, while on the other side, governments and groups, particularly the Taliban, view Pakistan as a hub for ISIS. Even some opponents of the Taliban believe ISIS has a presence on Pakistani soil. Zalmay Khalilzad, the former United States envoy for Afghan peace, also believes ISIS is present in Pakistan and has repeatedly raised such a significant claim. However, it remains unclear how much influence this has had on the White House’s approach. If the presence of ISIS-K on Pakistani soil is proven, the United States partnership with Pakistan would come under question, as it has in the past due to Islamabad’s support for terrorism. Thirdly, Al-Qaeda has become so weakened that the United States no longer requires a major campaign against the group. There are no clear indications that Al-Qaeda is capable of inflicting serious harm on American interests from Afghanistan or Pakistan, and American leaders are fully aware of this point. Fourthly, the selection of Pakistan as a partner in counterterrorism efforts is significant for Afghanistan because it makes conditions more difficult for the Taliban. In other words, Islamabad gains the upper hand and, seizing the opportunity under the pretext of combating the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), intensifies pressure on the Taliban.
On the other side, the Taliban rule Afghanistan, a group that is hostile toward ISIS but cooperates with Al-Qaeda, America’s irreconcilable enemy. The Taliban’s hostility toward ISIS is becoming clearer by the day and increasingly acceptable to the world, without attention being paid to the ideological commonalities between the two groups. Although the headquarters of ISIS-K has still not been identified, the group continues scattered activities against the Taliban, operations that have targeted some Taliban officials and fighters. The world has also reached the understanding that, compared with ISIS, the Taliban poses a lesser threat and that it may be preferable for the latter to contain the former. There are even countries that believe the removal of the Taliban would be harmful for Afghanistan, arguing that ISIS would immediately fill the vacuum left behind. The United States has also, on several occasions, acknowledged the necessity of maintaining contact with the Taliban to fight ISIS. For example, Marco Rubio once claimed in an interview that his country had sought cooperation from the Taliban regarding the fight against ISIS and that the request had not been rejected by the group. This means that, out of necessity, the United States may rely on the Taliban in the fight against ISIS, just as, according to Joe Biden, Washington and the Taliban cooperated in the elimination of Ayman al-Zawahiri, the former leader of Al-Qaeda. Accordingly, Pakistan is not the United States’ only option; rather, Washington has two options: the Taliban and Islamabad. These two options have conflicted over the past year over the issue of combating or supporting terrorism. It remains unclear whether the United States will make better use of the Taliban or Pakistan, or whether it will unite the two and then proceed with the fight against Al-Qaeda and ISIS-K.
You can read the Persian version of this analysis here:
استراتژی جدید امریکا علیه تروریسم؛ مبارزه با القاعده و داعش خراسان در اولویت است
