Vienna, the capital of Austria, yesterday hosted anti-Taliban factions for the fourth time. These gatherings in Vienna have now become a process known as “The Vienna Process.” In the fourth round of the Vienna Process, nearly seventy representatives from various political movements opposing the Taliban participated. Women, civil activists, and media representatives have consistently had the opportunity to participate in all Vienna Conferences. The first session of the Vienna Summit was launched on September 15, 2022, followed by the second on April 26, 2023, and the third on December 3, 2023.
What sets the fourth round apart from previous sessions is the increase in the number of attendees, contrasting with earlier meetings that hosted thirty or fewer participants. The current and previous Vienna Conferences share a single objective: achieving real cohesion among anti-Taliban fronts and finding solutions to navigate current conditions toward a desired outcome.
Following the fall of the previous Afghan government and the Taliban’s return to power, two seemingly competing political processes have emerged to address the country’s issues: Doha and Vienna. The Doha process appears to be evolving towards a Taliban-centric approach, with recent actions even excluding invitations to women and civil activists. In contrast, Vienna exclusively involves anti-Taliban factions, who would decline any Taliban participation if extended.
This distinction highlights that these two processes have intentionally or coincidentally positioned themselves opposed: Doha for the Taliban and Vienna for their opponents.
When compared, the Doha process seems more potent than Vienna for several reasons:
1- In the Doha process, the issue of Taliban presence or absence is prominently debated, primarily due to recognition as the current rulers of Afghanistan. The necessity of Taliban participation in the Doha process is emphasized to the extent that some countries view their absence as equivalent to the failure of that initiative. The Taliban, recognized as de facto rulers, impose strict conditions for their participation in Doha Meetings, often declining invitations as their opponents continuously advocate for inclusion. Conversely, in the Vienna process, participants are those opposed to the Taliban, and seeking power. It is noteworthy that the United Nations attaches great importance to the Taliban’s control of territory. For instance, reports from the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) consistently highlight the inability of any anti-Taliban fronts to pose a “territorial challenge” to the group. UNAMA’s continual reference to this issue underscores its significance, indicating that anti-Taliban forces are only considered challengers when they possess territory and geography, otherwise, they are largely overlooked.
2- Most neighboring countries, regional powers, and the international community support the proceedings in Doha. Some countries solely support the presence of the Taliban, while others favor the participation of both groups but refrain from taking a firm stance. The attendance of special envoys from predominant countries at the Doha Meetings indicates their support. However, the Vienna process has not garnered comparable attention from countries. Therefore, it is imperative for the organizers of the Vienna process to actively seek international support, as failure to do so may lead it into a deadlock in the future, merely focusing on fostering cohesion among anti-Taliban forces while disregarding global endorsement.
3- The Doha process is led by the United Nations, an organization whose words and positions hold significant importance for most countries. The role of the United Nations has prompted even those countries not entirely comfortable with the Taliban to participate in Doha Meetings and sign onto agreements they may not fully support. If the process were led by one of the major powers, conflicting national interests could diminish support for the Doha process. In contrast, the Vienna process is facilitated by the Austrian Institute for International Affairs, led by Wolfgang Petritsch, a retired Austrian diplomat.
4- The hosts of both processes, Doha and Vienna, also differ significantly in their strengths. Doha has actively played a role in Afghanistan affairs for years, serving as host to the Taliban and facilitating their return to power. Austria, however, has been less involved in Afghanistan matters despite its significant role in broader historical European developments. Therefore, the Vienna process is led by an Austrian non-governmental entity rather than necessarily by the Austrian government. In the current climate where many countries are considering engagement with the Taliban, Vienna’s transformation into a platform reflecting anti-Taliban voices is noteworthy.
Furthermore, the Vienna process holds several advantages over the Doha process:
1- The Vienna process began and continues without substantial support from major foreign powers, which in itself is an achievement. Its longevity, hosting four sessions compared to Doha’s three, underscores its enduring relevance. This continuity suggests hope for its prospects. If anti-Taliban forces seriously commit, they could potentially navigate without significant international support, though efforts to secure greater backing from countries would enhance their position.
2- Despite not yet yielding specific outcomes, the Vienna process enjoys broader public acceptance compared to Doha. Criticisms of Vienna are predominantly aimed at improvement rather than fundamental opposition, unlike the destructive scenarios often associated with Doha. Even human rights organizations, under the UN umbrella, have approached the Doha process cautiously, indicating a growing preference for Vienna’s inclusivity and constructive approach.
3- The Vienna process benefits from inclusivity and comprehensiveness, something which the Doha process completely lacks. Now that the United Nations has invited the Taliban as the sole representative of Afghanistan to the Doha meeting, this process has become even more exclusive than before. In Vienna meetings, political figures represent various political and military factions. Women also participate freely despite Taliban restrictions and express their views comfortably. However, this process has not yet become sufficiently comprehensive because some other factions, ostensibly opposed to the Taliban, do not participate, perhaps because they perceive the Doha framework as more restrictive. Vienna’s focus is also on achieving Afghanistan’s inclusivity, which will ensure its success. In that case, the United Nations will have no choice but to turn to Vienna and integrate both processes, a step that could pave the way towards establishing a more inclusive government.
You can read the Persian version of this analysis here:
