Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1153073096-scaled

Blinken to Afghan president: play ball or get out of way

A leaked letter shows growing frustration with Kabul and a desire to move around the government there to get a peace settlement.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

An undated letter from Secretary of State Anthony Blinken to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani was leaked over the weekend and reveals that Biden is fully aware that some powerful stakeholders in Kabul lack an interest in seeing the United States military leave — and as such, tying a U.S. withdrawal to Kabul’s actions makes no sense. 

Public statements in addition to the letter reveal that the Biden administration has proposed a dialogue to be held in Turkey involving regional actors, various representatives of the Afghan government, and the Taliban to finalize a peace agreement and establish an interim government. 

The letter, leaked by Afghanistan’s Tolo News and confirmed by the New York Times, also sheds light on the disunity and lack of inclusivity in the Afghan government as a significant barrier to peace, along with Taliban-led violence. Biden’s recognition of this reality should make keeping U.S. troops in the country until a political settlement is found a non-starter — even though Blinken acknowledges in the letter that the administration has not yet decided whether to withdraw troops by the May 1 deadline.

Blinken also urges President Ashraf Ghani to join “other representatives” of the Afghan government in Turkey to finalize a peace agreement. This language is significant because it undermines Ghani as the elected and therefore sole representative of the Afghan government. The message to Ghani and his circle is clear: play ball and accept an interim government or get out of the way. But Ghani insists that executive power can only be transferred through elections and said as much to the Afghan parliament over the weekend. He also knows that participating in the proposed talks in Turkey will spell the end of his political career. 

Feeling backed into a corner, it is quite possible that Ghani himself is the source of the leak as he tries to create a rally around the flag — or in this case the president. Ghani’s critics in the government and Afghan civil society may still believe the integrity of the office of the president demands elections rather than a transition to an interim government. 

An interim government that pushes Ghani out of power may also be viewed by some prominent Afghans as a premature concession to the Taliban since violence remains high. However, the 2020 Asia Foundation’s Survey of the Afghan People found that priorities differ among the general Afghan population and 65.8 percent of respondents support a peace deal even if it leads to a system under Taliban majority influence while 34.2 percent oppose it. This should not be conflated with support for the Taliban which the majority of Afghans oppose. 

According to the letter, Washington also asked the United Nations to convene foreign ministers and envoys from Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, and India to “discuss a unified approach to supporting peace in Afghanistan.” This aspiration ignores the fact that regional actors are not unified in their interests in Afghanistan. It is important for President Biden to remind Afghanistan’s neighbors that the country’s stability affects their collective future far more than America’s. 

But bringing them to the table and leaving the room with a consensus on how to cooperate in Afghanistan are two very different things. The inclusion of India in the process will only fuel paranoia in Pakistan which remains the single most important country for influencing the Taliban to reduce violence or accept a settlement. Other ideas floated by Washington include the convening of a “Bonn 2” conference inclusive of the Taliban. But some analysts have criticized this proposal as better on paper than in practice. 

The reality on the ground is that Afghanistan’s security situation is likely to get worse before it gets better. An analysis of the relative military capacity of the Taliban versus Afghanistan’s security forces (ANDSF) concluded that the latter is unlikely to hold territory long-term without a U.S. presence. The leaked letter appears to agree with this finding and implores the Ghani administration to accept the urgency of achieving a political settlement. Ghani may have to embrace a settlement at the cost of his own political power or risk losing all U.S. support.

Washington should not disengage from Afghanistan but the leaked letter demonstrates just how many conflicting stakeholders affect conditions on the ground in Afghanistan, and why it is a profound mistake to hinge a U.S. troop withdrawal on a settlement that may never come.


Ashraf Ghani, President of Afganistan, during NATO SUMMIT in 2018. (Gints Ivuskans/Shutterstock)
google cta
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Trump $1.5 trillion
Top image credit: Richard Peterson via shutterstock.com

The reality of Trump’s cartoonish $1.5 trillion DOD budget proposal

Military Industrial Complex

After promising on the campaign trail that he would drive the war profiteers out of Washington, and appointing Elon Musk to trim the size of government across the board, some will be surprised at President Trump’s social media post on Wednesday that the U.S. should raise the Pentagon budget to $1.5 trillion. That would mean an unprecedented increase in military spending, aside from the buildup for World War II.

The proposal is absurd on the face of it, and it’s extremely unlikely that it is the product of a careful assessment of U.S. defense needs going forward. The plan would also add $5.8 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Budget.

keep readingShow less
Trump Venezuela
Top image credit: President Donald Trump monitors U.S. military operations in Venezuela, from Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, on Saturday, January 3, 2026. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

Trump's sphere of influence gambit is sloppy, self-sabotage

Latin America

Spheres of influence stem from the very nature of states and international relations. States will always seek to secure their interests by exerting influence over their neighbors, and the more powerful the state, the greater the influence that it will seek.

That said, sphere of influence strategies vary greatly, on spectrums between relative moderation and excess, humanity and cruelty, discreet pressure and open intimidation, and intelligence and stupidity; and the present policies of the Trump administration in the Western Hemisphere show disturbing signs of inclining towards the latter.

keep readingShow less
 Ngo Dinh Diem assassination
Top photo credit: Newspaper coverage of the coup and deaths, later ruled assassination of Vietnamese leader Ngo Dinh Diem and his brother Ngo Dinh Nhu. (Los Angeles Times)

JFK oversaw Vietnam decapitation. He didn't live to witness the rest.

Washington Politics

American presidents have never been shy about unseating foreign heads of state, by either overt or covert means. Since the late 19th century, our leaders have deposed, or tried to depose their counterparts in Iran, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, and elsewhere.

Our presidents indulge in regime change when they perceive foreign leaders as inimical to U.S. security or corporate interests. But such efforts can backfire. The 1961 attempt to topple Fidel Castro, organized under President Eisenhower and executed under President Kennedy, led to a slaughter of CIA-trained invasion forces at the Bay of Pigs and a triumph for Castro’s communist government. Despite being driven from power by President George W. Bush in retribution for the 9/11 attacks, the Taliban roared back in 2023, again making Afghanistan a haven for terrorist groups.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.