MUNICH, Germany — President Trump’s administration has brokered a “reduction of violence” agreement that could provide “a historic spark” for negotiations between the Taliban and the Afghan central government and set the table for a gradual U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.
“They have given us something that if they implement, and it’s always important to keep that in mind, then we’re prepared to go forward with the agreement,” a senior administration official told reporters on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference.
That agreement involves “specific” restrictions on suicide bombings and rocket attacks, which should curtail fighting across the entire country. If that deal holds, a new sequence of diplomatic milestones comes into view: The United States would sign a peace deal with the Taliban. This would start what is reportedly a 10-day clock for the Taliban to begin negotiations with the central government in Kabul, which the Taliban historically has refused to acknowledge as a legitimate authority.
“We will be obviously monitoring any negotiations closely and will have people there if our help is needed,” the senior administration official said. “And I hope the Afghans don’t lose this opportunity. It’s a historic opportunity — and not without challenges. … It’s really historic and unique.”
Defense Secretary Mark Esper hinted at the diplomatic breakthrough while traveling to meet European allies in Brussels this week when he acknowledged “a proposal for a seven-day reduction in violence” in the war-torn country. Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had an opportunity to underscore the importance of the talks during a Friday meeting with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani on the sidelines of the MSC.
The reduction in violence agreement is expected to take effect “soon,” but the timing remains unclear. Ghani has been very skeptical of the talks and even the motives of the lead American negotiator, Zalmay Khalilzad. And yet, the potential significance of the deal for Trump’s decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan is obvious.
“Having a military presence in Afghanistan is not an end in itself for the United States,” the senior administration official said. “What is important is whether there are conditions in Afghanistan that necessitate a presence for the United States or conditions in Afghanistan that doesn’t necessitate a presence.”
The broader peace agreement includes a Taliban pledge not to allow terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda to use Afghanistan as a safe haven.
“We don’t trust, but we will have to verify — besides not trusting,” the official also said. “And so we will be monitoring. There will be verification associated with it [to] see if the Talibs deliver. And if the Talibs deliver on their commitments, we have commitments in terms of the reduction of forces that are also specific — and timelines. That’s the core part of the agreement.”
