Chayanika Saxena is a Research Assistant and student of MSc. International Relations at S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Having worked on Afghanistan for more than five years, she specializes in the assessment of geo-political risks to state-building, governance and rule of law in Afghanistan.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
By Chayanika Saxena - 08 Mar 2018
In a bid to secure reconciliation, the Afghan government continued the Kabul Peace Process with both international and regional involvement. It extended an olive branch to the Taliban by agreeing to hold talks with it “without preconditions.”
The US’ continuing occupation of Afghanistan has done little to resolve the War on Terror, nor does Trump’s “Rambo” rhetoric, which is met with much national and international criticism.
Seeking more “economic assistance” from India in Afghanistan, Trump did appear to signal who the “good guy” is in the South Asian region. However, India was effectively brought into an unsavory quid pro quo equation.
The stilted evolution of democracy in Afghanistan has been further affected by the existence and proliferation of competing centers of power outside the scope of the constitution. Parallel structures of governance have impacted the overall democratic structure adversely.
The drawdown of the American-led NATO forces from Afghanistan in December 2014 has resulted in the stepping-up of Chinese interest and investment. This time, the investment and interest are more diplomatic, political, and geared toward restoring peace in Afghanistan.