 Our next panel is what is the future of Afghanistan with Peter Bergen and Martin Beck who you will introduce So we're very lucky to have my team back here who was a former chief of staff for President Ghani he was in Kabul on August the 15th 2021 when the Taliban took over he was in the presidential palace And he was quite surprised when President Ghani suddenly disappeared He's also a fellow at New America And so there are basically three or four questions that we would we wanted to discuss Let's begin perhaps with something that my team mentioned to me this morning Which is the National Counterterrorism Center put out on September 11th Put out a assessment that al-Qaeda was basically more or less over in Afghanistan Which is very different from an assessment in June The United Nations said that there were 400 members of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan Some of them had positions in the Taliban administration Some of them were collecting welfare payments from the Taliban So my team so first of all What do you think about the claim to two days ago that? Al-Qaeda was more or less out of business that was put forward by the US government Thank You Peter for having me I Was surprised when I read about the report Let me elaborate a little bit further The report looks sounds to me more politically Teller in a way politically motivated to do with the US cycle of election So I have worked in the Afghan intelligence service back in 2015 From 2015 until 2017 I was number two in the Afghan intelligence service in charge of the domestic Intel intelligence, so I've worked closely with the CIA my sex with other agencies our partners in Afghanistan actively against the al-Qaeda and other terror outfit My perception of or my impression of the report is that the report is based First main factor determining this report is the US intelligence communities interaction with the Taliban with DJI director of Intelligence the director of intelligence Mainly in Doha it happens As far as I know there is there's a channel to do with the with the do a Talk started this channel was established So they actively pass mainly exchange information and also Time-to-time I Assume There's some Intel passes to the Taliban regarding the ISIS K Like Daesh Khorasan branch So the Taliban's claim to the American is that there's a significant redaction in the activity of Daesh in Afghanistan So the verification mechanism I believe is the signal intelligence and So the signal intelligence of course shows a redaction why? as anyone who is Have a deeper understanding of the Saudi Asia the terror Landscape knows that the terror outfits there especially in past two decades of American massive reliance on the technology they know how to avoid Signal intelligence or other technical means So My understanding and also reports from the ground is that Daesh or ISIS K for time being They are not launching any attack against the Taliban. That's what I've heard from many sources. So there is a redaction so that Talk about it or the reports we get from the ground is They are because recently after some of high-profile Daesh attack against Taliban the dollar and the Daesh was under tremendous pressure and I Think it's more to do with the signal Intel the American passed to the Taliban. So now Daesh is kind of reconsidering Their modus operandi and they're going silent for a time being so that in a way that Silent or being a even some people talk up Practical ceasefire that shows a reduction of violence. That's sick So this two factors Maybe if someone doesn't have a better understanding of the South Asia may believe This is real. So the Daesh is not a threat first or it's kind of reduced second on the question of al-Qaeda I Think it's very naive to assume that al-Qaeda Doesn't have a presence in Afghanistan or doesn't trip pose a trip to the global security so just Looking I mean it doesn't take much time just looking the local media or Follow reading news on Pakistan. You will figure out what's going on inside Pakistan right now How TTP is having to raise this operation cross-border operation inside the Pakistan and That speaks for itself TTP being the Pakistani Taliban. Exactly. Yeah, so Again my conclusion is Unfortunately, this report or this assessment is more politically motivated and it doesn't match To the ground reality first and second to the two report with the UN one in May you mentioned the other one in July of the analytical support and And Sanction monitoring team of the security council came out and talk the details about it Yeah, these UN reports are very thorough and they're based on member states Reporting I'm not just the United States assessment. It's many states and I found them generally speaking to be the most accurate Assessment of what's going on. Certainly that's available publicly and In one of the previous reports the UN said that Siraj Akhani, who's the minister of the interior, which is like running DHS FBI CIA is on the leadership council of al-Qaeda Of course the Akhani's have been sort of co-located with al-Qaeda for decades So anyway, I'm skeptical of the idea that al-Qaeda sort of out of business now on the other hand You know, they haven't announced new leader Aiman al-Sawari was killed in July of 2022 in downtown Kabul He was living there with the knowledge of Taliban officials according to the Biden administration Which kind of speaks for itself, but the fact that they haven't appointed a new leader So what does that suggest to you? Or they may have appointed a new leader that haven't published his name well, I think For al-Qaeda I mean Afghanistan is now safe haven and if anyone is like let's put us Ourself in their shoes It would be very stupid to do anything at this moment. It's the best time. I think they're learning from their Predicates of prisons in the region. They are reorganizing building their bases and even reports of new other members Relicating inside Afghanistan and at the same time they are trying to help this narrative of Taliban's are sticking with the Duhadi So I think it's a time of consideration for the Taliban and al-Qaeda Al-Qaeda members are in Taliban's Intel service the director of you call GTI general director of intelligence in Few Afghan members of that al-Qaeda is actively there working and also some governors which was in the report highlighted My understanding is Afghanistan right now Unfortunately, I've turned to a hit quarter of terrorism Yeah, and the short term It would not pose an immediate threat to the United States. It's already Posing trade more to the region Look the Pakistan already to cross border attack in Tajik stuff to ICS-K attack inside Iran originated from Afghanistan so The ground realities or the reports we get from the ground speaks differently Yeah, the UN report also said there are 20 terrorist groups operating in Afghanistan, which I think speaks for itself And the other thing which is interesting about the UN report is the United States when it left the Taliban Now have 70,000 armored vehicles more than a hundred helicopters The UN report suggests there's eight point five billion dollars of military equipment that was left behind the Taliban now has 8.5 billion dollars is more than the defense budget of a lot of European countries. So the Taliban is very well armed There was no meaningful armed resistance. I don't think I mean obviously you have Ahmad Shah Masood son being the resistance But he's in Tajikistan and it seems to me just as an outsider that the attacks that the What the armed resistance is doing is pretty limited to Panjir and isn't really that significant am I what do you think about? The armed resistance they seem to be getting almost no resources from any country They have some kind of presence in Tajikistan But this is not like Ahmad Shah Masood's resistance to the Taliban Before 9-11 where he had access to Tajikistan He was also pretty weak by the time 9-11 happened, but he was in the country and he was obviously then you know help We were able to ally with the Northern Alliance and overthrow the Taliban So so what's your assessment of the of the of the internal armed resistance to the extended exists? If it would go a little further before answering this question, I would like to address that Doha deal which kind of killed any potential armed assistance So if you see the history of Afghanistan or the region mainly Afghanistan most of the Missive regime change or any things in Afghanistan is kind of foreign driven in a way Unfortunately the doha deal Undermine the Afghan state which was built by American blood and regional African together. There was a counter terrorism capability in place With the Trump administration with the Biden's prison Biden's announcement of complete withdrawal kind of give a sense to the Afghan that Taliban is the future So in a way, we lost Afghanistan not through a military defeat Mainly through policy defeat or political defeat So this itself killed an arm for future armed resistance Because Afghans are survivalist, you know much better than anyone else They always look that are they when I was talking with it one of the The freedom fighters this Mujahidin against it this Soviet he said something very interesting to me said during those days When you would ask An elder in a village Like this who's in charge of this place? Are you with the Mujahidin or are the the communist regime the elder would say whoever controls this Area this hell top. I'm His subject So people are seeing the wind What the wind of change now the way things has been with the doha deal and With the continuous talk with the Taliban So Afghans are kind of suspicious what's happening So they of course fed off with the Taliban, but they're still seeing what direction United States will take it doesn't mean United States have to go back in a military way. No in a political way What is the big game? What is the bigger decisions? So that's one of the major factor for the Armed resistance any resistance inside the country to pick up first second after August 2021 some of former anus of members and also some of former northern Alliance launched some sort of Resistance, but of course it was difficult as you mentioned earlier Logistical support the weapons and the way the Taliban came to the power it still is very small and unfortunately It has not been able to politically Expand itself. It's become very narrow in a way but The armed resistance there it's not completely died, but as a Forces there beside that the women's of Afghanistan are protesting a lot of other forms of resistance but mainly I would say Because I'm in touch with a lot of former anus of members tribal elders and others they're looking for the How the when the politics change in Washington the reason why I mentioned Washington Washington is very important because from since 1979 our destiny has been tied with Washington, so I Think it's a lot to do with here and and it If things are not if people are not coming up in a massive Protest doesn't work against Taliban. We all know they have what sort of regime they are But people's are waiting that what the bigger politics become then they will decide so the Taliban right now You know, they're well entrenched. They don't face any real internal opposition They're well armed But things can change and so if you go back to December 2011 then Vice President Biden and Tony Blinken negotiated U.S. withdrawal from Iraq three years later Obama sent American troops back into Iraq because First of all ISIS was threatening genocide against the Yazidis and then as we heard earlier today They kid they kidnapped a murder Jim Foley and other American journalists and aid workers And there are still 2,500 American troops in Iraq today Which interestingly is exactly the same number of troops that was kind of keeping a lid on things in Afghanistan in The beginning of 2021 So what do you think you say that Washington is obviously so important to kind of the way Afghanistan And Afghanistan see the world. What do you think could change? Realistic, you know, are they this going to be there forever? the Taliban or other Particularly things that could change the politics either in Washington or in the region or in Europe or elsewhere where suddenly this kind of day factor of acceptance of the Taliban as the as the government even though no government They're not not recognized by any country, but they are in charge What could change that situation? well, I have talked about many scenarios and The way I see the Activities on the ground and the way the Taliban came to the power All of itself as an umbrella is a threat to the region and global security and probably What I would suggest be kind of odd not fashionable in today's Global politics because now it's more about the Bible of a great power competition, but what I see is For the United States and also original countries To work together so From like the beginning if I we go a little bit in the history of course Pakistan initially undermine the US presence in Afghanistan for war is reason After 2010 it was Iran Russia China They start heavily supporting the Taliban but today They already see it's becoming a threat look the incident in Pakistan the activities in the border of Tajikistan and the attacks inside Iran and Also, which one thing we don't talk is about ETI Eastern Turkestan Islamic movement, which is the Uyghurs and it's a bigger number in the northeast of Afghanistan What I came from and from 2014 after the security Translation they were the one who changed the security in favor of Taliban in the northeast So they're a threat to China as well. So right now Taliban's are playing very smartly. It's not in a way Flirting with the China Russia at the same time flirting with the United States So using to that was seeing the news. They given a very rich carpet welcome to the new Chinese ambassador Definitely, it's it's very The message is very clear. They're trying to give a message to the United States. I Think we shouldn't be a victim of this sort of play Now United States is a lot of expertise on the region, but the good thing is also region is also realizing It's a threat to them as well the best way is Back we come go we go back to the history after post 9-11. There was a consensus So on Afghanistan at least there the consensus Kind of forming a game So the best way is I think United States as a state as a letter of free world and also is still as someone Shaping the global politics and in the past two decades have invested a lot in Afghanistan More than 1 million American Military and civilian served in Afghanistan. The veterans are very active. I see a talk with them on Afghanistan issues so Probably It's ended for certain politician, but it's not ended for the people. So my suggestion would be Before it's becoming too All I mean lay it would be good for the United States to lead this and to form a consensus with the region and on a Before Afghanistan become More descent into chaos in a civil war or this Twitter groups becoming more consolidated I think United States has to use this leverage even Taliban's are disparate for recognition But but all this has to put a price Maybe we need a constitutional order in Afghanistan where all the Afghans come together That could be bring peace and stability in the region Also counter other terror organization. So probably look idealistic, but one of the way Forward already everyone is talking United States talking separately Iran talking separately with Taliban Chinese. Everyone is doing their own bilateral Security things with the Taliban. So what I'm suggesting is maybe something bigger Consensus Something we have to learn from the four decade if we say that from 1979 or the past two decades Listen learn from Afghanistan because that region the terror land escape in Saudi Asia is very Fluid, you know, it's very well than anyone else in this room How Taliban al-Qaeda even the current leadership of ISSK? They were former Taliban former al-Qaeda. They know each other very well So we shouldn't say the threat is not gone so Yeah, but so it's the problem with you know the Taliban is not recognized by any country and the last time they controlled Afghanistan They were recognized by three countries Saudi Arabia the Emirates and Pakistan But it's a I mean there's a policy dilemma, which is 40 million Afghans Who are many of whom are close to starvation. There's no jobs. The economy is completely collapsed And the Taliban are the de facto government. So how do you deal with the government? You know even whatever you do to help Afghans ultimately is going to help the Taliban, right? So how if you're you know, if you're a US policymaker It's tough because there's certain things you do want from the Taliban if you have dual nationals who are in Taliban custody of which I think there are several You're trying to negotiate their release. You're also trying to you know, make sure that Afghans don't starve. How do you deal with the with the Taliban in such a way that you're not propping up the regime? It's an interesting question because And also the dilemma exists I mean Already the reports are out Around 28 million Afghans need human humanitarian assistance and like life-saving It's it's it's just one of the biggest humanitarian crisis at the moment The fear the reason why Afghans are why saying of the engagement with the Taliban that why saying direct the wife is against Engaging against the Taliban For reason because when we look back this theory like Doha deal what happened? And they kind of the over-Afghan government to the Taliban same with Afghans of fair kind of an engagement of talk with the Taliban might lead in a way to the recognition or Normalizing their gender apartheid regime Yeah, so that the way forward is very Difficult it's not easy but Even the doha deal Being so far There are was things inside that could be used for a for a join or Peace in Afghanistan something a joint government will emerge from the Republic or the Taliban So it's still the Taliban is ticking to that deal They're saying we're committed to that So what happens to the into afghan side of it that could be revived Second by whom by whom but by if international community because they're asking All the times financial support the recognition. So any legitimate government in Afghanistan should have come out of the process So one of the process is this Yeah That's what I'm saying is the United States has to put this condition because United States is the Signatory of that deal. That's not a popular Dean in Afghanistan but It's better than nothing There's a framework in place that could be used one way and Second There has been call as I mentioned earlier there's a need for a Principle like Principle engage why why the world need to engage with the Taliban for what that has to be clear That engagement only for humanitarian assistance or other things Mildly in a way normalizing their behavior, which is happening right now. So it's better to have a better Policy, I think we have I don't agree with the Other like saying we don't have Money option. There are options still there are many options on the on the table and That are Think the Taliban the way I know them I have been Talking with them and we are proud and talk They always think the world especially United States doesn't have a consistent policy Said it will keep changing and keep changing so they're saying why we have to change they will change and They're right in a way because United States that since 2001 has Changing its policy in a way which has benefited the Taliban I think it's time for us to learn from all those past mistakes and there is there is is still a Way forward to correct the course of action We United States closed this embassy in Afghanistan in 1989 After the Soviets withdrew that turned out to be a mistake We don't have United States doesn't have any kind of diplomatic presence in Afghanistan I guess it has a de facto embassy in Doha and maybe it was back is done But should the United States Seriously consider reopening its embassy or should other Western countries? I mean obviously China Iran they will have their embassies Pakistan Should Western countries open consulates or some or if not an embassy at least have a diplomatic presence I'm understanding that that has the danger of Normalizing etc. I mean as the previous speaker ambassador Mentioned like validating the authoritarian regime Sometimes it said I Say jokingly it's it's not to be good for to be too close to America and also As a big enemy, you know, it's dangerous for you I think that it's kind of the way you see America has always to have a tendency to You know punish its own allies And and rewards the enemy so on that point that Following his argument, I would say This is the least Afghan expect from I mean Afghans already Angry with the decision of President Trump and by President Biden. Yeah, and United States Invested so much in that country a generation was Coming up, you know democracy was flourishing you were one of those generations. Yeah, you know how yeah thousands of like but I mean You're how old were you on 9-11? I was in 9th grade, right? So you saw this whole generation come up. It was connected to the outside world Exactly and and the Afghan was connected and and I think it was becoming a Source of hope a lot of original countries was jealous of that I think this whole thing shouldn't have ended the way it ended and We could have still with a little bit of maturity and patience A country To the kids of war Like active American prisons you cannot end that in one night in one year So negotiation needs patience and also easily because I was a member of negotiating team and before that negotiation before the They used signing the doha deal we warn the Americans in doha in cobalt in Washington because I was part of a dialogue with the Taliban and The only leverage was the withdrawal we just united the state just give it easily to the Taliban So on the opening, I think no as I mentioned earlier the opening of embassies Has to be connect to a condition to a thing Yeah, otherwise you just validate your point you mentioned that you know the trouble did the Trump and Biden Administration, you know the Trump administration did the withdrawal deal with the Taliban Which kind of gave the Taliban everything they wanted and the Biden administration went through with it But obviously they're not the only people Political actors that made mistakes and so how do you grade the Ghani administration? You were president Ghani's chief of staff. You were in the palace the day the Taliban took Kabul What mistakes did the Afghan did Afghan politicians make? Well, I mean that is one of the Main internal factor for the collapse If I would highlight the mystics we made president Ghani the style of governance and politics because he Took or he understood to perceive the negotiation more personal He thought the whole negotiation is to remove him from power I took it more personal the rivalry of ambassador Khalil Zad and person Ghani in a way undermined the US Kabul relationship, that's one factor and second President Ghani because in 2020 I left the government. I was a member of negotiating team As I mentioned earlier he taught the oldest processes to boost him from power instead of he preparing for a War without American support. He prepared For a scenario where there will be a deal. He's not there. He has to object it So there he brought a massive change in armed forces Didn't allow the armed forces to have nurtured its own leadership So saying because army was already I mean Taliban and also because we had a stalemate both side was tired of fighting So saying a deal comes like that if his interest is not included the army might impose that on him So he actively removed all the Our best commanders best generals from the from the army corps from brigade So a massive engineering happened in the army in our intel service in our police service and our local government went after in April 2021 when President Biden announced a complete withdrawal didn't stick He was expecting Biden might change the policy of Trump that no he didn't he went with the withdrawal. So everything crush So we had warned him in 2019 in July 2019 after a dialogue with the Taliban We should not hold the presidential election because that is more bring more Tension domestically the country is already facing an existential threat and the peace process are going So we need to be united that the old election was a major mistake that presidential election Because no one participated and it showed a shallow of the republic system and the country became more divided so I would say We are as responsible as here So prison running and all of us are really responsible for that I mean kind of he expedited the collapse of the Republic the Republic could Resist the Republic had to source of the Republic had a better armed forces So our when when this door deal was being negotiated We came with it with a theory that This deal will not Bring peace, but it's an opening for us. So we should prepare For a time when Americans will withdraw Then Taliban will have it. We will keep talking Yeah, but the talk will not give any result. So because Taliban believe whether the American support will collapse So whether the American support we should be able to take the war in another stalemate then the real Negotiation will start. So we didn't prepare for this scenario That was one of Some people are listening to the the ideas that you have because I don't think the Taliban are going to be empowered forever I think embedded in their DNA. They're gonna make some mistakes. They might Start recruiting Europeans, you know, they might also engage in ethnic cleansing against the Hazars, which they did in the past They there might be a tax against an American target in the region that you know from traceable to Afghanistan So things can change and so anyway, thank you very much. So