Lessons Analysis @Chea Resan §

Draft 1 §

• In the general scope of things, both the United States and the Soviet Union attempted at controlling Afghanistan since the 1980s have failed.
• This can be explained with the concept of Game Theory from Strategic Realism.
  • It asks whether a conflict is a ‘finite’ or ‘infinite’ game.
  • In this approach, the Afghanistan conflicts can be considered as an infinite game.
    • Because the United States and the USSR might be fighting for an objective of controlling Afghanistan.
    • The Taliban has been fighting for survival, therefore the winner will be the ‘player left standing’ in a race of who runs out of resources or motivation first.
    • Simply, external countries fought the conflict for interests, while the Taliban defended themselves for their values
• Now that the Taliban holds complete control over Afghanistan once again, the group seem to be taking a much different approach than its last escapade.
  • The Taliban conducted diplomatic missions years before the 2021 takeover, to avoid returning to its previous state of rule in the 1990s.
  • They conceded their positions on free press, women’s rights, and international cooperation
• Some say the Taliban has changed their ways and now is willing to adapt to the international environment
  • However, it can also be argued that these are only efforts to regain its footing and in the long term the Taliban will once again push for the spread of Sharia law that is incompatible to the rest of the world. (Face)
• So how can conflict resolution studies explain this conflict and its involving parties
  • To begin, Chapter 4 of the Conflict Management and Resolution book titled ‘Identity’ might explain the Taliban’s extremism. The concept of ‘social categorization’
    • Groups in society might segregate themselves by highly visible characteristics such as gender, ethnicity, race, or beliefs.
    • In the case of Taliban, they share a common extreme ideology of how society should be run around their interpretation of Islam through the Sharia Law.
    • This association of meaning and identity creates in-group-out-group hostilities, especially if the groups’ ideologies could not co-exist with one another, in the case of Sharia’s law to the international community.
    • Furthermore the chapter explains morale is enhanced by unquestionable loyalty that might even lead to willingness to sacrifice oneself
    • This is what lead from ‘identity’ to extremism similar to what happens with nationalism.
  • Now that the Taliban has taken control. It turns a more friendly face to the international community. Why?
    • They could be considered as being at the stage of negotiation, as can be explained by chapter 8, where both parties have interests and wants to change the way things are currently
    • Compared to before they didn’t…
      • The international community wants transparent and clear progress in women’s rights, free press, and peace.
      • And the Taliban wants access to its financial assets, a free flowing market, and recognition of its legitimacy as a government.
      • While some governments does not want any involvement with the Taliban at all due to the severity of their identity polarization such as for Italy and France.