After the United States recently placed the Afghan government on a list of countries that, according to Washington, detain foreign citizens “unfairly,” a group known as the “Resistance” quickly welcomed this action, considering it an important and timely step. In their statements, they claimed that as long as Afghanistan is not liberated from the “ruling system” and a “legal system” is not established, this country will not be considered safe for international travel.
But this stance clearly shows that this group still has its hopes pinned on Washington and interprets every action, or even a simple diplomatic stance from the U.S., as if it were a prelude to broader pressures and ultimately regime change in Afghanistan. In fact, what emerges from their words and analyzes is a kind of false and unrealistic optimism regarding the U.S. policies; an optimism that resembles a dream that never comes to fruition in the realm of reality.
This is while the experience of the past two decades has shown that the United States in Afghanistan has been more focused on its own strategic interests and calculations than on fulfilling the aspirations of its affiliated or aligned groups. The same country that today speaks of “Unjust Detention” had a military presence in Afghanistan for years, during which it detained and tortured thousands of Afghan citizens in prisons such as Bagram, Guantanamo, and other detention centers without trial, and still holds some in Guantanamo in a cruel manner devoid of humanitarian sentiment. However, the same groups that today welcome every action of the United States remained silent in the face of those cruel behaviors of the U.S. and perhaps even praised them.
From here, one can understand why this group’s hopes are not cut off from the United States. First, some of the leaders of this group have grown up in a political and security environment dependent on the West since its inception, and they still believe that Afghanistan’s political future will only be shaped through external pressures and the support of major powers. Such a mindset has led them to always wait for external changes instead of relying on the internal realities of the country.
Secondly, groups lack any social or popular base and the ability to influence within Afghanistan. For this reason, to compensate for these weaknesses, it is compelled to tie its hopes to external countries conclude from any disagreements or stances among countries that the conditions are ripe for a change in the regime in Afghanistan.
Another factor is the use of such stances for propaganda purposes. The leaders of these groups, in order to maintain the morale of their deceived followers, are compelled to constantly speak of a “near victory.” For example, Ahmad Massoud has claimed in one of his recent speeches that “Afghans will soon celebrate their victory with unity and solidarity.” Such statements are more an attempt to keep the hollow hopes alive among supporters who have repeatedly witnessed the collapse of these promises than being based on political and ground realities.
In fact, the history of this movement’s activities shows that relying on foreign support has become a repetitive pattern in their political behavior; each time, new hopes are formed with a piece of news or a foreign stance, but over time, as the realities become clear, those hopes quickly crumble.
Therefore, it can be said that this group’s hasty welcome of the recent U.S. stance is a continuation of the same past approach; an approach that, instead of relying on the internal realities of Afghanistan, is based on the illusion of foreign support and optimistic analyzes. Past experiences have shown that such hopes are more like a political mirage; a mirage that has appeared many times and has disappeared each time after a while. However, some still continue to wait for it.
Note: The articles, essays, and comments published by the Voice of Hindukush only reflect the views of the authors & writers and do not necessarily represent the agreement of the Voice of Hindukush.