Asia’s powerbrokers dropped an Afghan bombshell in Moscow today: ‘the country’s reconstruction must be paid for by its military occupiers of 20 years.’
By Pepe Escobar posted with permission and cross posted with The Cradle
Facing high expectations, a five-man band Taliban finally played in Moscow. Yet the star of the show, predictably, was the Mick Jagger of geopolitics: Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
Right from the start, Lavrov set the tone for the Moscow format consultations, which boast the merit of “uniting Afghanistan with all neighboring countries.” Without skipping a beat, he addressed the US elephant in the room – or lack thereof: “Our American colleagues chose not to participate,” actually “for the second time, evading an extended troika-format meeting.”
Washington invoked hazy “logistical reasons” for its absence.
The troika, which used to meet in Doha, consists of Russia, the US, China and Pakistan. The extended troika in Moscow this week featured Russia, China, India, Iran, Pakistan and all five Central Asian ‘stans.’ That, in essence, made it a Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) meeting, at the highest level.
Lavrov’s presentation essentially expanded on the themes highlighted by the recent SCO Dushanbe Declaration: Afghanistan should be an “independent, neutral, united, democratic and peaceful state, free of terrorism, war and drugs,” and bearing an inclusive government “with representatives from all ethnic, religious and political groups.”
The joint statement issued after the meeting may not have been exactly a thriller. But then, right at the end, paragraph 9 offers the real bombshell:
“The sides have proposed to launch a collective initiative to convene a broad-based international donor conference under the auspices of the United Nations as soon as possible, certainly with the understanding that the core burden of post-conflict economic and financial reconstruction and development of Afghanistan must be shouldered by troop-based actors which were in the country for the past 20 years.”
The West will argue that a donor conference of sorts already happened: that was the G-20 special summit via videoconference earlier in October, which included UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. Then, last week, much was made of a European promise of 1 billion euros in humanitarian aid, which, as it stands, remains extremely vague, with no concrete details.
At the G-20, European diplomats admitted, behind closed doors, that the main rift was between the West “wanting to tell the Taliban how to run their country and how to treat women” as necessary conditions in exchange for some help, compared to Russia and China following their non-interference foreign policy mandates.
Afghanistan’s neighbors, Iran and Pakistan, were not invited to the G-20, and that’s nonsensical. It’s an open question whether the official G-20 in Rome, on 30-31 October, will also address Afghanistan along with the main themes: climate change, Covid-19, and a still elusive global economic recovery.
No US in Central Asia
So the Moscow format, as Lavrov duly stressed, remains the go-to forum when it comes to addressing Afghanistan’s serious challenges.
Now we come to the crunch. The notion that the economic and financial reconstruction of Afghanistan should be conducted mainly by the former imperial occupier and its NATO minions – quaintly referred to as “troop-based actors” – is a non-starter.
The US does not do nation-building – as the entire Global South knows by experience. Even to unblock the nearly $10 billion of the Afghan Central Bank confiscated by Washington will be a hard slog. The IMF predicted that without foreign help the Afghan economy may shrink by 30 percent.
The Taliban, led by second Prime Minister Abdul Salam Hanafi, tried to put on a brave face. Hanafi argued that the current interim government is already inclusive: after all, over 500,000 employees of the former administration have kept their jobs.
But once again, much precious detail was lost in translation, and the Taliban lacked a frontline figure capable of capturing the Eurasian imagination. The mystery persists: where is Mullah Baradar?
Baradar, who led the political office in Doha, was widely tipped to be the face of the Taliban to the outside world after the group’s takeover of Kabul on 15 August. He has been effectively sidelined.
The background to the Moscow format, though, offers a few nuggets. There were no leaks – but diplomats hinted it was tense. Russia had to play careful mediator, especially when it came to addressing grievances by India and concerns by Tajikistan.
Everyone knew that Russia – and all the other players – would not recognize the Taliban as the new Afghan government, at least not yet. That’s not the point. The priority once again had to be impressed on the Taliban leadership: no safe haven for any jihadi outfits that may attack “third countries, especially the neighbors,” as Lavrov stressed.
When President Putin casually drops the information, on the record, that there are at least 2,000 ISIS-K jihadis in northern Afghanistan, this means Russian intel knows exactly where they are, and has the capabilities to snuff them, should the Taliban signal help is needed.
Now compare it with NATO – fresh from its massive Afghan humiliation – holding a summit of defense ministers in Brussels this Thursday and Friday to basically lecture the Taliban. NATO’s secretary-general, the spectacularly mediocre Jens Stoltenberg, insists that “the Taliban are accountable to NATO” over addressing terrorism and human rights.
As if this was not inconsequential enough, what really matters – as background to the Moscow format – is how the Russians flatly refused a US request to deploy their intel apparatus somewhere in Central Asia, in theory, to monitor Afghanistan.
First they wanted a “temporary” military base in Uzbekistan or Tajikistan: Putin–Biden actually discussed it at the Geneva summit. Putin counter-offered, half in jest, to host the Americans in a Russian base, probably in Tajikistan. Moscow gleefully played along for a few weeks just to reach an immovable conclusion: there’s no place for any US “counter-terrorism” shenanigans in Central Asia.
To sum it all up, Lavrov in Moscow was extremely conciliatory. He stressed how the Moscow format participants plan to use all opportunities for “including” the Taliban via several multilateral bodies, such as the UN, the SCO – where Afghanistan is an observer nation – and crucially, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), which is a military alliance.
So many layers of ‘inclusiveness’ beckon. Humanitarian help from SCO nations like Pakistan, Russia and China is on its way. The last thing the Taliban need is to be ‘accountable’ to brain-dead NATO.
The US should pay at least $1 Trillion + + for rebuilding and lost GNP for 20 years Afghanistan and the UK / Italy et al another $500 Billion merely for going along with the Puppet Master.
none of this destruction was necessary decades ago!
True, but US and France should pay a lot more to Italy and Lybia, for having destroyed the latter. It’s a rabbit-hole.
Imperial collapse and SCO rise continues at breakneck speed. Thanks Pepe. I am a citizen/subject of the U.S. I contributed (taxes) to the last 20 years of money transfer into the hands and accounts of the elites. Now Afghanistan is challenged with rebuilding. Lavrov is correct: I and fellow citizens of the U.S. and NATO countries have an obligation to pay for the crimes we have funded. So… what am I going to do about it? What are we going to do about it? Maybe hold our leaders accountable…
All of the 9/11 wars were wars of aggression. In the judgment of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, which followed World War II, “War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world. To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” (Wikipedia)
The pretext for all these wars were the false-flag attacks on the USA that were blamed on 19 Arabs led by Osama bin Laden who was holed up in a cave in Afghanistan. General Wesley Clark told us shortly after 9/11 that the Pentagon’s plan was “to take out seven countries in five years.” How more obvious could it be that “nation building” was never the intent in Afghanistan? The real perps of 9/11 are responsible for all of the death and carnage that has happened in the Middle East for the past twenty years. Monetary reparations for all these crimes are the least of it. There should be one-way flights to The Hague for hundreds of US and Israeli war criminals.
”The last thing the Taliban need is to be ‘accountable’ to brain-dead NATO.”
If anything, today’s NATO imbeciles are committed primarily to LGBTQ++. What if the Taliban had NATO’s spokespeople parade in public throughout the country wearing some hideous ”groovy” attire? Might be truly appealing to victors and vanquished alike.
I think Pepe limns the central contradiction here. The Eurasian group wants US out of Central Asia / Afghanistan but wants them to pay for reconstruction (which they are extremely unlikely to do under the best circumstances). If Russia strongly opposes US intel and over-the-horizon basing in Central Asia, why even insincerely offer a Russian base?
Is it to cause a split between the military-disaster capitalists in US and the Great Game players?
”At the G-20, European diplomats admitted, behind closed doors, that the main rift was between the West ’wanting to tell the Taliban how to run their country and how to treat women’ as necessary conditions in exchange for some help, compared to Russia and China following their non-interference foreign policy mandates.”
Same old story of utopianism, arrogance, and conceit. It is as if these morons firmly believe that the more repugnant their attitudes, the more convincing and persuasive they are themselves. With this kind of certified human garbage as their adversaries, Russia and China win effortlessly on walk-over. Just like Chechnya, Afghanistan too will be rebuilt after being ravaged and destroyed. It will emerge as a moderately prosperous society under Russian and Chinese protection.
I don’t think there has been much forthcoming from western powers regarding Syria reconstruction though I seem to recall a couple of ” promise”conferences..?.let alone punitive damages. But maybe Serbia can still persue NATO for depleted uranium effects . Wish UN …someone ..anyone .. could sort it all out. Sighs.
“NATO’s secretary-general, the spectacularly mediocre Jens Stoltenberg, insists that “the Taliban are accountable to NATO” over addressing terrorism and human rights.”
ROFL.
The delusions of these NATO criminals are comical.
Jens Stoltenberg and the NATO nations can go stuff themselves.
These NATO nations are war criminals who have destroyed multiple nations from Serbia to Libya to Afghanistan.
They have no moral legitimacy to be demanding anything–except to beg for mercy when they face punishment for their war crimes.
Deeds and details reveal reality. Making statements without actions is worthless. What are Afghanistan and its neighbors doing to build a better future? They seem to charge high interest rate to enrich the status quo and depend on the outside forces. They increase the cost for any development.
Wasn’t the war on Afghanistan authorized by the UN? So why aren’t Afghanistan, China and Russia pushing for a resolution at the UN to hold the “troop-based actors which were in the country for the past 20 years,” accountable and pay the damages? What does the international law state for such crimes? If one isn’t going to enforce the rule of international laws or enforce them equally, then one can’t ask for a rule of international laws. The UN looks the other way when the hegemon attacks nations.
Nations pursue distractions by focusing on others, while continuing the enslavement of their own people. Why is Afghanistan’s central bank autonomous and majority of its money created by private banks? The interest rate in Afghanistan is 15%, so it practices usury. What kind of Islamic law is that? So it wants new Oligarchy to get rich.
Russia is following Afghanistan in the interest rate arena? It increased the interest rate by 0.75% to 7.5% with the rationale, “higher rates help tame consumer inflation by pushing up lending costs and increasing the appeal of bank deposits.” The central bank becoming the business development arm of the banks? This strengthens the ruble and will make imports cheaper, increasing its dependency on imports. Nations do better by creating productive credit and not through consumption and speculative credit. Please explain Russia’s monetary policy. Is Russia like the Spanish Empire, that dependent on mining? Elvira Nabiullina, spent the two years with Sberbank as its chief executive and with former Economic Development and Trade Minister German Gref’s non-governmental think tank. She seems to be pursuing a policy to help banks? Sberbank is listed in London and New York. Why? Isn’t it a state bank?
What % of these SCO nations trade is in the US$? They would do better by conducting their trade in their respective national currencies. Do they trust each other? Reality trumps delusions.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/09/05/afghanistan-economic-crisis-taliban-takeover-banks-money-exchangers
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/22/russia-raises-key-rate-to-7point5percent-signals-more-hikes-possible.html
@Max: “Wasn’t the war on Afghanistan authorized by the UN?”
Does this answer your question?
“The council did not authorize the United States or any other country to use military force against Afghanistan. The US war in Afghanistan is illegal.”
Opposition to the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) – Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Opposition_to_the_W…
@ A.Deplorable,
Thanks for the response. I know the attack on Afghanistan was not a lawful response. However, the U$A & UK put up a big show and the UNSC didn’t do much. The key point is that the UNSC members, China and Russia did nothing to stop the abuse many years ago. Leadership comes with many responsibilities. One doesn’t gain trust, credibility and legitimacy, by looking the other way. China and Russia need to uphold laws, show leadership and lead by examples. If not, the rule of international laws is no better than the rules-based order. The UN has lost its credibility?
Talk – Action = ?
“Every time we turn our heads the other way when we see the law flouted, when we tolerate what we know to be wrong, when we close our eyes and ears to the corrupt because we are too busy or too frightened, when we fail to speak up and speak out, we strike a blow against freedom and decency and justice.”
― Robert F. Kennedy
https://www.e-ir.info/2013/11/06/was-the-nato-invasion-of-afghanistan-legal/
https://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1287&context=vulr
Wasn’t the war on Afghanistan authorized by the UN?
No.
It is remarkable what 20 years can do to one’s memory.
Bush’s US — cajoled by the late unlamented Rumsfeld — prosecuted a war of agggression on Afghanistan. Blair’s UK gladly assisted in the criminal enterprise.
The UN only came in after the fact by authorising ISAF months later.
RF and PRC are not fools when they mentioned ‘reparations’. This the first time reparations have been mentioned in the context of GWOT. Afghanistan is the first; other countries that had suffered the same fate may follow.
The Eurasionists (RF, PRC, ‘Stans) and Afghanistan could conceivably introduce a resolution at the UNGA to ask for reparations for the supreme crime in international law, the Crime of Aggression, against the US and the UK.
Now, UNGA resolutions are non-binding. But the chances of UNGA passing the resolution — save for opposition by the Empire/Israel and superpowers such as Nauru and the Marshall Islands — are pretty good. So what’s the point? Its passage will expose the rank hypocrisy of the Empire and chip away at the facade of it being the Good.
It is very, very remote that reparations will be forthcoming but wouldn’t it be a great day when the Empire is forced to pay reparations to ‘GWOT survivors’ for generations to come?
@Stand Easy: “wouldn’t it be a great day when theEmpire is forced to pay reparations to ‘GWOT survivors’ for generations to come?”
Can’t wait to see that day!
Excellent point. The legal authorization to invade Afghanistan was the AUMF, which was approved by Congress on September 14 by a vote of 420-1. The UN had absolutely nothing to do with it. The lone dissenting vote was Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee of California who pointed out that the resolution “was a blank check to the president to attack anyone involved in the Sept. 11 events — anywhere, in any country, without regard to our nation’s long-term foreign policy, economic and national security interests, and without time limit.” How right she was.
Russia and China should seize the yachts the size of cruise ships of billionaires under civil forfeiture laws, sell them off and use the proceeds for Afghan reconstruction.
What a nonsensical proposal! Did Russian and Chinese billionaires destroy Afghanistan?
Or, did you mean UK, USA and other NATO billionaires? Perhaps a better group, but most of
these chaps were not responsible for Afghan destruction either, though few might have benefited
from it . Furthermore, these chaps do not fall under Russian or Chinese jurisdiction.
Spiral
Well said! Nice to read the news we do not get to hear on the MSM.
“there are at least 2,000 ISIS-K jihadis in northern Afghanistan”
And Russia and the rest know that a lot of them are USA-backed jihadi head choppers extracted from Idlib and inserted into north eastern Afghanistan in order to give the Chinese a hard time.
The US/NATO would say that they already spent alot and tried building the country, if not for the Taliban’s insurgency.
It’s a weak argument, but not without merit.