Taliban takeover of Afghanistan will reshape Middle East, official warns
Gulf states are having to reconsider their alliances and especially whether they can still trust the US, says senior source
Evacuees wait to board a Boeing C-17 Globemaster III in Kabul on 30 August. Middle Eastern countries are now likely to doubt further American promises of security. Photograph: Us Army/Reuters
The Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan is a shattering earthquake that will shape the Middle East for many years, a senior Gulf official has said, warning that – despite the group’s promises of moderation – the militant group is “essentially the same” as last time it was in power.
Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the official also said that the rapid and chaotic US withdrawal also raises serious questions for Gulf states about the value of US promises of security over the next 20 years.
“Afghanistan is an earthquake, a shattering, shattering earthquake, and this is going to stay with us for a very, very long time,” the official said on Monday. He added that the episode marked a complete break with the outdated Carter doctrine – a commitment that an oil-dependent US would use military force to defend its interests in the Gulf.
“Can we really depend on an American security umbrella for the next 20 years? I think this is very problematic right now – really very problematic.”
He suggested that 20 years of warfare, supposed to be “a battle against those who had hijacked Islam”, had left no legacy in Afghanistan, and predicted that the Taliban’s seizure of power would prompt concern among leaders in West Africa and the Sahel about the rise of a newly confident Islamic extremism.
The official added he had no expectation that the Taliban would behave differently from when it was previously in power, saying, “They are essentially the same, but just more world-savvy.”
The biggest surprise, the official said, was the sheer incompetence of the US operation and the signs of bureaucratic infighting that marred US thinking.
Afghanistan, he said, will probably come to be seen as a Pakistan victory, and a Chinese opportunity – with the US playing a minimal role. “If there is a geopolitical struggle over Afghanistan, we will see Pakistan and China on one hand and India, Iran and Russia on the other hand,” the official said. “And I don’t think the Americans are going to be a part of the geopolitical struggle over Afghanistan.
Many Gulf states have already begun recalibrating their foreign policy to take into account declining US dependence on oil and the growing popular insularity of the US, but the official said he now expected that process to speed up, leading to realignments in alliances and a desire for some historical rivals to establish more pragmatic relations. The general aim will be to de-escalate tensions in the region, the official said.
The official added that he expected to see greater discussions between Saudi Arabia and Iran in the future, as well as between the United Arab Emirates and Iran. The official also pointed to the signing of a defence agreement between Saudi Arabia and Russia as a sign that in a post-carbon age, the Gulf states wanted to diversify their sources of security away from the US.
Iran, under its previous government, led by Hassan Rouhan, had started to hold discreet talks with Saudi Arabia at an intelligence cooperation level, but that may now become more open. Bahrain has already been seen to look for new alliances in the region including through the Abraham Accord with Israel, and in the UAE’s case by restoring diplomatic relations with Syria.
The emphasis will be on “trying to make this region less of a pressure cooker”.
The Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan is a shattering earthquake that will shape the Middle East for many years, a senior Gulf official has said, warning that – despite the group’s promises of moderation – the militant group is “essentially the same” as last time it was in power.
Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the official also said that the rapid and chaotic US withdrawal also raises serious questions for Gulf states about the value of US promises of security over the next 20 years.
“Afghanistan is an earthquake, a shattering, shattering earthquake, and this is going to stay with us for a very, very long time,” the official said on Monday. He added that the episode marked a complete break with the outdated Carter doctrine – a commitment that an oil-dependent US would use military force to defend its interests in the Gulf.
“Can we really depend on an American security umbrella for the next 20 years? I think this is very problematic right now – really very problematic.”
He suggested that 20 years of warfare, supposed to be “a battle against those who had hijacked Islam”, had left no legacy in Afghanistan, and predicted that the Taliban’s seizure of power would prompt concern among leaders in West Africa and the Sahel about the rise of a newly confident Islamic extremism.
The official added he had no expectation that the Taliban would behave differently from when it was previously in power, saying, “They are essentially the same, but just more world-savvy.”
The biggest surprise, the official said, was the sheer incompetence of the US operation and the signs of bureaucratic infighting that marred US thinking.
Afghanistan, he said, will probably come to be seen as a Pakistan victory, and a Chinese opportunity – with the US playing a minimal role. “If there is a geopolitical struggle over Afghanistan, we will see Pakistan and China on one hand and India, Iran and Russia on the other hand,” the official said. “And I don’t think the Americans are going to be a part of the geopolitical struggle over Afghanistan.
Many Gulf states have already begun recalibrating their foreign policy to take into account declining US dependence on oil and the growing popular insularity of the US, but the official said he now expected that process to speed up, leading to realignments in alliances and a desire for some historical rivals to establish more pragmatic relations. The general aim will be to de-escalate tensions in the region, the official said.
The official added that he expected to see greater discussions between Saudi Arabia and Iran in the future, as well as between the United Arab Emirates and Iran. The official also pointed to the signing of a defence agreement between Saudi Arabia and Russia as a sign that in a post-carbon age, the Gulf states wanted to diversify their sources of security away from the US.
Iran, under its previous government, led by Hassan Rouhan, had started to hold discreet talks with Saudi Arabia at an intelligence cooperation level, but that may now become more open. Bahrain has already been seen to look for new alliances in the region including through the Abraham Accord with Israel, and in the UAE’s case by restoring diplomatic relations with Syria.
The emphasis will be on “trying to make this region less of a pressure cooker”.
Let the Taliban try to govern Afghanistan using AK-47s.
ReplyDeleteTaliban came into power using murder and IEDS.
What you break, you own.
What u fart, u swallow, too!
DeleteWatch yr postulated painful progressions of Afghanistan & GET ready to hide back into yr fart filled well.
500 yo Bullyland has about 750 bases in at least 80 countries worldwide and spends more on its military than the next 10 countries combined.
ReplyDelete5000 yo Bullyland has ONE overseas military base - Djibouti in the African Horn. But they are building seven bases on artificial islands in the Southern Seas but they consider it “homeland” ha ha ha…
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2021/9/10/infographic-us-military-presence-around-the-world-interactive
Must be getting painful to do yr c&p farts!
DeleteRegurgitation of farts has become yr daily norm.
Just yesterday Rocket Man (who considers 5000 yo Bully it’s BFF) fired 2 ballistic missiles into the Sea of Yapan. South Korea responded by firing submarine-based missiles of their own. Very hot and delicate.
ReplyDeleteFortunately South Korea has been provided bodyguard services by 500 yo Bully for nearly 70 years. 30,000 troops based there, with anti-missile systems protecting attack. Deterrence for Rocket Man invasion. All this FOC, courtesy of Bully taxpayers. The southerners took this opportunity to focus on working hard and grow rich and strong. Today their GDP is equal to Russia, even though Russia has many more people and infinitely more natural resources. Today everybody knows Samsung, Hyundai and K-Pop. What do we know cum from Russia? AK-47?
Same in Yapan. Welcomed and protected by 500 yo Bully, with 50,000 troops based there, aircraft carrier, F35 jets, armed to the teeth. All FOC, since 1945. Free Bodyguard services.
So why didn't Afghanistan do the same? 20 years free bodyguard services, no need to pay back, $5 TRILLION. But Telly-ban, after being welcomed and Sapoted by 5000 yo Bully in The Great Hall of The People, emboldened, insist 500 yo Bully leave their country, so OK-lah, we leave. Sayonara and Good Luck playing Belt You Down Bully’s Road.
"Fortunately South Korea has been provided bodyguard services by 500 yo Bully for nearly 70 years. 30,000 troops based there, with anti-missile systems protecting attack. Deterrence for Rocket Man invasion. All this FOC, courtesy of Bully taxpayers"
DeleteFOC! Wow……
U readily ampu yr uncle Sam no end.
Care to refer to what that ex-president trump said about protection monied from Germany, SKorea & other NATO nations?
Oooop… such news NEVER appeared in our fart filled well!
Wakakakakaka…
Still chanting yr eugenic songs, courtesy of uncle Sam's military might & spurioys humanitarianism.
Japan & SKorea r the pity vassal states that no Afghans would want Afghanistan to become one!
Blurred mfer, what do u know about be a poor free man than a well-fed dog?
Ooop… no such sentiment ever exist in yr petrified neurons!
Over in Viet Nam they still love 500 yo Bullyland. Decade Long War of the 1960s and 70s, Agent Orange etc....No Issue. 500 yo Bullyland is still the NAMBAR 1 emigration, study and holiday destination.
ReplyDeleteThe REAL BULLY is Up North.
QUOTE
Vietnamese love the US, and China cannot change that. Attempts to turn the Afghanistan withdrawal to Beijing's advantage have failed
Dien Luong
September 13, 2021
Dien Luong Is A Visiting Fellow At The ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, Singapore.
When U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris' Arrival In Hanoi Was Delayed Last Month, China's Ambassador To Vietnam Xiong Bo Scurried To Hold A Previously Unannounced Meeting With That Country's Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh.
Last Friday, Two Weeks After Harris Departed Vietnam, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi Touched Down In Hanoi To Embark On A Weeklong Trip To
The Region, Adding South Korea To His Itinerary. Such Back-To-Back Diplomacy Efforts Stood In Stark Contrast To The Lackluster Diplomatic Exchanges Between Hanoi And Beijing Over The Past
Year.
Earlier This Year, Wang Visited All Southeast Asian Countries But Vietnam. Last March, Vietnam Was Not Invited To A High-Profile Regional Meeting Hosted By China In Fujian That Brought Together The Foreign Ministers Of Indonesia, Malaysia, The Philippines And Singapore To Discuss The Political Crisis In Myanmar.
....cont
Whether you agree or not, just think :
ReplyDeleteUS 750 bases in at least 80 countries worldwide for the sake of exerting its power, threat and and real action 'BULLY' to the rest of the world to do its bidding.
China ONE overseas military base - Djibouti in the African Horn. But they are building seven bases on artificial islands in the Southern Seas near and facing its coastline for the purpose of defense. Think again, the US and the West had been sending their warships cruising the Southern Seas continuously, showing their muscles, doing war fare exercise, warning and threatening China to behave, or else! The Atlantic Ocean is just 'outside' their 'home' and is so near and so huge, why don't they play their childish games there instead of all the way to the Southern Seas? So far have you seen China conducting the war fare exercise in the Atlantic Ocean close to the US?
Why are all these reports always so bias? China being defensive is wrong yet the US being offensive is considered right and judicious?
80% of US forces overseas are based in 3 areas - NATO treaty countries, Japan, and South Korea.
DeleteFor 75 years , US forces in Europe have been the primary deterrent against Soviet Union, then Russia's, mega armoured divisions rolling over their lands.
Just ask the Poles, Latvians, Czechs, Hungarians, Romanians...the Yanks are very welcome...
US deterrent forces in South Korea have allowed the South Koreans to build the world's 10th largest economy,in the aftermath of devastating Communist invasion.
US forces in Japan first came as occupation troops after WWII, but in the 70 over years since, the Yanks are primary defence partners, welcomed by every Japanese government
Wakakakakaka…
DeleteOld moneyed mfer, u r turning yr pal's eugenic fart into uncle Sam's singlehandedly demoNcratic policeman of the world into a new fairy tale!
Have u ever thought of the FACT that what if all those US proposed deterrents all-over the world were just PURE excuse to showcase yr uncle Sam's simplemindedness in being the only 'taiko' of the world?
But could a Yankee asslicker ever thought of such an unbecoming WASP 'gentleman?
Deterrent force? It was obvious what is the best and easiest way to maintain the 'Taiko' status after the WWII. Keep the rest of the world backward and under control in their military programs and adventure. Forbid them to do any nucleus program except under US supervision for energy purpose only.
DeleteHowever, US can't order the Soviet to abstain from building nucleus weapons so US itself went on to to a race with the Soviet to build thousand of nucleus warheads while forbidding the rest of the world from meddling with nucleus program except under supervision for energy purpose only.
So the military bases all over the world are for that purpose, the real 'deterrent force' is for keeping an eye and stop the home countries from growing strong militarily. Your idea of 'deterrent force' to prevent growing influence of the communist Soviet was just 'side effect'.
That's why China nucleus program had to go underground to avoid the US knowledge.
The point is 500 yo Bully is welcomed by 80 countries to locate military bases there, including countries that were at war with or against them. Eg Germany, Italy, Yapan, Korea many NATO and ME, African countries etc. None of these 80 countries were annexed or taken over administratively or politically.
ReplyDeleteBut when bodyguard services are no longer required and they are asked to leave, they did that, like Subic in 1991. The Philippines probably regrets that decision now, seeing how 5000 yo Bully is now encroaching on The Southern Seas. Today after 20 years of free spoon feeding, babysitting and bodyguard services Afghanistan don’t want them any more so they leave. Fortunately Russia and 5000 yo Bully still around to help. Hope they won’t run away too like they did before in the 80s and 90s, abandoning the Afghans to the Islamists.
"welcomed by 80 countries to locate military bases there"
DeleteWelcome? Where r the beef?
"None of these 80 countries were annexed or taken over administratively or politically"
What do u know about vassal states?
What a pact of lies!
Blurred mfer, u just never know about shamefulness in been caught spreading lies after lies!
AGAIN, why should Russia/China cleanup yr uncle Sam's shits?
"abandoning the Afghans to the Islamists"
!!!!
Almost all Afghans r islamists, don't u know?
It's for the Afghans themselves to solve out their own internal problems, PERIOD!
U want to parade yr spurious & pretentious bleedingheartish fart to those poor helpless civilian Afghans?
Then, go f*ck yr uncle Sam in pushing them into that Hellfires pit in the first place.
Got daging over the vassal status?
DeleteBut for sure got huge hutang to show for unnecessary/unaffordable infrastructure projects that indebt poor countries under the guise of Modern Mao's "Debt And Road"....
The debt repayment is Tributary Payment?.....ha ha ha....
Tributary State:
"A state subordinate to a more powerful neighboring state. The tributary state sent a regular gift or tribute to the superior state as a token of submission"
QUOTE
Pakistan economic crisis intensifies as China refuses to provide debt relief
ANI / May 30, 2021
ISLAMABAD: Bankrupt Pakistan's debt problems seem to be escalating as it is all weather-ally China has declined to restructure $3 billion in liabilities.
Islamabad has requested Beijing to forgive debt liabilities owed to China-funded energy projects established under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
The debt load, owed largely for the building of independent power producers (IPPs) on take-or-pay power generation contracts, is substantially more than the $19 billion in total invested in the plants, Asia Times reported citing reports and industry analysts.
Media reports suggest that China has refused to budge on Islamabad's request to renegotiate the power purchase agreements, saying that any debt relief would require Chinese banks to amend the terms and conditions under which the credits were extended...
UNQUOTE
Now u want to fart about tributary state!
DeleteCan u first understand yr own "quote" in reality check?
Obviously u DON'T!
Since u bring up the issue of tributary state, let me emphasize further that yr favourite SKorea, Japan & Germany r indeed vassalized tributary states of uncle Sam who resides far far away!
Why?
Under Plaza Accord yr nihonjin quietly kawtaued to US pressure to voluntary scale back export to US & devalued yen! Thus the lost of 20+yrs of economic "hidup segan mati tak mau" till this days!
Under the imf "guidelines" in 97 the SKorean chaebols have all become US wall street vultures frontmen in controlling the every daily lives of the SKorea.
Ditto with the threatening withdrawal of the US troops based in Germany if auntie Merkel wasn't tough enough to say good ridden!
So what were/r the tributaries that these nations paid to yr uncle Sam?
Oooop… FOC mah - as u do loudly farted!
Wakakakakaka…
"Pakistan economic crisis intensifies as China refuses to provide debt relief"
Such a misleading & cleverly twisted fart.
Is Pakistan's financial woe the making of China?
From the CPEC?
From the BRI that u know nothing about?
Blurred mfer, if u have truly studied the economic predicaments of Pakistan u WON'T have suck a recalcitrant fart!
Pakistan's public debt has two main components, namely domestic debt (which is incurred principally to finance fiscal deficit) and external debt (which is raised primarily to finance development expenditure).
Pakistan’s major problem is not the debt issue, but its constant shortage of foreign currency.
In 2014, the World Bank gave Pakistan a $12 billion loan, which was scheduled to be dispersed over five years. In 2020, Pakistan took another loan of $500m from the World Bank.
In addition to the World Bank loan, the Pakistani government received a $6.7 billion loan from the IMF in 2014. The government also received a $1.5 billion gift from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 2014.
The World Bank Group is the leading creditor with 46 per cent share followed by the Asian Development Bank at 25 per cent. China comes third with 24 per cent and Japan contributes 3 per cents shares in the external debt stock.
The China-Pakistan Economic Pipeline agreement provides loans to the government of Pakistan to generate viable economic activities which r the current sources of foreign exchange earnings used in repaying the mounting foreign debts!
W/O the Chinese loans under BRI, the traditional business activities of the Pakistan WOULDN'T be able to generate the required foreign exchange.
Blurred mfer, yr favourite fake news machine - Asia Times, has conned u kaw-kaw. & U swallow the cesspool concentrate wholesome with no questions asked.
You have obviously no desire to find out the truth, which reflect your biasness, nevertheless this is for you to think about it :
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45OpF8dIRSI
Pakistani FM: CPEC generates growth and it is not "debt trap"
Note the CHAMPION for having the most Vassal/Tributary States is 5000 yo Bullyland, ie for 5,000 YEARS.
ReplyDelete500 yo Bullyland is a Baby by comparison, if at all.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/history-tributary-states.htm
Note: Tibet is listed as Tributary State, 1720-1911, meaning it was NOT part of China, but was Bullied into paying protection money.
Wakakakakaka…
DeleteTruly f*cked dickhead using bygone tributary states to justify yr know nothing rants!
Do China have any tributary nations as of today?
Do USofA have any modern tributary states as of today?
BTW, who listed Tibet as a Tributary State of China from 1720-1911?
Did that fact twister asked Tibet? China? Or its own fabrication?
Vassal/Tributary countries is Like having to pay Protection Money to Yitalian Mafia.....pay every month or I burn your shop down.....the shop does not legally belong to the Mafia but in order to operate safely the owner has no choice but to pay to the Mafia.
ReplyDeleteThere is no such protection money paid by the 80 countries to 500 yo Bully. All Funded FOC by Bully taxpayers. That was why Trump complained.
If asked to leave they leave, like in Subic Philippines and now Afghanistan. And in many cases in NATO countries the number of Bully troops decreased as the Soviet threat reduced.
Compare to the worse off colonization by the West, Spain, Portugal Holland England, subjecting all the locals as their slaves, plundered all their resources and wealth, or the even worst action of the US, Canada and Australia, not only plundered their resources and wealth, they even plundered their land chased out the aborigines, the original owners of the land and claimed ownership. The Chinese were so tame, so kind as to let those vassal states to be autonomies without Chinese interference but gave them protection when invaded by others.
DeleteLies after lies!
Delete"There is no such protection money paid by the 80 countries to 500 yo Bully. All Funded FOC by Bully taxpayers. That was why Trump complained"
Blurred mfer cares to fact check what trump said?
https://www.stripes.com/theaters/asia_pacific/at-nato-summit-trump-says-japan-and-south-korea-should-pay-more-for-us-troops-1.609703
Blurred mfer - " should pay more for US troops"!!
Clear? Comprendi?
Oooop… "All Funded FOC by Bully taxpayers"
Mfer, goes take a lesson from those 台毒 dickheads about how to lie lah!
Wakakakakaka…
"And in many cases in NATO countries the number of Bully troops decreased as the Soviet threat reduced"
North Atlantic Treaty Organization members boosted expenditures last year, with 11 countries meeting a defense-spending target after trump threaten & hectoring European countries for not spending enough on military outlays.
Left on freewill, the Yankee soldier boys ain't ! Just loitering around causing more societa diseases to the locals as been complained many a times in SKorea, Japan & Germany!
Blurred mfer do keep to yr shameless farts - people r watching!
Compare with Great Leap Forward (40 million), Cultural Revolution (2 million), One Child Policy (400 million), the Scale of Humanitarian Disaster inflicted on their own people, for which there is no acknowledgement or remorse, in fact there is a re-writing of history, worship and reverence for the very people responsible.
Delete".... Great Leap Forward (40 million), Cultural Revolution (2 million), One Child Policy (400 million), ..... Humanitarian Disaster inflicted...." all these unfortunate disasters were consequences attributed to the aftermath of the invasions and plundering by the West, US, UK, France, Holland, Spain, Portugal, Russia, Japan ....... Get it ???
DeleteWow… wow…
DeleteBlurred mfer resolves to regurgitate proven lies to hide its know-nothingness!
Recalcitrant persistent mfering lier!