Search

The withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan is a direct consequence of structural changes in the polarity of the international system. Following the end of the Cold War, the US emerged as the dominant country in the system, making it relatively easy to pursue a foreign policy based on liberal principles, where state-building and social engineering were among the main principles. While some scholars consider the US withdrawal from Afghanistan a strategic failure of its foreign policy, this paper argues that such action was necessary due to fundamental changes in the constellation of forces in the international system. The main reason for this withdrawal is the economic growth of China and its power projection in Asia and other regions of the world. Therefore, similar US actions can be anticipated in the future. This paper adopts a structural realist approach as its primary theoretical framework and Afghanistan is used as the case study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The fall of Afghanistan and the immediate geopolitical space in the region represented a unique instance of political will and alignment toward Afghanistan between the United States and the European Union. Combined with pressing concerns of increasing danger to an at-risk population of Afghanistan citizens who collaborated with the US-led coalition, immediate and broad-reaching action was needed to ensure not only the safety of these individuals left behind in Afghanistan but also those who were evacuated. This paper proposes joint US-EU collaborative efforts and revisions to pre-existing evacuation frameworks to facilitate further evacuations out of Afghanistan. The challenges that existed in spring 2022 in the immediate aftermath are described, and subsequent proposals on redress are provided as a case study for failures in preexisting frameworks. Further analysis of developments since spring 2022 demonstrate applicability and lack thereof because of the changed geopolitical space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 9/11 attacks triggered a paradigm shift in the United States security policy, prioritizing to ensure homeland security and to fight against the terrorism in the new American strategy. The United States invasion of Afghanistan further ravaged the existing fragile state damaging the already crumbling socio-economic and human infrastructure. In addition, the spillover of war into Pakistan started a new era of instability and misery further complicating the socio-economic fabric of the country making it the most vulnerable to terrorism related incidents. The two decades prolonged conflict not only destroyed the economic, social, and political infrastructure in both states, meanwhile mass human rights violations have been committed by the coalition forces under the leadership of the United States. In this context, the present paper investigates human rights abuses through the prism of international human rights law. The study addresses the following questions. (a) To what extent the United States war against terror violates the international law of human rights, and how it helps Washington to reconsolidate the regional hegemony. (b) Whether the war on terror improve the situation of human rights or further aggravate the conditions of civilians in targeted states. The study underlines that the war on terror failed to meet the merit of the right to intervene for self-defense, yet the coalition forces deliberately assimilate the innocent civilians under the vagueanti-terror war rhetoric. In addition, the war serves the United States hegemonic interests in South Asia, as the American presence in Afghanistan and the Indo-United States strategic partnership brought serious geopolitical implications for China and Pakistan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ostensibly, Joe Biden's victory over Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential elections should have placed United States international policy back on a familiar path. However, despite the prevalence of a highly traditional vision of US foreign policy, the Biden administration has maintained significant continuities with the previous administration, as reflected in the policy towards China and the withdrawal from Afghanistan. In part, this is due to the constraints produced by the deep divisions that exist at domestic level. This paper aims to unravel the fundamental elements of Biden's foreign policy, focusing on possible ideological and doctrinal elements, strategic priorities, and any continuities and changes relative to his predecessor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A cacophony of protest greeted President Biden's withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan following a 20-year deployment, implemented and overseen by four different administrations, both Republican and Democrat. For all the criticism of the final withdrawal's implementation, however, strategic ambivalence was always present in U.S. operations in Afghanistan. The bi-partisan decisions that defined the Afghan mission can best be seen in the National Security Strategy documents produced by successive administrations as they sought to address the evolving situation on the ground and the perceived level of threat to the United States. The utilization of discourse analysis to examine these official policy documents allows for an understanding of the comparable attention that was paid to Afghanistan by successive administrations, as well as for an appreciation of the tone and language used regarding the nation. Doing so reveals that despite the duration of the mission and the associated costs, a deep-seated strategic ambiguity existed towards Afghanistan, as it languished as a sideshow for U.S. grand strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]