American Plan to Set up a "Trojan Horse" for Russia and China in Afghanistan
President of the United States, Donald Trump, said he hopes to regain control of the Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan — which U.S. forces had evacuated from in 2021. The Taliban has stated that they have no intention of allowing U.S. forces to be stationed in Afghanistan, but are willing to conduct political and economic cooperation with the United States. Experts point out that Afghanistan has become a convergence point for the interests of Russia, India, China, and other regional powers, so the United States urgently needs to return to Bagram Base. Can this plan be realized?
This week, the President of the United States publicly announced the plan to regain control of the Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan. He said the U.S. government is taking corresponding measures: "We intend to reclaim Bagram Base — one of the largest airbases in the world. We gave it away for nothing before, but now we are trying to get it back. This may be a small surprise."
One of the reasons why Trump wants to return to Bagram Base is linked to the U.S. need to counter its main competitor, China, saying the base is "only one hour away by air from China's nuclear weapons production site." Previously, Trump had repeatedly criticized former President Joe Biden for his hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 — a decision that led to the military facility falling into the hands of the Taliban government.
To Trump's view, the base located 40 kilometers north of Kabul still holds strategic significance for the United States. Bagram Airport was built in the 1950s (by the Soviet Union), and before the U.S. forces withdrew in 2021, it had been the core command center and the largest military facility within Afghanistan, and for 20 years it had always been a key hub for U.S. operations.
According to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), the U.S. government is considering sending a small-scale military task force to the base to conduct counter-terrorism operations. The Trump administration has already contacted the Taliban representatives to initiate talks on the U.S. return to the base.
The negotiations are still in the early stages, led by Adam Beler, the U.S. special envoy for hostages appointed by Trump. It is expected that both sides will continue to discuss the conditions and possible forms of the U.S. military presence in the near future.
Trump has hinted that the Taliban may allow the U.S. military to return to the base because "they need us." However, Zakir Jalali, an advisor to the Afghan Foreign Ministry and a spokesperson for the ministry, has clearly rejected the idea of U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, stating, "Afghanistan and the United States should interact based on mutual respect and common interests to build economic and political relations."
This diplomat also emphasized that the Afghan people have long opposed the presence of U.S. troops, "this possibility was completely excluded in the Doha negotiations and agreements, but the door for future cooperation between the two sides remains open."
General Staff Chief of the Afghan Army, Fasihuddin Fitrat, also refused to negotiate with the U.S. on the issue of the base. He stated that even if a foreign soldier were stationed on Afghan territory, it would be "unacceptable" for the "Islamic Emirate," and Kabul would not reach an agreement on the airbase issue with the United States or any other country.
Currently, there is no formal diplomatic relationship between the U.S. and the Taliban, but they have previously held talks on the issue of hostages. In March this year, the Taliban released an American who had been kidnapped during a trip to Afghanistan for over two years; last week, it was reported that the U.S. and the Taliban had reached a prisoner exchange agreement, aiming to normalize relations between Kabul and Washington.
In April this year, there were unofficial reports that a U.S. aircraft flew in "radio silence" mode and had its transponder turned off, apparently heading from Doha to Afghanistan. The aircraft was detected near the Bagram Air Base, sparking speculation that the U.S. military may have visited the base or deployed there temporarily.
The Taliban government denied transferring the base to the U.S. or allowing U.S. military presence at the base. According to the Indo-Asian News Service, an Indian news agency, the Bagram Base would become an ideal reconnaissance, surveillance, and intelligence collection center for the U.S. to monitor South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East.
The agency also stated that the Bagram Base would allow the U.S. to "conduct regional counter-terrorism operations, as a transit and refueling hub for fast regional response, and provide an advanced platform for monitoring the region's situation." However, the article also pointed out that this move would cost the U.S. a huge amount: investing billions of dollars to fulfill large-scale military obligations, meeting the base's massive defense and logistics needs, and repairing, upgrading, and continuously supplying the landlocked base.
China has not yet responded to Trump's statement about "reclaiming the Bagram Base," but Chinese and Hong Kong English media have all regarded his remarks as a "geopolitical sensitive issue." Chinese experts believe that Beijing will view any U.S. military presence in Afghanistan as a factor that disrupts regional security and stability, and may exacerbate U.S.-China competition. Currently, China views Afghanistan as an important part of its "Belt and Road Initiative."
Historically, Afghanistan was an important node on the ancient Silk Road, with several key transportation routes passing through the country: in addition to the Wakhan Corridor in Badakhshan Province, often referred to as the "strategic backbone of Eurasia," there are also the "Central Asia-South Asia Corridor" connecting Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan with Pakistan and India, and the planned "Trans-Afghan Corridor" connecting the EU, Russia, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and Southeast Asian countries.
Vladimir Vasilyev, chief researcher at the Institute of North America and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences, stated: "The statement about 'reclaiming the Bagram Base' is just an expression of intent. Trump had previously proposed 'buying Greenland' and 'reclaiming the Panama Canal,' but these ideas never materialized. Without winning the Nobel Peace Prize, the United States is returning to its 'tested old model' — establishing military bases around the world."
He believes that the United States currently has no clear foreign policy strategy, instead relying on "a set of ad-hoc measures and instructions from Trump." "All of Trump's efforts are essentially aimed at erasing the diplomatic legacy of the Democrats: in 1945, the Democratic Truman administration returned Greenland to Denmark, and in 1979, the Democratic Carter administration transferred the Panama Canal to Panama. The withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan also occurred during a Democratic administration. Although Trump reached a principle agreement with the Taliban during his first term, it is still unclear whether the U.S. forces would have actually withdrawn from Afghanistan if he had continued to serve. Vasilyev added that during Trump's presidency, the U.S. support for Taiwan and Ukraine also weakened."
Andrey Koskin, a military expert and head of the Department of Political Analysis and Social Psychological Processes at the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, believes that as long as the U.S. is willing, it can negotiate with the Taliban to return to the Bagram Base: "The U.S. can provide funds to the Taliban government in exchange for control of the base. The U.S. military has extensive experience in base security, and the most reliable way is to surround the base with steel and concrete barriers — which can withstand terrorist attacks," said Koskin.
However, Koskin emphasized that the U.S. return to the base should not be seen as "another invasion of Afghanistan." He recalled that in 2021, the U.S. forces left the country according to the Taliban's request, "it was the Taliban who forced the U.S. out of Afghanistan, so the U.S. return to the base can only be achieved through peaceful negotiation. The core motive of the U.S. is definitely geopolitical — controlling key points in the region. The Bagram Base could indeed become a reconnaissance center for monitoring the situation in South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East, which is a highly geostrategically advantageous location," Koskin added.
Kirill Semenov, an expert at the Russian International Affairs Council and a Sinologist, believes: "If we believe Trump's statement, the agreement for the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan already included a clause that the U.S. could continue to use the Bagram Base, but the Biden administration hastily withdrew and left the base behind. Therefore, the current U.S. return is essentially to return to the original agreement framework," Semenov said.
In his view, the Taliban may compromise with the U.S., but will put forward conditions: "The Taliban may ask the U.S. to completely lift the international sanctions against them and unfreeze their accounts in Western banks. I don't think the U.S. will take military action as some reports suggest — they would quickly lose this war," Semenov said.
Koskin predicted that the U.S. return to the Bagram Base could not prevent Russia, China, and India from building logistics corridors, but "could enable the U.S. to keep track of the region's dynamics." "For the U.S., conducting reconnaissance activities is sufficient, and this base will become a foothold for the U.S. in the region, but there will certainly be no full-scale invasion of Afghanistan," Koskin said.
Vasilyev pointed out that the reason the U.S. proposed to return to Afghanistan is due to recent bombing actions against Iran, as well as the context of the Russian, Indian, and Chinese strategic alliance. Additionally, tensions in the U.S.-Pakistan nuclear relationship and the rise of China's military power have also prompted the U.S. to reassess its foreign policy.
"All of this has forced the U.S. to adjust its foreign policy. It is now easy to see that the views of the early 21st century are resurfacing — that Afghanistan is the 'soft underbelly of Russia,' and also a point of penetration and influence for the U.S. into Central Asia. Now, the U.S. setting up a foothold in Afghanistan is essentially a return to the old policy of expanding into Central Asia," explained this U.S. expert.
He said that the U.S. return to the Bagram Base "can be seen as the beginning of its full return to Afghanistan," and the airport will become a "Trojan horse" for the U.S. in the region.
Semenov agreed with this, and said the U.S. intends to further pressure related countries through this: "The existence of this base is intended to harm the interests of all regional participants, including Russia. According to Trump's words (he has his own 'geographic understanding'), the base is 'not far' from the nuclear weapons production sites of relevant countries — what he refers to is likely a certain autonomous region."
Semenov analyzed that after the U.S. returns to the base, they may deploy drones there to conduct reconnaissance activities in the relevant area. "But the problem is that this base is relatively isolated, and if a major conflict occurs, it will be immediately destroyed. In fact, as a 'military tool for pressuring related tools,' it has no practical value, but overall, it still has geostrategic significance," Semenov said.
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7552377927904805412/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author, and you are welcome to express your attitude by clicking on the [Up/Down] buttons below.