China's next headache, a new Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan

Many of our readers are old enough to remember the United States’ support of the Afghan Mujahideen following the USSR invasion of Afghanistan. Indeed, the Mujahideen – including both local Afghan fighters and Arab militants who travelled to Afghanistan for jihad – helped form the ideological and governmental basis for the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, controlled by the Taliban and a safe haven for numerous terror groups such as al-Qaeda.

The US Operation Cyclone’s judgement was to support the little guy to fight the big guy, and waste the big guy’s resources. In the context of the Cold War where proxy wars were a flavour of the month, the logic made sense.

However, hindsight always tells a different story. We all know what happened next.

What followed the 9/11 attacks was an upheaval across the entire Middle East and central Asia, and indeed across Islamic communities the world over. In the West, we saw a dramatic rise of Islamic fundamentalism while the Middle East witnessed bloody invasions, civil wars as well as the growth and decline of regional superpowers.

However over recent years, the world has averted its gaze from the Middle East and has looked towards China as the new global sponsor of instability.

Blowing up satellites in orbit, state sponsored cyber attacks, trade wars and debt diplomacy. The list of aggressions are numerous.

In so doing, the West has forgotten its enemies in the Middle East and central Asia. The West has forgotten them so much so that two consecutive US Presidents have come to the conclusion that withdrawing from Afghanistan and ceasing their 20-year war on the Taliban and terror sympathisers in central Asia was the best course of action.

VIEW ALL

Is there something more behind Trump and Biden’s decisions?

Donald Trump (author of the “bomb the sh*t out of them” doctrine), began the process of negotiations with the Taliban for a troop withdrawal. Meanwhile, President Joe Biden (chief internationalist) didn’t bow to pressures from many across the global community to remain in the country and followed Trump’s lead. Two proponents of different approaches to war and foreign policy generated the same outcome. Curious.

Perhaps there’s more to the situation than meets the eye.

Adnaan Aamir, journalist based in Quetta, Pakistan, and founder of Balochistan Voices, outlined in the Interpreter this week that the Pakistani Taliban attempted to take the life the Chinese ambassador to Pakistan.

Aamir outlined that there were three potential reasons for this attack.

“Most obviously, the TTP recognises that China is arguably the closest ally of Pakistan at present. The terror group has repeatedly targeted symbols of the Pakistani state and important personalities,” Aamir contested.

“Second, the TTP is happy to further muddy the waters for Pakistan in its regional rivalry with India.

“A further reason for a change of strategy may be that the TTP has decided to retaliate against China over the treatment meted out to Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang province, where there have been mass incarcerations in the name of countering terrorism.”

Aamir explained that there is currently a US$50 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor agreement underway, which will build numerous energy and infrastructure projects across the country. Indeed, not only would this threaten the strength and bargaining power of the US’ newfound strategic partner in India, but will also provide China with a gateway to marry up with their freshly renewed allies in Iran.

Except, a newly emboldened Taliban Emirate is in the way.

Strategically, it would also be hugely beneficial to the US to place a rogue extremist government on the doorstep of a global superpower. Indeed, the Taliban and al-Qaeda, both in Pakistan and Afghanistan, have long historical connections to the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement operating in western China, specifically among the Uyghur community.

The situation gets more interesting considering that the Turkistan Islamic Party was dropped from the US terror list by former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo in October 2020, arguing that there is too little evidence that they still exist – a line that China promptly denied. Again, curious.

End note

Perhaps there is more than meets the eye regarding the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Certainly, the US has geopolitical impetus to leave the region in ruins for the Taliban to reassert control over.

History has a curious way of repeating itself.

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia's future role and position in the Indo-Pacific region and what you would like to see from Australia's political leaders in terms of partisan and bipartisan agenda setting in the comments section below, or get in touch with This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..