Trump’s Other “Phony Deal of the Century” Unravelling. “Peace with the Taliban”

Region: ,
In-depth Report:

The Trump regime’s so-called deal with the Taliban is intended to facilitate future talks with the US and its puppet regime in Kabul. 

It has nothing to do with assuring peace and stability to the war-torn country, nothing to do with ending US occupation — nothing to do with giving Afghanistan back to the Afghans, free from US control of their territory.

It’s not a peace or ceasefire deal. The so-called “Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan” is subterfuge — guaranteeing nothing to its long-suffering people because the US doesn’t operate this way, serving its own geopolitical interests by controlling and exploiting other nations.

The US came to Afghanistan to stay, permanent occupation planned, the same plan in all its war theaters, waged to transform nations into vassal states — ruled by installed puppet regimes subservient to US interests.

The Kabul regime was uninvolved in US/Taliban talks with no say on the signing document that included a prisoner swap.

When US-installed president Ashraf Ghani objected, saying he “made no commitment to free 5,000 Taliban prisoners” as part of a prisoner swap a day after the agreement was signed in Doha, Qatar, fighting resumed.

A separate so-called Joint Declaration between the US and its Kabul puppet regime makes no mention of numbers of prisoners to be exchanged, saying the following:

“To create the conditions for reaching a political settlement and achieving a permanent, sustainable ceasefire, the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan will participate in a US-facilitated discussion with Taliban representatives on confidence-building measures, to include determining the feasibility of releasing significant numbers of prisoners on both sides.”

Failure to release about 5,000 Taliban prisoners as stipulated in the US agreement with its representatives could unravel the deal before the ink is dry.

On March 10, intra-Afghan dialogue is supposed to discuss prisoner swap arrangements. Ghani objected saying “(i)t is not the authority of the (US) to decide. (It’s) only a facilitator.”

On March 3, Trump spoke with Taliban leaders in Doha. A day later, Pentagon warplanes terror-bombed Taliban fighters in Nahr-e Saraj.

Reportedly their fighters killed 30 Afghan forces and four civilians in areas they control.

Before the February 29 Doha signing ceremony, the Taliban and Trump regime agreed to a week-long cessation of fighting.

Breached by resumption of violence, the fragile deal is unravelling much faster than anticipated.

It calls for reducing numbers of US and allied forces in the country in the coming months, withdrawing entirely in 14 months, including abandonment of Pentagon bases that cost billions of dollars to build and maintain.

It affirmed a phony US commitment to aid Afghan security forces prevent ISIS, al-Qaeda, and likeminded jihadist groups from operating in Afghanistan — groups the US created, supports, and deploys to combat theaters as proxy troops.

It permits continued Pentagon military operations with consent of the Afghan government on the phony pretext of combatting terrorism as necessary.

It prohibits use of force by the US and allied countries “against the territorial integrity or political independence of Afghanistan or intervening in its domestic affairs” — how the US operates time and again against targeted nations to control them.

Terms of so-called agreements the US signed with the Taliban and Kabul puppet regime aren’t in sync with each other.

Taliban officials won’t deal with the Kabul regime unless a prisoner swap agreed to with the US is fulfilled, what Ghani objects to.

Further complicating things is the disputed September 2019 presidential election Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah both claim to have won — the Trump regime yet to recognize one figure over the other.

Resumed fighting between Taliban fighters and government forces may continue as long as terms agreed to in Doha aren’t fulfilled.

In response, the Pentagon said it’ll “defend Afghan forces” by attacking Taliban positions.

The US/Taliban agreement doesn’t obligate its fighters to cease combatting government forces.

Trump wants concluded whatever will help his reelection campaign.

Claiming an end to over 18 years of war in Afghanistan and bringing home US troops in whatever numbers could help his chances even if conflict is far from resolved.

A resumption of fighting on the ground along with Pentagon terror-bombing of Taliban controlled areas could unravel the Doha deal altogether.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Visit his blog site at

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." Visit his blog site at Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]