Will the Doha Agreement succeed in ending decades of border conflict between Afghanistan and Pakistan? | policy

Experts and analysts wonder whether the agreement reached by Afghanistan and Pakistan in Doha is capable of addressing the deep historical roots of the conflict between the two countries, or whether it is merely a temporary truce that will be followed by new rounds of escalation, in light of the presence of non-state “armed actors” and border and political disputes extending back to the era of British colonialism.

This historic agreement came after bloody confrontations that lasted for days and left dozens dead and wounded, and the repercussions reached the Afghan capital, Kabul, where violent explosions occurred.

Today, Sunday, Doha witnessed a remarkable breakthrough in this file, after the two countries entered into a series of severe military confrontations on the common border, and reached a temporary truce last Wednesday, but the need was urgent for a more permanent and comprehensive agreement.

In this context, the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced – in an official statement – that the Pakistani and Afghan sides agreed during the talks on an immediate ceasefire and the establishment of mechanisms concerned with consolidating permanent peace and stability between the two countries, expressing its hope that the agreement will form a solid basis for sustainable peace.

To ensure the effectiveness of this agreement, the two parties agreed – according to the statement – to hold follow-up meetings during the next few days to verify its implementation in a reliable and sustainable manner, which contributes to achieving security and stability in the two countries.

Feedback

In terms of official reactions, Afghan Defense Minister Mullah Muhammad Yaqoob Mujahid confirmed – in statements to Al Jazeera – his government’s full commitment to the agreement with Pakistan, stressing that Kabul wants to solve all problems through dialogue, warning that failure to adhere to the provisions of the agreement and each party doing what it wants will not lead to solving the problems, but rather they will grow and their scope will expand.

On the Pakistani side, Defense Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif pointed out that the Afghan and Pakistani sides agreed on the need to stop terrorism and make joint efforts to get rid of it.

The Pakistani minister considered – in an interview with Al Jazeera – that the presence of Qatar and Turkey and their good intentions in reaching the agreement constitute a real guarantee for stopping terrorist acts and achieving stability in the region.

First, the writer and political analyst Muhibullah Al-Sharif seems surprised by the speed of reaching an agreement during the Doha negotiations, stressing that Afghanistan and Pakistan are not ready to bear great pressure due to the problems facing each country individually.

In the same context, the academic and researcher in international relations, Sami Reda, considered that the good offices of Qatar and Turkey were at the forefront of the elements that helped bring the positions of the two countries closer together, stressing that both countries did not want escalation, but things got out of control.

Pakistani interests

As for Pakistani interests in the agreement, Reza points out that Islamabad wants secure western borders, “and this is the most important goal of the Pakistani government and state.”

However, he pointed out an important complication to the picture, which is the presence of “non-state actors” in the border region that are not subject to the control of either government, explaining that these actors include armed organizations that launch attacks on Pakistani security services inside Pakistan and even on civilians, and they are not officially accepted by the governments of both parties.

For his part, Omar Samad, chief researcher at the Atlantic Council for Afghanistan and Pakistan, went on to shed light on the historical roots of the crisis, explaining that it goes back to the stage of British colonialism, the partition of India, and decades of problems that were not dealt with properly, stressing the responsibility of the two neighboring countries to combine their efforts to reach a solution that satisfies them.

He asked both neighboring countries to rely on facts and evidence, instead of exchanging accusations that cannot be verified, warning that exchanging accusations alone will not lead to eventual solutions.

He also called for the existence of measures and procedures acceptable to both parties, whether this represents monitoring, assessing the situation, confidence-building measures, or bringing in experts from countries – such as Qatar and Turkey – who play an important role.

As for the biggest challenge represented by field implementation, analysts believed that the success of the agreement depends on the implementation mechanisms on the ground.

In this regard, Al-Sharif indicated that the most important part will be the executive stages of the agreement, which require professional delegations from both parties to study the issue and discuss the issues in a radical manner, with all frankness and sincerity, adding that this agreement opens the way to talk about the root issues between the two sides, whether it is related to security, intelligence, or political matters.

From a procedural and practical standpoint, Reda explained that the mechanisms being talked about relate to initial monitoring and control procedures for incidents that occur in the international border area between the two countries, with the need for confidence-building measures that have declined greatly in recent years instead of being strengthened.

At the level of the surrounding regional environment, Reza pointed out that the regional countries – especially Iran and the countries of Central Asia – will have an interest in achieving peace in this region, considering that any escalation will not be in the interest of any of the countries, in light of the wars looming on the horizon in the entire region, even the Middle East.