Unfolding the American Agenda in Afghanistan: Motives, Moves, and Regional Implications.

After January 20th, when President Donald Trump took the oath of office once again, there has been a noticeable surge in American engagement in Afghanistan. On the surface, Washington’s renewed focus seems to revolve around the return of approximately $80 billion worth of sophisticated weapons and equipment left behind during the hasty U.S. withdrawal in 2021. The release of American nationals from Taliban captivity is portrayed as a diplomatic success. Simultaneously, high-level backchannel diplomacy continues, with figures like Zalmay Khalilzad maintaining close contact with Taliban leaders and various Afghan factions. Speculations about potential American airbases in Afghanistan are also gaining ground.

Yet, beneath the layers of apparent pragmatism lies a complex network of strategic interests, shifting policies, and geopolitical maneuvering that signal a deeper American motive in the region. This op-ed seeks to explore the rationale behind Washington’s revived interest in Afghanistan, the suspicious yet calculated engagement with the Taliban, and the larger implications of this policy shift for regional powers like Pakistan, China, Russia, Iran, and the Central Asian republics.

The Surface Narrative vs. the Deeper Strategy

The Biden administration’s withdrawal in 2021 was widely criticized for its abruptness and lack of planning. The resultant chaos tarnished America’s global credibility, while Afghanistan slipped back into the hands of the Taliban. However, with President Trump’s return, the narrative is shifting once again—this time with a mix of security concerns and strategic recalibration.

Publicly, the U.S. administration is focusing on two main issues: first, the recovery of advanced weapons and military hardware left behind; second, the protection and release of U.S. citizens. Both objectives are legitimate and politically acceptable. However, these concerns alone do not justify the scale and nature of renewed American diplomatic and strategic activity in Afghanistan.

The real picture seems far more nuanced. Washington appears to be using these issues as an entry point for re-establishing a long-term foothold in a region that remains strategically vital, especially given Afghanistan’s proximity to China, Iran, Central Asia, and Pakistan. The country’s geostrategic location—at the crossroads of South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East—makes it too important to be left solely under the influence of regional powers.

Why the Taliban? A Dialogue Beyond Recognition

One of the most perplexing elements of recent U.S. policy is its quiet but consistent engagement with the Taliban, despite not officially recognizing their regime. Figures like Zalmay Khalilzad, a veteran diplomat with deep roots in Afghan politics, continue to engage with Taliban leaders and other power brokers. While official statements are absent, the pattern suggests that Washington is deliberately pursuing a policy of “functional engagement”—collaborating where interests align, without extending formal legitimacy.

This approach has raised eyebrows, particularly regarding the recent removal of the Haqqani Network from the U.S. terror list. Known for its past links to deadly attacks on American forces and civilians, the Haqqani group’s de-listing is seen as both symbolic and strategic. It potentially opens channels for intelligence cooperation and counterterrorism operations, or at the very least, minimizes direct threats to any future American presence in the country.

Such actions indicate a shift in U.S. priorities—from state-building and democratization to a colder, interest-based realism. The American policy seems to be pivoting from ideals to pragmatism, from governance to geopolitics.

American Interests: Rebalancing Power in the Region

At the heart of Washington’s renewed interest in Afghanistan lies a broader strategic agenda: containing Chinese influence, monitoring Iranian activity, reasserting leverage over Central Asian energy routes, and maintaining a deterrent against Russia’s regional ambitions.

• China: Afghanistan’s border with China’s Xinjiang region is of immense strategic concern to Beijing. The Chinese have invested heavily in regional infrastructure through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). A re-engaged America, possibly through intelligence posts or air bases in Afghanistan, can act as a counterweight to unchecked Chinese expansion.
• Iran: The proximity to Iran offers Washington a vantage point to monitor Iranian movements and influence networks, particularly those linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its operations across the region.
• Russia: With Moscow distracted by its engagements in Ukraine and tensions with NATO, a U.S. re-entry into Central Asia via Afghanistan would be perceived as a challenge to Russia’s traditional sphere of influence, particularly in countries like Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.
• Central Asia: The region remains critical for global energy flows and mineral resources. American presence in Afghanistan could act as a pivot for projecting soft and hard power across Central Asia, especially as Russia and China consolidate their economic and political influence there.

The Pakistan Factor

For Pakistan, America’s renewed interest in Afghanistan is a double-edged sword. On one hand, Islamabad shares concerns about a stable Afghanistan, especially in curbing terrorism and cross-border militancy. On the other, the potential re-establishment of U.S. military bases in the region—possibly with the Taliban’s silent consent—could complicate Pakistan’s own strategic calculations.

Islamabad has historically played the role of a facilitator between Washington and the Taliban. However, an active U.S. footprint in Afghanistan might reduce Pakistan’s leverage, shift regional dynamics, and draw it deeper into great-power competition between the U.S. and China.

Scenarios Ahead: What Could Unfold?

• S. Tactical Presence Returns: Under this scenario, Washington establishes limited intelligence or drone bases under discreet agreements with the Taliban or other factions. This would ensure a minimal footprint with strategic impact.
• Proxy Engagement: The U.S. might opt for indirect influence through local actors, NGOs, or economic tools, avoiding the risks of physical deployment while maintaining intelligence and diplomatic presence.
• Reversal of Recognition: While unlikely in the near term, a conditional recognition of the Taliban could emerge if internal Afghan governance becomes relatively stable and cooperative in counterterrorism.
• Great Power Contest: A reasserted American role may provoke a sharper response from China, Russia, and Iran—leading to a new cold-war style power contest centered around Afghanistan.

The Return of the Great Game

The unfolding developments in Afghanistan suggest that Washington is far from abandoning its strategic stake in the country. Under the cloak of recovering weapons and rescuing hostages, deeper geopolitical calculations are in play. The dialogue with the Taliban—though unofficial—signals a shift toward realpolitik, where interests trump ideology.

For regional actors—especially Pakistan, China, Russia, and Iran—this demands recalibration. The return of American strategic interest could either stabilize Afghanistan through calibrated cooperation or destabilize the region through renewed competition.

In this context, a multilateral regional approach involving all stakeholders, including the Taliban, remains the most viable path to sustainable peace. Otherwise, Afghanistan risks becoming once again the battleground of foreign agendas rather than a sovereign, self-determined state.