US withdrawal:

Mansoor Gujjar
3 min readAug 7, 2021


Leaving behind a mount of explosives

Definitely, it is adorable that very keen observations were converged on the document drafted for agreement between Taliban and United states. As far as the quality of literature produced in the Doha document is concerned, one can easily term it as a sophisticated and well articulated script and verdict. But, there are some loopholes which indicate planned negligence and deliberately created vacuum.

The track record of almost every colonial power matches the traits of another. It is widely recognised that the invaders love to offer unrest, chaos and civil war as a dessert for their withdrawal celebrations. After the 3 June, 1947 plan when the Great Britain was setting off, it left half a million dead and more than fifteen million displaced along some serious uneven partition of territories and assets which annoy the subcontinent till this day. Belgium departed from Congo exploiting her resources and leaving behind the burning tribal wars. The cunning lines drawn by sykes-picot in the Middle East are being redrawn with blood this time. Similarly, "Mission Afghanistan" has been closed without giving a proper remedy for peace.

If a war analyst is to ask, he will probably question that;

Q1: Why did America agreed to sit on a dialogue table with Taliban only? why didn't they agreed with a state than a militia which ultimately reflected Taliban as powerful winners.

Q2: Did the Americans negligently fail to give a practical way forward to peace or they deliberately ignore to debate on this very important post-withdrawal issue, allowing the furious lords to return to their land?

Q3: Why the Americans all of a sudden started expecting peace from the very Taliban whom they had rained upon tons of explosives for being terrorists? They have left heavy weaponry at their disposal. Do they want Taliban to raise tensions for all.

Q4: Do the Americans intend to wash out their notorious character for destabilizing the region and shifting the burden once again to Taliban and ultimately maligning Islam for its quest for political supremacy leading to destruction? The policy and research institutes of US and Europe will sit to publish bundles of research articles then.

Q5: Do they want Taliban either to fire a long civil war or to de-seat Kabul and start imposing Islam in the state and finally imposing Islam in their foreign policy about the suffered Uighurs, religious victimization in China, brothers of East Turkestan Islamic movement, Kashmir: Asia's Berlin wall, ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Burma, Muslims radicalization in India? And, it is obvious that war mongers cannot directly fit to adjust with the demands of a modern nation state and afterall-----all-attractive warfield of Afghanistan with so many complexes.

The first American president George Washington in his farewell address in 1796 advised not to get involved in "inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others". Following the advice, US history reveals that "national interests" is their permanent partner. They bombed Japan, destroyed their "everything" and then helped the Japanese rise again at the cost of thousands of US forces in Japan containing China. They are with the South Korea but they will never go to war for them. Nonetheless, the Americans this time are playing their cards differently, their influence greatly reduced apparently which means either they have hired a new lackey or they want an international happening like 9/11 to reintervene forcefully and by right.

What do you think Pakistan is amid crisis again?

(Episode 2)



Mansoor Gujjar

Author/Activist Social Media, Experienced Affiliate Content Writer & Guest Post Expert .