Rangin Dadfar Spanta

Editor's Note:

Among international observers, there are wide talks about Afghanistan facing uncertain future after the withdrawal of US troops. Is the country ready to stand on its own feet? What role can China play? Global Times (GT) reporter Chen Chenchen sat down with Rangin Dadfar Spanta (Spanta), former national security advisor of Afghanistan, to talk about these issues.

GT: How do you see China's role in Afghan reconstruction?

Spanta: China has been helping in reconstruction of Afghanistan for the last 13 years. The biggest investment in Afghanistan is the copper mine opened by China. Afghanistan is very rich in underground resources, and I hope the Chinese companies in this field can come to Afghanistan and use the advantage that we have.

China is a good neighbor and a close friend. My personal preference is that as Chinese firms have given so many aids to the reconstruction of Afghanistan, it's better that they come and invest in Afghanistan, so that we can stand on our own feet.

GT: In terms of security, what kind of role do you expect China to play?

Spanta: China and Afghanistan are under the same threat from terrorism. Terrorists with the East Turkestan Islamic Movement are located behind our border. Sometimes they are trained and equipped there or using Afghanistan as a pathway to come to China. China and Afghanistan have cooperation in combating terrorism. Meanwhile, strengthening and deepening this cooperation, intelligence exchanges, and China's participation in training Afghan security forces and transferring experiences are all fields where we can cooperate in terms of security.

GT: Afghanistan and the US have signed a bilateral security pact. Some argue that US military presence will continue in Afghanistan. Do you agree?

Spanta: This is not a military presence in a classical way. As you know, I led the Afghan delegation while preparing this document. The role of the US since January 2015 will be more advisory in training and advising Afghan security forces. We need to find a way so that we can stand on our feet. We need this cooperation from the US for financing our security forces. The number of US soldiers is limited, and they are mainly advisors and trainers.

GT: How do you see the pact's influence on the US-Afghan relationship?

Spanta: The presence of the international community and the task force was approved by the UN Security Council. China also approved this. NATO forces have to go to Afghanistan, fighting terrorism. Now we have to find a solution, sit together, and put this presence into an accepted framework. And this presence is limited, and not permanent. We hope the forces of the US can return home.

GT: At the moment, there is an argument that the US withdrawal will leave a vacuum in Afghanistan, which will be filled by other powers, such as China. How do you see this argument?

Spanta: There will not be a vacuum. When we began the journey of the reconstruction of Afghanistan, we didn't have at first a national army or police force, and now we have 350,000 well-trained soldiers and police. And for months we have been fighting terrorists alone, and we are defending our country alone.

This is our job to do that. If there is any readiness from the Chinese side to cooperate with the Afghan security sector in this way or other way, I highly welcome it.

GT: So the era of the Great Game in Afghanistan has completely gone?

Spanta: I don't think it's a great game. Afghanistan after the beginning of the 1990s was unfortunately turned into a sanctuary for international terrorist groups. The attack on New York was organized from Afghanistan, but by Al Qaeda and its affiliates. Now the international community can help Afghanistan on the process of liberation. That is not a kind of game between superpowers.

GT: Afghanistan has very rich experiences in fighting terrorism, but still hasn't defeated it. What do you think is the main reason?

Spanta: That is a multi-faceted problem. There is a constant position in my approach: The main problem in this context was that the US and other countries couldn't help us because they fought mainly the symptoms, not the causes. I mean, the sanctuaries, the financial resources, the training camps, they never touched them. The production centers of terrorism were always active. That is what the US and others neglected.

GT: Do you think the US purposely ignored the problem?

Spanta: I don't know. I don't want to talk about that. But they absolutely neglected it. That's the strategic ambiguity, or the lack of strategic clarity. Who is the enemy? Where is the enemy? And how to fight them? These are the questions. Fighting only the symptoms is not enough.

GT: Do you think Central Asia is still the backyard of Russia?

Spanta: Central Asian countries have a special relationship with Russia. Many Central Asian countries use Russian as an official language. And the universities work with each other, and the economies are very similar.

But now we have independent countries that after years of colonialism and occupation regained their own sovereignty. They are trying to strike a balance between exercising sovereignty and having good relations with Russia. I have met with a number of leadership of these countries. After the developments in Ukraine, they are concerned about their sovereignty. But they will keep their sovereignty and at the same time good relations with Russia.

GT: Amid tension between the US and Russia, does Afghanistan need to pick a side?

Spanta: No. This is not the case. But such tension is indeed a serious threat, because after WWII or the Cold War, we have for the first time a kind of confrontation between Russia and other powers. Russia has the feeling that foreign forces are interfering in its security area, which is probably true. But others see the interference of Russia, and its occupation of some parts of Ukraine.

I think the security regime in Europe being destroyed is a serious threat for Europe. It creates more tension and competition between Russia and the US in the Middle East and other parts of the world. We do need more cooperation, instead of confrontation. But this confrontation is still not affecting Afghanistan, and this is good for us.