Leave Afghanistan and move on.

 Leave Afghanistan and move on. This is the continuation of the American story in Afghanistan. Not only that, but the Afghan story of India is also like that. Only Pakistan has turned the page. is that so? That is what the Americans are asking. The world is amazed at this. It is the only difference between the two scripts. There are countless statements of condemnation and millions of investigative studies and critical reviews of what has happened in Afghanistan over the last two decades. What could have been done? What could have been done or what could have been avoided? There is material on this subject in every archive in the world. Yet the key players are doing just that. Is the same wind of destruction and ruin blowing once the US withdraws? Only time will tell. Pakistan's "not at all" may not be to the West's liking, but it has given confidence to Afghan stakeholders. That is why Pakistan's invitation to influential people in Afghanistan to negotiate is one

Of course, 9/11 was a tragedy, but what happened next was devastating. It was a classic example of the further suppression of violence, the indiscriminate use of force and the violation of all human rights in the name of human rights. We have seen the extremes of degradation. Millions of lives have been lost, millions have been affected, more violence has erupted in the region, the world has felt the sting of violence, and most importantly, the Taliban, who were a minority in Afghanistan, have become a majority today. As feared, the country is now engulfed in the flames of civil war. There is nothing that the government or the administration can do to stop it. It is a reminder of the tragic events for Pakistan that if different approaches were not adopted, the damage done in the past is going to be repeated. Three types of political-geographical confusion could arise after the US withdrawal:

1. From Nation Building to Destruction: Most American wars have a "nation building" agenda. That was the goal of the Afghan war. Every year since the end of the Cold War until 2005, the United States has been determined to build a new nation. Earlier, interventions were made on "humanitarian grounds". Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo and East Timor are examples of such "high-profile" interventions. After the devastating effects of the long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, President Biden categorically denied the traditional American "commitment" and said, "We did not go to Afghanistan to build a nation. "In other words, it meant  Afghanistan would go to hell.

2. From dependence to shaking hands: The flaw in the US occupation plan is that they can easily enter and take control of a country, but then the exit strategy is very poor. Choosing weak governments, providing them with military and financial support, and controlling their policy-making is part of the US strategy. In response to the US intervention, client governments face violence and insurgency. Then the US war machine starts using drones and other modern weapons. When the intervention intensifies, the client government begins to weaken. Weakness increases its reliance on US aid. Increasing the capacity of indigenous peoples, which is the declared agenda of the United States and which should be an evacuation strategy, fails for a number of reasons. The reason for this failure is lack of capacity and efficiency. That is why, despite twenty years of controlling Afghan affairs at the grassroots level, the United States has not been able to enable the Afghan army to defend itself against the Taliban. This situation is definitely a big one

3. From looters to facilitators: The unfortunate aspect of foreign intervention is that in its target country, insignificant players are incited to spread chaos and divide society. An example of this is the emergence of the Northern Alliance. India's intervention is also clear. As a result, the sovereign state becomes a victim of political ordeals, both internally and externally. India started its business and trade activities using Afghanistan. It opened several consulates there for foreign policy purposes against Pakistan. Unfortunately, in the past, Pakistan has become a tool of the US agenda and the target of the wrath of Afghans and terrorists. The question today is, has the United States done what it did in the past? Also, where can we go from here? Answering these questions requires deep thinking and deep intellectual access. Pakistan can take some steps to avoid the problem of embedding across the Durand Line.

1. "Not at all" at all levels: The refusal to allow the US to fight in safe havens across the border was undoubtedly the most difficult decision for Pakistan. This is a significant change in policy compared to the past. It is important to reinforce the perception that Pakistan can no longer be influenced by its decisions without showing flexibility. Civil and military sympathies are welcome. The two are on the same page in this regard, but many interested groups are bent on facilitating the saboteurs. They must be dealt with severely. If this does not happen, there will be more violence and seriousness in response to the violence as in the past.