The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 left the nation at a pivotal juncture. Today, Afghanistan faces an acute humanitarian crisis and increasing influence from China, Russia and Iran. Amid these challenges lies an unparalleled opportunity for the incoming Trump administration to reassert itself as a partner for stability and progress.
For all the hardships endured by Afghans during two decades of American involvement, many still prefer engaging with the U.S. over adversarial powers. China, Russia, and Iran primarily approach Afghanistan to extract; the U.S., at its best, comes to empower.
Recalibrating U.S.-Afghan relations requires bold, pragmatic initiatives. Reopening the consulate in Kabul, for example, could serve as a pivotal step to rebuild trust and foster cooperation.
While this would entail some security concerns and a level of diplomatic recognition for the Taliban — a prospect fraught with challenges—this is a moment for strategic realism. Limited recognition does not equate to endorsement, but could unlock avenues for collaboration.
Another bold initiative would be to focus on bilateral agreements for humanitarian assistance, rather than traditional multilateral frameworks. Multilateral organizations in Afghanistan have struggled to align with the de facto government, leading to frustration on both sides, program inefficiencies, and diminished donor confidence.
Concerns over aid inadvertently benefiting Taliban officials have further complicated the situation. Direct partnerships with Afghan organizations and coordinated engagement with local authorities could improve efficiency and foster transparency. This pragmatic shift would also align aid delivery more closely with local needs.
Finally, addressing immediate humanitarian challenges, such as acute hunger and systemic poverty, through bilateral agreements would stabilize vulnerable populations while creating an environment for incremental reforms.
The stakes remain high. Afghanistan’s economic instability fuels migration and extremism, with groups like ISIS-K maintaining a concerning presence. Its strategic location and untapped resources further underscore Afghanistan’s strategic value as an important piece on the geopolitical chessboard.
To fully realize this potential, the U.S. could engage not only with Afghan officials but also with influential regional partners such as Pakistan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
Education stands as a cornerstone of Afghanistan’s long-term stability. Reengagement efforts should prioritize reopening schools for girls, improving access to quality education and supporting educational initiatives that benefit all Afghans. Education is not just a moral imperative; it is a strategic investment that can counter extremist ideologies and promote economic growth.
Reengagement, however, must be pragmatic and tied to clear, measurable outcomes. Initiatives such as expanding healthcare access and addressing systemic poverty could showcase U.S. goodwill while advancing core American values. Crucially, aid and collaboration could be tied to enforceable conditions, ensuring accountability from the de facto authorities.
What would make this different now? The 20 years of U.S. involvement were often marked by a top-heavy, externally driven approach that struggled to adapt to Afghan realities.
A recalibrated strategy focused on smaller, locally grounded initiatives — led by Afghan organizations and communities, with Western oversight — could yield better results. By leveraging lessons learned, this new engagement would emphasize efficiency, transparency, and measurable outcomes, avoiding the pitfalls of past overreach and bureaucracy.
The approach could also include a “counterterrorism lite” component, leveraging intelligence-sharing partnerships that require no U.S. troops. Funding for these efforts could be sourced by reallocating existing resources, avoiding additional taxpayer burdens. Such efforts would reflect America’s unfinished business in Afghanistan — addressing the abruptness of the withdrawal and its fallout without granting political legitimacy to the Taliban.
The Taliban’s leadership is not monolithic, offering opportunities for engagement. The Kandahari faction’s rigid governance contrasts with the Haqqani network’s pragmatism and broader popular support.
While engagement with the Haqqanis carries historical baggage, they have signaled a willingness to talk and it could yield incremental progress in areas like education and healthcare. Targeted collaboration could leverage these internal divisions to promote reforms while maintaining U.S. principles.
Additionally, reopening the U.S. consulate in Kabul would symbolize renewed diplomatic relations and provide a platform for engagement. Framed as a mutual opportunity rather than a concession, this initiative could lead to:
- Consular Services: Offering Afghans a reliable, accessible hub for navigating visa and consular requirements.
- Economic Collaboration: Easing select sanctions and unlocking Afghanistan’s financial markets in exchange for commitments to transparency and economic stability. Transforming Bagram Airfield into a commercial hub could spur economic development while countering Chinese investments.
- Humanitarian and Social Progress: Negotiating bilateral programs to reopen schools for girls, expand access to healthcare, and address systemic poverty, demonstrating U.S. goodwill.
- Explosive Ordnance Risk Education and Clearance: Prioritizing efforts to reduce the deadly legacy of unexploded ordnance. This issue has caused friction between the de facto government and multilateral organizations but remains critical to protecting Afghan lives and fostering trust.
- Security Cooperation: Facilitating counterterrorism efforts to stabilize Afghanistan, contingent on commitments to rein in extremist factions like ISIS-K.
This blueprint avoids past mistakes by focusing on initiatives with tangible, measurable impacts. It balances engagement with accountability, ensuring that U.S. efforts align with strategic interests and moral responsibilities.
Afghanistan represents more than a humanitarian challenge; it is an opportunity for America to redefine its leadership.
By focusing on initiatives that directly benefit Afghan communities, the U.S. can counter adversarial influence while advancing its global position. When donor fatigue and skepticism about multilateral frameworks are at an all-time high, a recalibrated approach would show that U.S. engagement offers a brighter future for Afghans.
Through timely action, the incoming administration can prevent Afghanistan from becoming a breeding ground for extremism and a geopolitical stronghold for adversaries like China and Russia.
Within the first 100 days, reopening the U.S. consulate in Kabul and initiating direct bilateral aid agreements could stabilize the region, protect American interests and project renewed American global leadership.
Arman Nuri is a pseudonym for an official who has worked with a humanitarian organization in Afghanistan for more than 30 years. He is writing under a pseudonym to avoid potential retribution from the Afghan government. Ron MacCammon is a retired U.S. Army Special Forces colonel and former political officer for the Department of State. He provided on-site management and oversight for the State Department’s largest and oldest humanitarian demining program and has worked on conventional weapons destruction programs in Afghanistan and Africa.
