（下边有中文翻译请继续看到底。 谢谢。）
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.
1月20日唐纳德·特朗普总统再次宣誓就职后，美国在阿富汗的参与明显增加。从表面上看，华盛顿重新关注的焦点似乎是2021年美军匆忙撤军时留下的价值约800亿美元的尖端武器装备的归还。被塔利班囚禁的美国公民获释被描述为外交上的成功。与此同时，高层的秘密外交渠道仍在继续，像扎尔迈·哈利勒扎德这样的人物与塔利班领导人和阿富汗各派系保持着密切联系。关于美国可能在阿富汗建立空军基地的猜测也越来越多。
然而，在表面上的实用主义背后隐藏着一个复杂的战略利益网络、不断变化的政策和地缘政治策略，这表明美国在该地区有更深层次的动机。这篇专栏文章试图探讨华盛顿对阿富汗重新产生兴趣的理由，与塔利班可疑但经过深思熟虑的接触，以及这一政策转变对巴基斯坦、中国、俄罗斯、伊朗和中亚共和国等地区大国的更大影响。
表层叙事vs.深层策略
拜登政府2021年的撤军计划因过于仓促和缺乏计划而受到广泛批评。由此产生的混乱玷污了美国的全球信誉，而阿富汗又重新落入塔利班之手。然而，随着特朗普总统的回归，叙事再次发生了变化——这一次是安全担忧和战略调整的混合体。
在公开场合，美国政府把重点放在两个主要问题上：回收遗留的先进武器和军事装备，以及保护和释放美国公民。这两个目标都是合法的，在政治上也是可以接受的。然而，仅仅这些担忧并不能证明美国在阿富汗重新开展外交和战略活动的规模和性质是合理的。
真实情况似乎要微妙得多。华盛顿似乎正在利用这些问题作为一个切入点，在一个仍然具有战略重要性的地区重新建立一个长期立足点，特别是考虑到阿富汗靠近中国、伊朗、中亚和巴基斯坦。这个国家的地缘战略位置——位于南亚、中亚和中东的十字路口——使得它太重要了，不能仅仅受地区大国的影响。
为什么是塔利班？一场面目全非的对话
美国最近的政策中最令人困惑的因素之一是，尽管没有正式承认塔利班政权，但它与塔利班的接触却悄无声息，但始终如一。像扎尔迈•哈利勒扎德（Zalmay Khalilzad）这样在阿富汗政坛有着深厚根基的资深外交官，继续与塔利班领导人和其他权力掮掮者接触。虽然没有官方声明，但这种模式表明，华盛顿正在刻意追求一种“功能性接触”的政策——在利益一致的地方进行合作，而不扩大正式的合法性。
这种做法令人惊讶，特别是最近将哈卡尼网络（Haqqani Network）从美国恐怖组织名单上除名一事。哈卡尼组织过去曾与针对美国军队和平民的致命袭击有关联，因此被从名单上除名既具有象征意义，也具有战略意义。它有可能为情报合作和反恐行动打开渠道，或者至少可以最大限度地减少对美国未来在该国存在的直接威胁。
这些行动表明，美国的优先事项发生了转变——从国家建设和民主化转向更冷的、基于利益的现实主义。美国的政策似乎正在从理想转向实用主义，从治理转向地缘政治。
美国利益：地区力量再平衡
华盛顿重新对阿富汗感兴趣的核心是一个更广泛的战略议程：遏制中国的影响力，监视伊朗的活动，重申对中亚能源路线的影响力，并保持对俄罗斯地区野心的威慑。
中国：阿富汗与中国新疆地区的边界对北京来说具有巨大的战略意义。中国通过“一带一路”倡议对区域基础设施进行了大量投资。一个重新参与的美国，可能通过在阿富汗的情报站或空军基地，可以对抗中国不受限制的扩张。
伊朗：靠近伊朗为华盛顿提供了一个有利位置，可以监视伊朗的行动和影响网络，特别是那些与伊斯兰革命卫队（Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps）及其地区行动有关的网络。
俄罗斯：由于莫斯科忙于乌克兰事务以及与北约的紧张关系，美国经阿富汗重新进入中亚将被视为对俄罗斯传统势力范围的挑战，尤其是在塔吉克斯坦和乌兹别克斯坦等国。
中亚：该地区对全球能源流动和矿产资源仍然至关重要。美国在阿富汗的存在可以作为在中亚地区投射软实力和硬实力的支点，尤其是在俄罗斯和中国巩固其在那里的经济和政治影响力之际。
巴基斯坦因素
对巴基斯坦来说，美国在阿富汗重新燃起的兴趣是一把双刃剑。一方面，伊斯兰堡也关心阿富汗的稳定，特别是在遏制恐怖主义和跨境武装活动方面。另一方面，美国在该地区重建军事基地的可能性——可能得到塔利班的默许——可能会使巴基斯坦自己的战略考量复杂化。
伊斯兰堡历来在华盛顿和塔利班之间扮演着调解人的角色。然而，美国在阿富汗的活跃足迹可能会降低巴基斯坦的影响力，改变地区动态，并将其更深地卷入美国和中国之间的大国竞争。
未来的情景：会发生什么？
战术存在回归：在这种情况下，华盛顿在与塔利班或其他派系的谨慎协议下建立有限的情报或无人机基地。这将确保最小的足迹和战略影响。
代理接触：美国可能会选择通过当地行动者、非政府组织或经济工具进行间接影响，在保持情报和外交存在的同时避免实际部署的风险。
逆转承认：虽然短期内不太可能，但如果阿富汗内部治理相对稳定并在反恐方面合作，有条件地承认塔利班可能会出现。
大国竞争：重新确立美国的角色可能会引起中国、俄罗斯和伊朗的更激烈的反应，从而导致一场以阿富汗为中心的新的冷战式的权力竞争。
大游戏的回归
阿富汗局势的发展表明，华盛顿远没有放弃在阿富汗的战略利益。在找回武器和解救人质的外衣下，更深层次的地缘政治考量正在发挥作用。与塔利班的对话——尽管是非正式的——标志着向现实政治的转变，即利益高于意识形态。
对于地区参与者——尤其是巴基斯坦、中国、俄罗斯和伊朗——这需要重新调整。美国战略利益的回归要么可以通过协调合作稳定阿富汗，要么可以通过重新竞争破坏该地区的稳定。
在此背景下，包括塔利班在内的所有利益攸关方参与的多边区域办法仍然是实现可持续和平的最可行途径。
( 注意： 本文是用AI翻译的，或有误差。请以原版英文为准。谢谢。)
Reference Link:- https://strafasia.com/unfolding-the-american-agenda-in-afghanistan-motives-moves-and-regional-implications/