Zalmay Khalilzad: The Architect of Afghanistan’s Fall

In the face of Afghanistan’s worsening crisis and security instability, the irony of Zalmay Khalilzad’s recent remarks on “failure” is hard to miss. As the US Special Envoy to Afghanistan, Khalilzad led the controversial negotiations with the Taliban, and now, despite his policies contributing to Afghanistan’s devastating collapse, he criticizes Pakistan’s politics, military actions, and the imprisonment of Imran Khan. His recent tweets condemn the Pakistani military’s failure to protect citizens and the country’s ongoing brain drain, yet they overlook his own role in the destruction of Afghanistan.
While Khalilzad highlights the loss of life in Quetta and accuses the Pakistani military of prioritizing political manipulation over security, he fails to address the much larger humanitarian catastrophe in Afghanistan that his decisions helped precipitate. He also criticizes Pakistan’s internal political instability, highlighting the exodus of professionals and calling for the release of Imran Khan. In addition, he denounces the extension of General Asim Munir’s tenure, accusing the military of consolidating its grip on the country’s political and judicial systems. However, his remarks seem hypocritical when considering his involvement in Afghanistan’s decline, where his policies are directly responsible for much of the region’s instability.
Khalilzad’s greatest failure lies in his role in negotiating the Doha Agreement, which, rather than securing peace, paved the way for the Taliban’s return to power. By sidelining the Afghan government and negotiating directly with the Taliban, he legitimized the group and undermined the Afghan leadership. His agreement, which set a rushed US troop withdrawal, left crucial issues like human rights, counterterrorism, and political inclusivity unresolved, ultimately leading to Afghanistan’s swift collapse and the Taliban’s brutal resurgence.
Today, Afghanistan serves as a grim reminder of the consequences of flawed foreign policy. Under Taliban rule, the country has regressed into a state of authoritarianism, poverty, and economic collapse. The reemergence of terrorist groups, including ISIS and al-Qaeda, has intensified the regional and global security threat. Consequently, Khalilzad’s negotiations dismantled decades of progress, leaving Afghanistan destabilized and its future uncertain, while exacerbating instability throughout the region.
In contrast, Pakistan has been a constant lifeline for Afghanistan, providing humanitarian assistance and hosting millions of refugees for years. Despite facing its own political and economic challenges, Pakistan has continued to support Afghanistan, an effort Khalilzad’s criticisms largely overlook. His rhetoric suggests that Pakistan’s instability mirrors the crisis in Afghanistan, yet he fails to acknowledge the significant contributions Pakistan has made to its neighbor’s survival during this tumultuous period.
When considering Khalilzad’s critiques of Pakistan’s governance, one must ask whether Afghanistan could have even survived without Pakistan’s support. The humanitarian aid, refuge, and peacekeeping efforts offered by Pakistan have been vital, particularly in the aftermath of the Taliban’s return to power. Thus, Khalilzad’s criticisms seem not only misplaced but also tone-deaf, as his own policies played a key role in Afghanistan’s continued suffering.
Moreover, Afghanistan’s ongoing humanitarian crisis, exacerbated by the Taliban’s return, remains dire. Essential services like food, healthcare, and education are inaccessible to much of the population, and poverty levels continue to rise. Women and ethnic minorities have suffered under the repressive regime, which has reversed decades of progress. Khalilzad’s failure to secure meaningful commitments from the Taliban regarding human rights and inclusivity has led to catastrophic outcomes for vulnerable Afghans.
Khalilzad’s management of the US withdrawal process was another devastating aspect of his tenure. The chaotic exit not only left Afghanistan in disarray but also significantly damaged US credibility on the global stage. The hurried withdrawal erased years of American investment in the region, signaling a betrayal of both Afghan allies and American soldiers. For the Afghan people, the return of the Taliban represented the destruction of hopes for a better future, while for the US, it underscored the failure of a mission that once aimed to combat extremism and promote democracy.
This disastrous exit has also shaken global confidence in US foreign policy, leaving allies questioning the reliability of American commitments. As such, Khalilzad’s policies not only devastated Afghanistan but also tarnished the reputation of the US in the international community, undermining trust and cooperation with its allies.
Considering these consequences, Khalilzad’s recent commentary on Pakistan rings hollow. His calls for political reform in Pakistan appear more as an attempt to deflect attention away from the disastrous legacy of his own policies in Afghanistan. Rather than criticizing others, Khalilzad must first reckon with the profound and lasting impact of his decisions on Afghanistan’s collapse.
The Afghan people, still struggling under the weight of Khalilzad’s decisions, deserve accountability for the suffering they continue to endure. His criticisms of Pakistan come off as tone-deaf and misdirected. If he is truly committed to addressing failure, Khalilzad must first confront his role in Afghanistan’s tragic state. The situation in Afghanistan is not simply a political failure; it is a painful reminder of the perils of poorly designed foreign policy, and Khalilzad’s role in this disaster must not be forgotten.