Connect with us

Asia

A total failure of US war on terror in Afghanistan

Published

on

Whatever is the views of analysts regarding evacuation of NATO or US troops from Afghanistan and letting Taliban to occupy power corridors in Afghanistan through Doha Qatar Peace Accord but it could be considered part of America spy master’s strategies for exposing the “hidden militants and militant groups” in the region. In fact, the US made changes in its Afghan policies after 2009 and gave it final touches after targeting Osama Bin Laden on May 2, 2011 last.

In fact, for a very brief period after 9/11, Pakistan, considered a major stakeholder in Afghan conflict, extended visible support to US led allied troops but internally Pakistan’s intelligence agencies remained busy in patronization of Taliban, especially its faction called Haqqani network. Both Haqqani Network and its patrons Pakistan’s secret agencies remained very careful in its acts of carrying out deadly terror acts against the NATO troops throughout Afghanistan. And the US after thorough consultation and in connection with its strategies, offered office in Doha, Qatar. The move remained very successful and now not only Haqqani network but even Al Qaeda fugitives are visible in Kabul and other areas of Afghanistan.

On the other hand, the US has stakes not only in Afghanistan but also in Central Asian Republics, Middle East and especially in Iran. Iran since the failure of US in Syria war, becoming a serious threat to US influence in the region. In particular, Chinese attempts to get occupation of all trade routes in the region is also a serious threat to the US interests in the region. At the moment, Pakistan is in a dominant position in Afghanistan and Pakistan is in close links with Iran. So far the US is very careful in its strategies for tackling the situation that erupted in Afghanistan.

US invaded Afghanistan on pretext of war on terror 

In 2001, the USA invaded Afghanistan in pursuit of the war on terror with the support of NATO and over 40 countries. On September 11, 2001, 19 members of al-Qaeda hijacked four commercial airliners, crashing the first two into the World Trade Center in NYC, and the third into the Pentagon. In NYC, nearly 3,000 people lost their lives and over 2,500 others received injuries.

US blamed al-Qaeda for the attacks and decided to send troops to Afghanistan on the pretext of war on terror. The US was in Afghanistan for the last 20 years and eventually withdrew in August 2021.

20 years of US involvement in the Afghan conflict is considered the longest war in the history of the USA.

The highest number of US troops in Afghanistan was in 2011 after then-President Barack Obama decided to increase the number of US forces, which reportedly around 140,000 US and NATO troops were present in Afghanistan.

NATO officially ended its military mission in Afghanistan in 2014 and handed over security responsibility to the Afghan National Security and Defense Forces (ANDSF).

Unwinnable war in Afghanistan

Realizing the fact that war is not winnable in Afghanistan, the former US President Donald Trump pursued the path of reconciliation and appointed Afghan-born US veteran diplomat Zalmay Khalilzad to continue the peace negotiations with the Islamic Emirate’s Qatar-based political office.

After more than 10 rounds of negotiations, Khalilzad reached a peace deal on February 29th, 2020, in Doha.

When the incumbent president Joe Biden won the election, echoed Trump’s policy and openly said they are not interested in nation-building in Afghanistan and stressed on the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan no matter even if it resulted into the collapse of western-backed government they supported in the last 20 years.

Finally after spending trillion dollars on training and equipping hundreds of thousands of (ANSDF) and with casualties of 2,448 US forces while another 20,722 were wounded, US accepted defeat and went out of Afghanistan.

Former Afghan National Army and US forces in Afghanistan.

Reality check:

The main reason behind US presence in Afghanistan was to fight against terrorist group, but is that happened so. With one word we can describe that US not only waged a flop war against terrorist group, but many other groups emerged under the very noise of US presence and the most terrible example is the emerge of the Islamic State (IS), also known as Daesh.

In its July report, the UN Security Council warned that the Daesh group has expanded to other provinces, including Nuristan, Badghis, Sar-e-Pul, Baghlan, Badakhshan, Kunduz, and Kabul, where fighters formed a slipper cell.

The report said: “In its efforts to resurge, ISIL-K has prioritized the recurrent and training of new supporters and to recruit fighters from the Syrian Arab Republic (Assad regime) Iraq and other conflict zones.” Daesh has strength of some 500-1500 militant in Afghanistan and its three key commanders namely Sanaullah Ghafari, a key commander of the terror group, and two so-called spokesmen of the group Sultan Aiz Azam, and Maulaw Rajab were placed on the US specially designated global terrorist list.

The US left Afghanistan at the mercy of Daesh, with many experts believing that the US has been deliberately supporting Daesh to use it as a pressure tool against the current Taliban government. The US reportedly also started supporting the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) aimed at further destabilizing Afghanistan and from there to destabilize its rival countries in the neighboring Afghanistan and regional countries.

US aim of Afghanistan occupation

Afghanistan is located on the heart of Asia. It has borders with most rival countries of the US. Afghanistan has borders with Iran, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan and a tiny border with China. Afghanistan is also very near to Russia, another biggest rival of US. There is believe that US tried to penetrated  into these countries through its 20 years of presence, but these countries were smart enough to prevent any such designs. At one hand, US was trying to pretend that Washington is in Afghanistan to fight terrorist groups, but covertly they were pursing secret agenda, in other hand, the Afghans were very hopeful that US presence is for the betterment of the country, which proved false. US time and again said they were not in Afghanistan for any nation-building purposes, but a simple question arise that why US interfered into internal affairs of Afghanistan, especially in elections and appointing top ministers, especially the Interior, Defense and  head of intelligence department. Once US realized they can’t reach its goal to these countries from Afghanistan, they changed their policy in which Afghanistan gradually become insecure after 2006, and many more terrorist groups started emerging. The neighbors and regional countries, especially Iran, the Central Asian states, China and Russia started to strengthen its intelligence department to avoid any terrorist activities inside their soil from Afghanistan.

Jeopardizing regional security

US has a scenario to destabilize Afghanistan similar like Iraq and Syria, to threat its rival countries and now after withdrawing from Afghanistan they still did not recognize the Taliban, and indirectly supporting Daesh to change Afghanistan into a ruin just to reach its goal of destabilizing other countries from the Afghan soil.

Afghanistan and regional countries in map.

Afghanistan Overview map, ColorIn July, five rockets presumably fired from Afghanistan fell on the border town of Termez in the south of Uzbekistan, a move that raised speculation that the US is pursuing a different agenda. Taliban should also be very careful in its relation with US because Washington abandoned its 20 years allies and let the Taliban to took control of Afghanistan, the same US can support other groups, probably Daesh is in the line, against the Taliban just to reach its goal.  The US has approximately left behind $7 billion of military equipment in Afghanistan after withdrawal from the country in August. The equipment is now in a country that is controlled by enemy the US was trying to drive out over the past two decades. This is shocking reality that US has a very secret agenda behind this. US is trying to support other groups, most likely Daesh, and once the terrorist group took control of Afghanistan with $7 billion of military equipment, they can easily threat any country they want and this the long-term policy of US.

Asia

Analysts warn new surge in Chinese exports threatens global markets

Published

on

Financial Times writer Ryan Avent has written that a fresh, rapid surge in China’s trade surplus could signal a new wave of the “China shock”.

Economists define the “China shock” as a spike in Chinese exports to global markets that intensifies competition for manufacturers in advanced economies and curtails employment in certain sectors.

The term gained widespread currency after China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, accelerating the inflow of inexpensive Chinese goods into the US and other nations.

The US was the country hit hardest by the initial shockwave. Between 1999 and 2011, more than 2 million jobs were lost because domestic producers were unable to withstand the competition.

Avent argued that the effects of the initial wave are still felt across the American economy because China failed to carry out the rebalancing that the world expected.

The share of net exports in China’s gross domestic product contracted during the 2007-2019 period, allowing Western nations to focus on national security and other matters.

Avent reported that the trade surplus is now escalating rapidly once again, posing a threat to the economies of wealthy nations.

The writer pointed to the stagnation of domestic demand following the collapse of the real estate market six years ago as one cause of this surplus. Another prominent factor is the Beijing government’s channelling of massive resources into manufacturing in pursuit of self-sufficiency.

Attention was also drawn to the role of the depreciating yuan. An appreciation of the currency could require China to alter its foreign exchange interventions, reduce purchases of foreign currency and assets, and sell those assets off. That scenario could trigger currency depreciation and rising interest rates in other countries.

The Wall Street Journal also reported in the spring of 2024 on economists’ concerns regarding a potential second wave.

Experts predicted that global markets would once again be flooded with inexpensive goods, stating that China was manufacturing far beyond domestic demand to overcome its economic troubles.

Moreover, it was stressed that China is now competing in high-technology fields such as automobiles, computer chips, and complex machinery manufacturing.

Meanwhile, Vasiliy Kashin, Director of the Centre for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics (HSE) University in Moscow, told the Russian media outlet RBC that the US has imposed sanctions on the Chinese economy since the first shock period, adding that these measures would very likely tighten in the event of a fresh export wave.

According to assessments reported by the Financial Times, this new process could also shake China’s own economy. Alongside rising output, entry-level manufacturing plants across the country are turning toward automation and reducing personnel.

This trend could trigger a painful departure from labour-intensive production, leaving millions unemployed. Manufacturing activities in China that previously capitalised on cheap labour are shifting to other Southeast Asian countries.

The Beijing administration rejected allegations that its industrialisation steps pose risks to other countries. As reported by the Xinhua news agency, China’s Ministry of Commerce stressed that claims of a “China shock 2.0” are groundless. The ministry stated:

“The US and other Western countries have circulated the so-called ‘China shock 2.0’ narrative, asserting that China’s industrial development has shaken Western monopolies and narrowed growth space for Global South countries. This claim is unsupported by concrete data and is entirely unfounded.”

Continue Reading

Asia

Iran and China run secret barter network to bypass oil sanctions

Published

on

Iran is operating a covert, barter-like trade mechanism to bypass sanctions on its oil sales and procure billions of dollars in goods from China, including military hardware.

Speaking to the Reuters news agency, two senior Iranian officials and three sources closely monitoring the matter said the Tehran administration receives credits for goods imported from China instead of cash in exchange for the oil it sells to the country.

The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, emphasised that this method of swapping oil revenues for Chinese goods provides an immediate financial lifeline to the Tehran government at a time when the US has intensified economic and military pressure over its nuclear programme.

China, the world’s largest crude importer, continues to access discounted Iranian oil through this arrangement while shielding its banks and exporting companies from the risk of international penalties.

Although the Washington administration has imposed sanctions on several small-scale Chinese entities facilitating the transport of Iranian oil, it avoids sweeping measures that could shake the global economy.

The US has stepped up its pressure as it seeks to reopen the Strait of Hormuz amid the ongoing war between the two countries.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last month that countries failing to cut commercial ties with Tehran would risk exclusion from the dollar system.

It remains unclear how the barter mechanism has been affected by the US naval blockade imposed on Iran as part of the six-month-old war.

However, since the reimposition of the blockade on 14 July, no shipments of Iranian oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz to China have been recorded.

Beijing and Tehran, which describe Western unilateral sanctions as illegal, refrain from disclosing publicly how they sustain their trade.

Sources state that Tehran introduced this system to obtain pharmaceuticals, vehicles, and communications equipment. Chinese manufacturers are said to have no direct contact with Iran, and there is no indication that they are violating sanctions.

On the other hand, the mechanism was utilised at least once last year under contracts supplying Iran with millions of dollars’ worth of air defence equipment. The sources provided no details regarding the shipments in question, and the transactions were not independently verified.

The United Nations conventional arms embargo returned alongside other sanctions in September 2025 following the collapse of the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers.

Tehran had withdrawn from the terms of the agreement, while Beijing and Tehran described the European nations’ automatic reimposition of sanctions as legally flawed.

Responding to questions from Reuters, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that it had no knowledge of the trade structure in question.

Beijing stated that it opposes unilateral sanctions lacking United Nations Security Council authorisation and having no basis in international law.

Iran’s diplomatic missions in New York and Geneva remained silent on the inquiries. A US official speaking on behalf of the White House stated only that they are working with international partners, including the EU, to prevent Tehran from achieving its nuclear goals.

According to data analytics company Kpler, China purchased more than 80% of the crude oil exported by Iran in 2025. This share equates to an average of 1.4 million barrels per day.

Although the two countries signed a 25-year strategic partnership agreement in 2021 covering energy and infrastructure, the operational details of their cooperation remain largely confidential.

The model in question constitutes only one of the networks through which Iran procures goods and services from China without passing through international banking channels.

A Western official and two other individuals tracking the matter said that a buyer acting on behalf of state-owned Chinese oil company Zhuhai Zhenrong deposited hundreds of millions of dollars each month until this year into ChuXin, a shadow financial entity based in China.

These deposits reportedly represent payment for oil purchased from a Hong Kong-based company linked to the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC).

Approximately 70% of the oil revenues routed through ChuXin is allocated to infrastructure projects in Iran. The remainder is transferred to the accounts of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) established to disburse payments to companies supplying goods to Iran.

Sources close to Iran’s decision-making apparatus confirm the existence of this financial mechanism.

Fund management is shared between a firm acting on behalf of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce and another entity linked to the Central Bank of Iran. When the Central Bank of Iran authorises importers, money transfers are directed to supplier firms. While the name ChuXin does not appear in official records, one source noted that the structure exists solely on balance sheets.

Andrea Ghiselli, an international politics specialist at the University of Exeter, stated that Beijing uses these indirect networks to demonstrate that it will not bow to US secondary sanction threats.

Highlighting that Chinese leaders aim to protect their own banks and firms from being pushed out of the global financial system, Ghiselli said: “They want to create deniability.”

Continue Reading

Asia

China leads $54bn capital injection into state banks and insurers

Published

on

China’s Ministry of Finance will lead a total capital injection of $54 billion into state-owned insurance companies and banks as part of a coordinated push to reinforce the capital structure across the country’s financial system, according to details disclosed by the institutions in statements on Sunday.

China Life Insurance (Group) Co, the country’s largest life insurer, will receive 35 billion yuan ($5.2 billion) in capital support, whilst China Taiping Insurance Group will receive 7 billion yuan.

In a separate announcement, People’s Insurance Company (Group) of China (PICC) said it plans to raise up to 15 billion yuan via a private placement of A-shares to the Ministry of Finance. The company stated that the proceeds will be used to replenish its capital.

The initiative could fortify the financial position of state insurers, which have been called upon to support the equity market with medium- and long-term funds. At the same time, it could position these institutions to help regulatory authorities manage smaller and higher-risk insurance companies.

Financial sector stability

China’s insurance industry has been contending with shrinking profitability caused by prolonged low interest rates. Solvency ratios across numerous small and medium-sized insurers have also deteriorated.

China Export and Credit Insurance Corp stated that the Ministry of Finance will inject 10 billion yuan to boost the company’s core capital. China Reinsurance (Group) announced that it will execute a capital increase of 3 billion yuan.

“The capital injection represents an important step for enhancing the financial sector’s capacity to serve the real economy and promoting high-quality development across the financial and insurance industries,” China Life said in a statement. The insurer added that the capital support will improve the group’s resilience to risks.

Taiping also noted that the funds provided will strengthen the company’s solvency and other core metrics.

Banks benefit from recapitalisation plan

Separately, three state banks announced on Sunday that they will receive capital support totalling 290 billion yuan.

The recapitalisation framework was first announced during the annual parliamentary meetings in March this year. The move broadens a funding mechanism deployed last year to strengthen the capital structures of several other major state-owned lenders.

Agricultural Bank of China and Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC), two of the country’s largest state-owned lenders, announced plans to raise up to 160 billion yuan and 100 billion yuan, respectively, through private placements of A-shares to the Ministry of Finance, China National Tobacco Corp, and affiliated entities.

Both lenders confirmed that all net proceeds will be deployed to replenish their Core Tier 1 capital. The measure is expected to help sustain credit expansion at a juncture when Beijing is increasingly relying on state lenders to support economic growth.

Weak credit demand remains a persistent headwind for the world’s second-largest economy, while continuing to erode profitability across the banking sector.

Export-Import Bank of China, one of the country’s three policy banks, stated that the Ministry of Finance will inject 30 billion yuan of capital into the institution, thereby bolstering its capital base.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey