Connect with us

Asia

Reasons for US withdrawal from Afghanistan

Published

on

America’s withdrawal from Afghanistan was not a one-time decision, but was formed gradually. The US left Afghanistan when it was sure that the Taliban regime would implement its terms. Months of negotiations took place in Doha for a safe exit.

Some reasons are as follows:

1- The excessive pressure of the Eastern Front against US, NATO and India

The US entered the region which is bordered with China, Iran and the borders of the former Soviet Union. This was not digestible for the regional powers. China’s fear of Uyghurs being strengthened by the US and also China’s need for Afghanistan to expand the Silk Road caused it to directly and indirectly support the opposition of the republic and the withdrawal of US from the region.

This is why before the fall of the Republic in Afghanistan, we witnessed the presence of Taliban delegations in China. In 1395, this delegation traveled to China under the title of peace.

India brought itself closer to Afghanistan by building the Salma Dam. Salma Dam is the biggest project of India for the reconstruction of Afghanistan, which is worth 300 million dollars.

The construction of Salma Dam was one of the big projects of the government of Mohammad Dawood Khan, the first president of Afghanistan, which started in 1976 with the help of India. The construction process of this dam, which was stopped due to the conflicts in Afghanistan, started again in 2005.

Salma Dam was put into operation in the presence of Ashraf Ghani, the former president of Afghanistan, and Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India. India had a special economic view on Chabahar port to export goods to Afghanistan and Central Asia through this port. Pakistan was against increasing India’s influence in Afghanistan and Central Asia, and by strengthening the Taliban, it tried to make the republic fall in order to reduce India’s influence. For that purpose, Pakistan sent all its extremist groups, including the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) to Afghanistan for suicide attacks.

Pakistan’s subversive operations in Afghanistan were carried out for three purposes:

First: Due to the reduction of India’s influence through the fall of the Republic.

Second: By transferring suicide bombers and extremist groups to Afghanistan and guaranteeing its unity and security by moving extremist groups away from Pakistan to neighboring countries.

Third: Weakening the desire for independence in the Pashtunistan region of Pakistan (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) by strengthening extremist groups.

But these extremists were all focused on confronting the republic, not the Pakistani army. After the fall of the republic, TTP was automatically activated – because it did not have a playground and the best playground was their own land (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) which was located in Pakistan. For this reason, TTP has made some areas insecure and caused border conflicts and Pakistani attacks on Afghanistan.

Iran also felt very threatened by the US, so it was trying to plan to drive the US out of Afghanistan. The president of the United States at the time called Iran a part of the axis of evil.

Axis of Evil is a term coined by George W. Bush, the president of the United States on January 29, 2002, in his annual speech to the Congress, used it in referring to the three countries of the Islamic Republic of Iran, North Korea, and Iraq.

Bush is the one who started the global war against terrorism after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the main results of which were the occupation of Afghanistan in the same year and the occupation of Iraq in 2003.

When such a person occupied two countries, one in the east and the other in the west of Iran, and also considered Iran as the axis of evil, he also planned to attack Iran from a political point of view. For this reason, Iran was not happy with the presence of the US in Afghanistan.

We all remember that an American archive 170 plane fell into the hands of Iran. This spy plane, which was sent by the US to Iran, caused the Iranian security authorities to become more suspicious of the US and to work indirectly against the US in Afghanistan.

The Russians, who once had a physical presence in Afghanistan in the form of the Soviet Union, and their agents such as Taraki and Najib could not fulfill their hopes and dreams, considered America the cause of their failure.

During the height of the war between the Mujahideen and the Soviet Red Army, the Americans sent many weapons through Pakistan to Afghanistan to prevent Soviet influence and expansion.

Both because revenge against the US and Washington had penetrated to spread terrorism, the Russians determined all their will to expel the US from the region. The Taliban’s visit to Russia before the fall of the republic indicated Moscow’s determination to overthrow the republic and drive the US out of Afghanistan.

2- Internal differences and the failure of nation building

The lack of formation of nation building in Afghanistan made the US regret staying and start negotiations with the Taliban.

When a government system cannot institutionalize nation building, division and corruption will spread and it will lose the ability to deal with external and internal threats in a coherent and unified manner. The US were fully aware of this and did not see the national army as the main supporter or protector of the country.

3- Countering China’s economic power

The only country in the world that has been able to challenge the US economically is China. The Chinese dragon is getting stronger day by day and is taking over the world markets.

The US’s staying in Afghanistan would cause it to lose the necessary focus for economic competition and struggle with China. In addition, the presence of the US military in Afghanistan and in the neighborhood of China was a weak point, which could be indirectly attacked by China at any moment. Meanwhile, the US’s focus on the Yellow Sea and Taiwan Island will increase the pressure on China.

4- Failure to realize democracy in Afghanistan

The US stayed in Japan and Germany, but left Afghanistan. One of the important reasons is the issue of culture and economy. Japan did not have a religious ideology and quickly accepted democracy.

The culture of liberalism permeated all the cultural layers of the Japanese people and the people also accepted this culture. West Germany also accepted American culture and with the collapse of the Berlin Wall, East Germany also joined the liberalism system.

The fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989 was the starting point of liberalism in Eastern and Central Europe. This did not happen in Afghanistan. The people of Afghanistan have been accustomed to Islamic culture for about 1,400 years and were also caught up in internal wars for many years. Extensive damage caused democracy to not penetrate in the city and village.

As long as a culture is not indigenous and is not accepted from within the society, it is not possible to impose it with external pressure. The communists did this in Afghanistan and failed. The US also failed to influence culturally in the middle and lower layers of the Afghan society and saw no hope of realizing democracy and liberal culture and therefore, the US left Afghanistan.

Asia

South Korea emerges as major beneficiary of shifts in global arms market

Published

on

Uncertainty in the global arms market, driven by the United States reassessing its relationships with allies and a broad rearmament drive across many countries, is creating major commercial opportunities for South Korea. According to an analysis published by Politico, Seoul has become the world’s fastest-growing supplier of military equipment.

The report said that large-scale conflicts around the world have created urgent demand for weapons as countries seek both to support allies and strengthen their own defenses against potential future confrontations. At the same time, changes in the US role within the global arms market have opened new opportunities for South Korean manufacturers. Statements and policy decisions by US President Donald Trump regarding NATO have led allies to question Washington’s reliability in times of crisis, increasing uncertainty across the global market. In addition, the diversion of a large share of US weapons supplies to the Middle East because of ongoing conflicts has placed further strain on already overstretched supply chains.

European countries increase purchases from South Korea

Faced with what Politico described as the Trump administration’s more distant approach toward allies, European countries in particular have accelerated arms purchases from South Korea. The publication noted that Seoul’s growing influence as a supplier has been driven largely by major defense contracts signed with Poland.

Following the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine, several Eastern European capitals, including Warsaw, transferred portions of their military inventories to Kyiv, relying on German support to replenish their arsenals. However, Berlin’s slow pace in replacing allied stockpiles generated frustration across the region.

South Korea emerged as an alternative supplier during this period and became a reliable source of military equipment for Eastern European countries. Poland became Seoul’s largest customer through a $13.7 billion agreement covering the purchase of tanks, rocket launchers, self-propelled howitzers and other military equipment.

“We were originally preparing against North Korea, but now we are ready to provide these solutions to customers around the world,” said Choo Hyung-kim, head of the Security Management Institute, a defense analysis organization affiliated with South Korea’s National Assembly.

Lack of political baggage gives Seoul an advantage

Politico reported that one of the greatest advantages enjoyed by South Korean defense companies is the absence of the “political baggage” associated with major arms exporters such as the United States, China, Russia and Israel.

According to the figures cited, the combined projected revenue of South Korea’s largest defense companies, including Hanwha Group, Hyundai Rotem, LIG Nex1 and Korea Aerospace Industries, is expected to reach approximately $37 billion in 2026. That would represent a fourfold increase from their combined revenues in 2021.

Meanwhile, an official from the office of former South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol told the Yonhap news agency in 2024 that the scale of any weapons shipments to Ukraine would depend on Russia’s approach to its relationship with North Korea. Seoul later clarified that it had no plans to provide ammunition directly to Ukraine.

Continue Reading

Asia

DeepSeek raises $7.4 billion in funding round, surpasses $50 billion valuation

Published

on

Chinese artificial intelligence startup DeepSeek has raised more than 50 billion yuan ($7.4 billion) in its first funding round. According to Reuters, citing The Information, the company’s valuation has surpassed $50 billion.

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that the capital will be used to support the costly development of advanced artificial intelligence technologies.

According to the newspaper, citing sources familiar with the matter, investors valued the company at more than $50 billion. The valuation makes DeepSeek the most valuable AI startup in China.

DeepSeek founder Liang Wenfeng reportedly owned about 90% of the company before the funding round. Liang is said to have contributed roughly $3 billion during the fundraising process, making him the largest participant in the round.

According to Reuters, the transaction was structured in an unusual way that allows Liang to retain control of the company.

Rather than investing directly in DeepSeek, investors were required to invest through a limited partnership managed by a senior executive of the startup. Under the arrangement, investors were not granted voting rights. The report also said restrictions were placed on the use of invested funds for a period of five years.

The sole exception was the China National Artificial Intelligence Industry Investment Fund. The fund reportedly invested approximately $150 million directly in DeepSeek, allowing it to retain both voting rights and full discretion over its stake.

Other major investors in the funding round included Tencent, which invested approximately $1.5 billion, and Contemporary Amperex Technology, which invested about $740 million.

Bloomberg previously described the transaction as one of the largest fundraising rounds undertaken by a Chinese startup. According to the agency, the investment marks a new stage in the efforts of leading Chinese AI companies to compete with their US rivals.

DeepSeek told prospective investors that it would prioritize foundational and transformative AI research over short-term commercialization.

Based in the Chinese city of Hangzhou, DeepSeek emerged as one of Beijing’s most prominent AI companies after unveiling a more powerful and lower-cost model more than a year ago. The WSJ reported that interest surrounding the company has accelerated AI adoption in China and increased investor appetite for domestic startups.

Liang Wenfeng has previously said he intends to continue developing open-source AI models and ultimately aims to achieve artificial general intelligence (AGI). According to Bloomberg, the strategy continues an approach that has contributed to the spread of open models and influenced companies across China’s AI market, including Alibaba’s Qwen platform.

Bloomberg added that while global rivals such as OpenAI and Anthropic are exploring public offerings and revenue-generation strategies, DeepSeek has maintained its “research first” approach.

Continue Reading

Asia

China issues white paper on global governance reform, urging support for UN-centered international system

Published

on

China’s State Council Information Office on Wednesday released a white paper titled “A More Just and Equitable Global Governance: China’s Principles, Proposals and Actions.”

The white paper was issued to introduce China’s principles, proposals, and actions regarding global governance, to foster a broader consensus within the international community, to enable more effective responses to global challenges, and to build a more just and equitable global governance system.

The document states that global governance is a common endeavor concerning the well-being of all humanity, and that building a just and equitable global governance system is a shared vision long pursued by people around the world. It also emphasizes that China has always been an active participant, contributor, and builder of global governance.

According to the white paper, in the new era, Chinese President Xi Jinping has put forward the vision of building a community with a shared future for mankind. Advancing a global governance system shaped on the basis of extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits, Xi has called for true multilateralism to promote an equal and orderly multipolar world and an economic globalization that is inclusive and beneficial for all.

In 2025, Xi proposed the Global Governance Initiative (GGI). This initiative was designed to offer China’s solutions to two urgent questions of the era: What kind of global governance system should be established, and how should global governance be reformed and improved?

The white paper notes that shortly after its introduction, the GGI received support from approximately 160 countries and international organizations, with more than 60 countries joining the Group of Friends of the Global Governance Initiative. It states that the international community is of the view that the GGI sends a clear message: to defend multilateralism, join forces, and strive for a just future.

According to the white paper, the GGI aligns with the growing trend toward greater democracy in international relations and strengthens international confidence in the practice of multilateralism. The initiative provides a clear and actionable roadmap for the improvement of global governance, injecting valuable stability and positive energy into a turbulent world.

The white paper emphasizes that China proposed the GGI to accelerate the construction of a more just and equitable global governance system. The document states that firmly defending the authority and status of the United Nations is of fundamental importance for the effective implementation of this initiative.

According to the white paper, success will also depend on major countries acting with a sense of responsibility and all nations working together in unity to bridge deficits in peace and development. It states that rather than attempting to reinvent the wheel, all countries must firmly defend the international system with the UN at its core, maintain the international order based on international law, and uphold the fundamental norms of international relations based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

In addition to the preface and conclusion, the white paper consists of five chapters: “Today’s World Faces Severe and Complex Challenges,” “The Global Governance Initiative Responds to the Challenges of Our Era,” “China’s Contribution to the Development of Global Governance,” “Directing the Course of Change Toward a Bright Future,” and “Advancing Hand in Hand at a Critical Juncture in History.”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey