By Abu Javed
A great struggle was waged here for a lofty ideal, a struggle the chronicles of history may struggle to match. That ideal was achieved: an Islamic order was established across the expanse of Afghanistan, the shroud of occupation was lifted from its wounded land, and a long-awaited freedom finally dawned, one that restless souls had sought and yearned for through many bitter years.
Yet there are modern-day pharaohs who would rob this achievement, eager to tarnish the banner of liberty that now waves above us. The man who shouts today about seizing Bagram is the very ruler who only yesterday forfeited his global standing. Stripped of prestige, he now seeks to reclaim it. But how? Through another military adventure, or by means of political maneuvering?
Should he choose the path of invasion, it will be nothing more than a replay of a failed experiment. Not only will it fail to restore his lost honor, it will deepen his disgrace in the eyes of the world. For this land can be occupied, but it cannot be kept. No empire, however advanced in arms or technology, has ever managed to preserve its grip upon Afghanistan.
If, instead, he pursues political engagement, he must begin by recognizing the legitimate leadership now in place. It is astonishing that he expects meaningful negotiations over Bagram from a leadership that once sacrificed its entire command to safeguard a guest. How could betrayal be imagined from men who endured twenty years of struggle for this very cause?
There is no possibility whatsoever that this leadership would strike a bargain with Trump over Bagram. Their position could not be clearer: the United States must honor the Doha Agreement, refrain from using force against Afghanistan’s sovereignty and independence, and abandon interference in the nation’s internal affairs.
The stance of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) is both principled and pragmatic, while reminding America of the lessons of its defeat. Instead of clinging to failed strategies, they urge a rational and realistic course. Whatever rivalries or hidden agendas Washington may pursue, they will not prevail. Our interests are our own, and above all stands the defense of territorial integrity, an inheritance that will never be traded.
Bagram is Afghanistan’s soil, a treasured piece of it, and it will not be surrendered or sold at any price. It was here that the Afghan people resisted foreign presence, fought their jihad, and expelled the occupiers. By what reasoning, then, should anyone advocate for the foreigners’ return? To understand Afghanistan, one must grasp the pulse of its people and the depth of their sentiment. If they had ever wished for American bases, they would not have struggled for two decades. America took nothing lasting from this land before, and it will not carry away so much as a brimming cup this time.
