What will Turkey do and not do in Afghanistan?

With the meeting between President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and US President Joe Biden at the NATO Leaders Summit, Turkey-US relations were carried to a positive stage that no one expected. In this, the personal diplomatic skills and realistic approaches of both leaders have an undeniable share. Of course, there were also many who linked the event rather to the role expected of Turkey in Afghanistan. Some even went so far as to translate, in the texts reporting the event, expressions reflected as "Turkey is the most reliable country for the post-US mission in Afghanistan" directly into "Turkey, which aspires to be the US's subcontractor."

This expression is, in a single word, very much deprived of a grasp of Turkey's role, mission and vision in Afghanistan or in countries such as Syria, Libya and Somalia. In fact, in all these regions the owners of these expressions always find something to label in the role Turkey plays. Of course, what we call "find" would be better expressed with the word "fabricate." It is clear that an approach that does not in any way attribute to Turkey its own vision and mission and does not deem it worthy of this, an approach that always harbors suspicion toward Turkey, at best needs some rehabilitation and a presentation of the new Turkey.

Despite the labels attached to all these operations from the start, Turkey is now an actor with only its own vision in Libya, in Syria, in Somalia and in all its other external operations. Precisely for this reason it frequently finds itself face to face with other actors, for example the US, France, Israel, and the Gulf's subcontractors. We find ourselves having to fight tough wars with the proxies these actors set upon us, with PKK-PYD, with FETÖ, with DAEŞ.

The US, which has made as realistic an assessment as possible of its own failure in its mission in Afghanistan, has in fact been making withdrawal plans since 2015. In NATO's operation in Afghanistan, on the other hand, Turkey as a member has been making, and continues to make, the biggest contribution from the start. Turkey's presence in Afghanistan is not perceived by the people of the country, nor by any segment of the people, like the presence of the US or even of the other NATO members. Although it is there on behalf of NATO, its soldier is in a much closer, much more trust-inspiring relationship with the Afghan people.

In fact, one wishes that NATO had never poked its nose in, and that, outside the NATO mission, Turkey, had it had sufficient means at the time, could have entered Afghanistan with its own mission alone. In that way it could have contributed far more to reconciling the conflicting groups and as a mediator in a negotiation process that would ensure stability in the country. Perhaps at the outset this might not have been so possible; we cannot know. But for a long time, as an actor whose mediator mission could be accepted, the actor that could be the subject of the highest-level goodwill acceptance of all sides, the Taliban included, is Turkey. Iran, Pakistan, the US or any other country surely has influence here, and groups it influences. But Turkey, while being a country for which all the groups unanimously feel sympathy, is also at a distance open to the necessary cooperation with influential external actors.

With its mission of seeking to secure peace, justice, stability and development in the Islamic world, Turkey's presence in Afghanistan may perhaps overlap with other international missions, but no one can attribute to this mission the subcontracting of others.

On the other hand, starting from what has been done so far in Turkey's mission in Afghanistan, there are also lessons to be taken into account for the future.

In Afghanistan the Taliban is an important force and represents a very important segment of the Afghan people. Indeed, at present it constitutes the most respected organized structure in the eyes of the ordinary Afghan people. The US also saw this and, from 2015 on, regarded it as a party that had to be reconciled with and negotiated with. It is very important for Turkey to develop an embracing attitude in the political struggles inside Afghanistan, without excluding any side, at an equal distance from everyone.

Even though NATO has withdrawn from the war it waged against the Taliban on behalf of the US, the Afghan people's own internal conflict now harbors the possibility of a war that could flare up at any moment. In the war continuing between the Northern Alliance and the Taliban, Turkey must not include itself among the addressees of the Northern Alliance's calls for support from Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Iran. Turkey must establish its presence there not to fight the Taliban but as an element of stability that respects the rights of the Taliban and of all other groups.

It must not give credit to the Uzbek, Tajik and Turkmen groups' othering of the Taliban as Pashtun nationalist. One must not forget that the Taliban does not consist only of Pashtuns, and that it also includes Uzbek and Turkmen commanders within it.

There is no point in pursuing the still-living hostilities of the groups that, under US leadership, have so far organized against the Taliban and been provoked. Yet the US is pulling out, and in the end the elements of the Afghan people are left alone with one another. Turkey is expected to play a careful and fair role so that the elements of the Afghan people can communicate with one another. If it plays it, Turkey will play a very auspicious historical role in keeping with its own mission. Let us not even think of the opposite.

What we need to think about more are Afghanistan's current ethnic and political balances and the opportunities and threats for the answers Turkey can give to them.

Let us continue with this too later.