By Mehmet Ozturk and A. Humeyra Atilgan
MOSCOW (AA) - Russia’s presidential envoy to Afghanistan has said the U.S. President-elect Donald Trump should change Washington’s longstanding Afghan policy.
Zamir Kabulov, President Vladimir Putin's special envoy to Afghanistan and director of the Russian Foreign Ministry's Second Asian Department, made the assertion during an interview with Anadolu Agency in Moscow.
"We expect that Donald Trump will tailor a new American approach to Afghanistan," Kabulov said.
His remarks came shortly before the anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which began on Dec. 27, 1979 and ended ten years later.
The Soviet war in Afghanistan -- which featured nine years of direct Soviet involvement in the country -- left an estimated one million civilians dead, along with some 90,000 mujahideen fighters, 18,000 Afghan troops and 14,500 Soviet soldiers.
Kabulov rejects the assertion that as many as one million Afghans were killed during the conflict, noting that neither Russia nor the other countries involved kept a precise record of casualties.
The "one million casualties" figure, he says, was "invented by the Americans" later in order to portray the Russians as "butchers".
He criticized Washington’s current Afghanistan strategy and the reasons behind the 2001 U.S.-led invasion of the country.
"Let's see the new president, Trump, describe his Afghan policy," he said. "Then we will judge."
Noting that the U.S. had spent "almost $1 trillion" in Afghanistan over the last 15 years, Kabulov described the results of the massive expenditure as "negative".
Looking at the country’s current situation, he said, "I presume Mr. Trump should do something to change it," in reference to Washington’s Afghan policy.
Kabulov said Trump should address several issues, which, he asserted, are "a matter of concern not only to Russia, but important regional actors, like China, Iran, Pakistan and others".
The Russian diplomat also criticized the fact that the U.S. now has "the right to use nine big military bases plus almost ten more" smaller ones in Afghanistan.
Asked whether this arrangement was disturbing to Russia, he said: "Of course; why should it not be disturbing for anybody?"
"If we did something like that [i.e., establish military bases] in Mexico, would it not be disturbing for America?" Kabulov asked.
He went on to assert that everything done during the Obama administration's "withdrawal" from Afghanistan had been carefully "calculated".
"Having this infrastructure as [a] basis, America will need from two to four weeks to redeploy up to 100,000 soldiers on the same bases," the diplomat said.
Such a scenario, he pointed out, would not constitute an "invasion" in terms of a US-Afghanistan bilateral security agreement.
"The 15-year-old ‘anti-terror’ rhetoric in Afghanistan" is no longer convincing, he said, adding that the current U.S. presence in the country was not merely for training purposes.
"You are not talking to stupid or foolish people," he exclaimed. "We know the reasons [for the ongoing U.S. military presence in Afghanistan]."
Regarding the reasons behind the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in late 2001, Kabulov said these were partly related to Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution.
"They [the Americans] lost the biggest military base in the region," he said, from which they had been able to exert control over vast swathes of the Asian continent.
"So, Afghanistan was for that," he said. "Because it was an available option."
Noting that there were also political and economic factors behind the 2001 invasion, he said: "Afghanistan is relatively at the center of the three biggest hydrocarbon reserves in the world: the Persian Gulf, the Caspian Sea and Central Asia."
Afghanistan, he stressed, enjoys easy access to all three.
Asked whether his country had a peace plan for Afghanistan, the Russian envoy said it did not.
"We are not Americans to make plans for other nations," he stated. "We do not have bad habits."
"Secondly," he added, "we are not planning to organize conferences [to discuss peace in Afghanistan], because we have not been asked to do so."
Asserting that conferences alone could not bring peace to the conflict-ridden country, he said: "Peace must be between the Taliban and the Afghan government."
He added: "If there is no change in international efforts for Afghanistan" -- efforts to improve its economy, political administration and military -- "Afghanistan will not have a future at all; it will disappear."
"We do not want this scenario," he concluded, "because from all accounts, it is against the interest of my country and the entire region."
"It will be very damaging and dangerous," he said.