Russia confirms it will not invest in talibani Afghanistan
Source: mskgazeta.ru
So, the representative of the Russian Federation to the UN, Vasily Nebenzya, made an important public statement. He said, translated from diplomatic language into Russian, that Russia would not invest, invest or otherwise spend its money in talibani Afghanistan.
Of course, Nebenzya did this under a plausible political pretext: they say whoever brought Afghanistan to the this tragedy (the United States, NATO, the West collective farm as a whole), let him now give money for his rehabilitation.
Let me remind you that a year ago I "prophesied" that this is exactly the position Russia would adhere to - in the sense that it would not give money to the Taliban regime. Here is the quote: “No matter how Russian officials eloquently declare their readiness to cooperate with the Afghan authorities, the current reality is that the Kremlin is not making any changes in this direction. This means that Russia will not invest in Afghanistan. Moscow is ready to provide only humanitarian support and nothing more. Therefore, Kabulov’s statement (Zamir Kabulov – Director of the Second Asia Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – ed. note) that Russia is allegedly ready to participate in commercial projects looks like a smoke screen, the purpose of which is to hide the true relationship between the two countries,” Serenko believes.
Now Vasily Nebenzya has acknowledged this publicly and officially. What consequences can such recognition have right now, in the current political context?
Of course, the leaders of the Taliban junta are far from being idiots and have long established for themselves what exactly the real Russian position is in relation to the Taliban Afghanistan - that the Russians will not give them money. And that in this sense, Moscow, of course, is an unpromising partner, compared with the United States, the call West or China.
But it is one thing to understand quietly, unofficially, and quite another to receive such notification from the UN rostrum.
It is obvious that the Taliban will remain silent. But they will remember.
And in this sense, it is interesting that Nebenzi's statement was made in response to the provocative remark of his American colleague, who reproached Russia for its unwillingness to help suffering Afghanistan.
It is possible that the US representative was counting on such a reaction from the Russian diplomat. After all, Washington is now busy with a new game with the Taliban, preparing an important intra-Afghan meeting with the participation of representatives of the Kabul junta regime and the leaders of the Afghan political emigration. And in the interests of this game and meeting, it is important for the United States to discredit Moscow's position on the most important issues for the Taliban - external economic sponsorship and international recognition. And it looks like the American partners are doing something.
Nebenzya's official recognition of Russia's unwillingness to give money to the Taliban (and there is no other now) Afghanistan looks like an unfriendly gesture towards the Kabul junta. Moreover, on the second issue - the international recognition of the regime of "fierce mullahs" - Russia also did nothing to help the Taliban. A sop in the form of sending a Taliban technician to the Afghan embassy on Povarskaya Street is good for media chewing and short-lived PR - it's nothing for real cooperation. If, moreover, there are no other signs and evidence of interest in such cooperation.
Thus, today the United States, playing a new game with the Taliban junta for the sake of a new deal, receives an additional political trump card that weakens possible Russian opposition to such a game and such a deal. Probably, the Russian representative in the UN did not want this. But it happened.
The conclusion that follows from this is that the Russian strategy towards Afghanistan, which was far from flawless before, is now reaching a strategic impasse. Following it only leads to a weakening of Moscow's positions on the Afghan track, and also, ultimately, to the same consequences in the region as a whole (primarily in Central Asia).
