DOCSLIB.ORG

From War to Peace: the Regional Stakes in Afghanistan's Future

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From War to Peace: the Regional Stakes in Afghanistan's Future SPECIAL 131 . O N From War to Peace: The Regional Stakes in Afghanistan’s Future Kabir Taneja Editor MARCH 2021 © 2021 Observer Research Foundation. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, copied, archived, retained or transmitted through print, speech or electronic media without prior written approval from ORF. INTRODUCTION Kabir Taneja nited States Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s letter to Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani, leaked to the press in March 2021, set forth plan for Afghanistan involves a wider role for a spate of diplomatic statements as regional players such as India, Pakistan, Iran, Uthe Joe Biden administration sought to clarify their Russia and China, the US–Taliban agreement will stance on ending the war in Afghanistan. At the time remain the pivot around which any bilateral or of writing this report, multiple processes were being multilateral system can be constructed. This, by undertaken with urgency to find a resolution to the default, means that while regional players could conflict. The long-running Doha process—where help Washington, D.C. hedge some of its risks, the much headway has been made since 2013 between February 2020 agreement will remain either the the Afghan government and others, and the Taliban, deal-maker or deal-breaker in the negotiations. seems to be dissipating. New forums in Russia and Turkey are taking shape to take the conversations The US war in Afghanistan, now in its 20th further, and more regional and international actors year, has become a virtual shrine for the follies are getting involved. As these cogs attempt to work of American interventionism, the internal in concert, the Biden administration is attempting complexities of Afghan politics, and regional to embed the peace process in a wider regional wrangling over parochial interests in South Asia. framework. This report looks into these regional From the beginning of the conflict in the aftermath stakeholders and their geopolitical stakes. of 9/11 and the start of America’s ‘war on terror’ campaign, the Afghan war moved towards an ad- The US–Taliban deal, signed in February 2020 hoc plan. The narratives that carried it forward— under the administration of Donald Trump, is of defeating Al Qaeda, diminishing the Taliban, today the bedrock of all negotiations around the and institutionalising democratic political systems Afghan conflict. The agreement requires the US in Kabul—have met with limited successes. Even to withdraw its military forces from the country by 1 May 2021. While President Joe Biden’s new Attribution: Kabir Taneja, Ed., “From War to Peace: The Regional Stakes in Afghanistan’s Future,” ORF Special Report No. 131, March 2021, Observer Research Foundation. 2 within these limits, however, the progress made is more than worthy of being protected: women’s rights to education, democratic values, and elections. Throughout the international negotiation As the May 1 deadline looms, this report trains process with the Taliban, India has mostly been an the spotlight on some of the most critical regional outlier, refusing to join the table and preferring and international actors that could help pave to back the democratic process and government the way to a peaceful and stable Afghanistan. In in Kabul. New Delhi’s support in Afghanistan has the first chapter, Ibraheem Bahiss analyses the largely taken the form of institutions, from building nucleus of the issue—the Ghani government dams and supporting education, to training in Kabul, and how it is poised to deal with the members of the Afghan military and providing pressures of coming to a conclusion with the them with equipment and training in policing and Taliban. In her piece, Kriti M Shah focuses on the diplomacy. These have had their limitations, which Taliban itself, and its strong position that allows are revealing themselves today as regional and it to play its cards the way it wants to. Kashish international actors mould policies to cement their Parpiani follows with an essay on the superpower, interests as a cloud of uncertainty hovers around the US, beleaguered in Afghanistan and looking the future Afghan political architecture. Even as it for a plausible exit from the quagmire of a two- is clear that the Taliban will have an influence on decade long war. In the fourth chapter, Sushant Kabul’s power-sharing system in the time to come, Sareen looks at the position of perhaps the most the relationship that different stakeholders will important foreign actor, Pakistan, and how the develop with the group could determine their own Pakistani establishment is looking for an outright view of regional and international security. While victory for its interests via the Taliban. Kalpit one of the critical provisions of the US-Taliban deal A Mankikar, in his chapter, examines China’s is for the latter to cut all ties with Al Qaeda and deny interests in Afghanistan from the view of regional them refuge, most analysts agree that the chances of security and Beijing’s overall approach towards this happening are slim. the Muslim world as it continues its crackdown on the Uyghur Muslims in restive Xinjiang. In the The sidelines of the Afghan negotiations could sixth piece, Nivedita Kapoor surveys an old player determine other regional stories. The recently in the Afghan contemporary history—Russia, and announced ceasefire between India and Pakistan is how it continues to play a role despite its limiting being viewed from a US-led Afghan lens. The India- historical baggage. In the last chapter, I look into Pakistan rivalry is also critical to peace in Afghanistan, one of the most underrated players in the Afghan where both New Delhi and Islamabad preside over crisis, another neighbor—Iran, and how its a game of critical strategic, tactical and political one- fractured relations with the US could exclusively upmanship. While the Taliban has its historical, shape its Afghan policy. ideological and political mooring in Pakistan where most of the Shuras are based, New Delhi has backed The aim of this report is to offer a quick but the democratic processes in Afghanistan. India has incisive analysis of regional views on Afghanistan. publicly supported the government of President These explorations should help clarify the Indian Ghani despite increasing hostility towards his perspective through the vantage points of some presidency, both from within the Afghan polity and of the potential partners (or even foes) that New certain quarters in Washington, D.C. Delhi will have to engage with for its own future policies on Afghanistan and the region. 3 THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT: CHASING PEACE Ibraheem Bahiss he intra-Afghan conference held in Moscow in March heralded a new approach to the Afghan conflict – one that could threaten the very survival Capitalising on regional support for an interim of Ashraf Ghani’s government. The arrangement, the Joe Biden administration Tgovernment’s current predicament is the accretion propped up the notion of an interim “participatory of factors both outside and within its control. peace government”, according to a leaked draft US proposal.4 This call for an interim government The Doha accord, signed between the United was part of a broader strategy of the new US States (US) and the Taliban in February 2020, has administration, as announced by Secretary of put the Afghan government in a difficult position.1 State Antony Blinken in a letter to President Ghani The agreement required sacrificing negotiation leaked to the press.5 The letter highlighted three leverage in return for having the Taliban sit at the crucial steps aimed at accelerating a settlement table. As the Doha agreement was not predicated on between the Afghan government and the Taliban. the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan, First, it asked the United Nations (UN) to the government had little capacity to extract convene a summit of leaders from the US, Russia, concessions from the insurgents. Considering that China, Pakistan, Iran and India to form a unified he would not be able to gain a favourable deal under approach to the peace process. Second, it hinted such circumstances, President Ghani took a gambit, at the creation of an interim government in the and arguably, delayed the peace process by refusing form of a “written proposal aimed at accelerating to release Taliban prisoners as per the agreement.2 discussion on a negotiated settlement and This ultimately proved counterproductive. For ceasefire.” The letter also mentioned a senior- one, it fuelled perceptions among donor states that level meeting in Turkey “in the coming weeks to the current government was hindering the peace finalize a peace agreement.” process. Top US officials, for example, continued to stress that peace talks were the only path forward to finding a resolution to the enduring conflict in Afghanistan.3 Presumably, this also incensed regional powers such as Iran, Russia and China, who view the peace process as an opportunity to compel the US to withdraw from their strategic underbelly. 4 Two shortcomings of the current government have contributed to its current predicament. The The Afghan government has objected to the plan. first is its Machiavellian approach to domestic For his part, the chairperson of the High Council power-brokering. Powerful warlords like Atta for National Reconciliation, Abdullah Abdullah, has Noor and Marshal Dostum were quickly courted expressed cautious support for the plan. Others, by the government and then just as easily including former President Hamid Karzai and abandoned for short-term gains. Where the some powerful Afghan politicians, such as Abdul government has negotiated political pacts, such as Rashid Dostum and Atta Noor, have also tentatively the National Unity Government agreement, the endorsed the plan. Hezbi Islami Gulbuddin agreement, and the 2020 political participation agreement, the government Ghani has stated that he is willing to step down has consistently been followed by accusations of 9 from the presidency before the end of his term, violating the terms of these agreements.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mystery Money
    MYSTERY MONEY How a loophole could allow foreign money to flow into super PACs through secretive shell companies ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was written by Research Director Michael Beckel and Research Associate Amisa Ratliff. Design by Communications Associate Sydney Richards. Cover image credit: bioraven/Shutterstock.com ABOUT ISSUE ONE Issue One is the leading crosspartisan political reform group in Washington. We unite Republicans, Democrats, and independents in the movement to increase transparency, strengthen ethics and accountability, and reduce the influence of big money in politics. Issue One’s ReFormers Caucus of more than 200 former members of Congress, governors, and Cabinet officials is the largest bipartisan coalition of its kind ever assembled to advocate for solutions to fix our broken political system. Issue One 1401 K Street NW, Ste. 350 Washington, D.C. 20005 © 2020 Issue One MEDIA CONTACT Michael Beckel [email protected] | 202-888-6770 issueone.org | facebook.com/issueonereform | @issueonereform [ 2 — Mystery Money ] Issue One MYSTERY MONEY BY MICHAEL BECKEL & AMISA RATLIFF INTRODUCTION oney laundering schemes to illegally funnel foreign money into super PACs M through shell companies threaten the integrity of our political system. Since the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010 paved the way for the super PAC era, there has been a proliferation of corporate super PAC donors — including scores of opaque and obscure companies that allow the people behind them to remain hidden. Such secretive entities provide especially ideal cover for foreigners wishing to evade the existing prohibition on their involvement in U.S. elections. A new Issue One analysis shows why this loophole needs to be closed.
    [Show full text]
  • Will “America First” Leave America Alone? – the Trump Administration’S Trade Policy in the Indo-Pacific Region Author Darah Phillip by Darah Phillip
    Special Article 2 Will “America First” Leave America Alone? – The Trump Administration’s Trade Policy in the Indo-Pacific Region Author Darah Phillip By Darah Phillip President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the Trans- ties with the US. Pacific Partnership (TPP) in one of his first acts in office on Jan. 24, For the US and Japan, the TPP created an opportunity for the two 2017. The withdrawal was an early demonstration of his nationalistic, countries to pursue an economic relationship to match and “America First” trade philosophy. Trump’s initial argument behind complement their longstanding bilateral security alliance. Under the leaving the TPP was that the US, and American workers in particular, guise of tying Japan’s economy with that of the US, the TPP enabled would be worse off in the trading bloc. He also insisted that he was a Japanese negotiators to counter domestic resistance to trade in areas tougher negotiator than former President Barack Obama and that he such as agriculture by leaning on the strategic imperative of using the could negotiate a better deal for Americans. Three and a half years agreement to mitigate Japan’s growing economic dependence on after leaving the TPP, however, the Trump administration has not China. produced a trade framework in the Indo-Pacific region to surpass, let The TPP was also expected to encourage growth in US trade with alone rival, the TPP. Instead, the US may be more isolated from its Vietnam and Malaysia, two countries with high trade barriers and yet economic partners in the region today than it was in 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of Donald J. Trump†
    THE AGE OF THE WINNING EXECUTIVE: THE CASE OF DONALD J. TRUMP† Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash∗ INTRODUCTION The election of Donald J. Trump, although foretold by Matt Groening’s The Simpsons,1 was a surprise to many.2 But the shock, disbelief, and horror were especially acute for the intelligentsia. They were told, guaranteed really, that there was no way for Trump to win. Yet he prevailed, pulling off what poker aficionados might call a back- door draw in the Electoral College. Since his victory, the reverberations, commotions, and uproars have never ended. Some of these were Trump’s own doing and some were hyped-up controversies. We have endured so many bombshells and pur- ported bombshells that most of us are numb. As one crisis or scandal sputters to a pathetic end, the next has already commenced. There has been too much fear, rage, fire, and fury, rendering it impossible for many to make sense of it all. Some Americans sensibly tuned out, missing the breathless nightly reports of how the latest scandal would doom Trump or why his tormentors would soon get their comeuppance. Nonetheless, our reality TV President is ratings gold for our political talk shows. In his Foreword, Professor Michael Klarman, one of America’s fore- most legal historians, speaks of a degrading democracy.3 Many difficulties plague our nation: racial and class divisions, a spiraling debt, runaway entitlements, forever wars, and, of course, the coronavirus. Like many others, I do not regard our democracy as especially debased.4 Or put an- other way, we have long had less than a thoroughgoing democracy, in part ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– † Responding to Michael J.
    [Show full text]
  • Consequences of US Trade Policy on EU-US Trade Relations and the Global Trading System
    STUDY Requested by the INTA committee Consequences of US trade policy on EU-US trade relations and the global trading system Policy Department for External Relations Directorate General for External Policies of the Union PE 603.882 - November 2018 EN DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT STUDY Consequences of US trade policy on EU-US trade relations and the global trading system ABSTRACT The Trump Administration’s trade policy is driven by the belief that previous Administrations have let other countries take advantage of the United States for foreign policy reasons, as demonstrated by America’s more open trade regime and its trade deficits. It is determined to end this perceived imbalance by demanding reciprocity instead, and is willing to use tough tactics to achieve this through strict enforcement of its procurement and trade defense law; expansive tax provisions; bringing the WTO dispute settlement to a halt; withdrawing from and forcing others to renegotiate existing bilateral and multilateral agreements; adopting a novel “national security” argument to justify breaking WTO tariff commitments for steel, aluminum and possibly autos; and enacting punitive tariffs on billions of dollars of imports from China, possibly threatening a trade war. The scenarios for U.S.-EU trade relations as well as the global trading system are anything but rosy. The EU can stand up to the Administration’s “bullying,” or it can take advantage of America’s need for a “re- balancing” to build its own stature by taking simple steps to improve EU-U.S. trade, forging a way forward in the WTO, and providing necessary leadership to address the dangers China’s economic system poses to the global trading order.
    [Show full text]
  • Trump, American Hegemony and the Future of the Liberal International Order
    Trump, American hegemony and the future of the liberal international order DOUG STOKES* The postwar liberal international order (LIO) has been a largely US creation. Washington’s consensus, geopolitically bound to the western ‘core’ during the Cold War, went global with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the advent of systemic unipolarity. Many criticisms can be levelled at US leadership of the LIO, not least in respect of its claim to moral superiority, albeit based on laudable norms such as human rights and democracy. For often cynical reasons the US backed authoritarian regimes throughout the Cold War, pursued disastrous forms of regime change after its end, and has been deeply hostile to alternative (and often non-western) civilizational orders that reject its dogmas. Its successes, however, are manifold. Its ‘empire by invitation’ has helped secure a durable European peace, soften east Asian security dilemmas, and underwrite the strategic preconditions for complex and pacifying forms of global interdependence. Despite tactical differences between global political elites, a postwar commit- ment to maintain the LIO, even in the context of deep structural shifts in interna- tional relations, has remained resolute—until today. The British vote to leave the EU (arguably as much a creation of the United States as of its European members), has weakened one of the most important institutions of the broader US-led LIO. More destabilizing to the foundations of the LIO has been the election of President Trump. His administration has actively
    [Show full text]
  • Donald Trump's “America First” Policy Rarely Does a New U.S. Administration Come Into Office with a Full-Fledged Coherent
    U.S. Foreign Policy Portland State University, Winter 2020 David Kinsella Donald Trump’s “America First” Policy Rarely does a new U.S. administration come into office with a full-fledged coherent approach to foreign policy recognizable to a theorist of foreign policy or international relations. Rather, on the campaign trail, they proffer a series of foreign policy positions, whether consistent with or at odds with current U.S. policy and, once in office, take actions in response to world events and opportunities—again, sometimes consistent with previous policy and sometimes taking the nation in new directions. The Trump campaign, and now the Trump administration, has been no different than others in this regard. However, as with previous administrations, analysts like us search for a coherent set of principles that help makes sense of an administration’s foreign policy, more often than not attaching “doctrine” to a particular president that captures some essential features of their foreign policies. Thus, in the course, we have described the Truman doctrine, the Nixon doctrine, the Reagan doctrine, and the Bush doctrine. Of course, administrations’ foreign-policy ideologies often go by other labels—“containment” and “détente” are two that you now know well. After eighteen months in office, the most common label we see attached to President Trump’s foreign policy is America First. It is still a bit early in his tenure to elucidate a consistent set of principles that bring coherence to the administration’s foreign policy actions or help to predict future actions should he be elected to a second term.
    [Show full text]
  • Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 01/06/2020 9:48:46 AM
    Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 01/06/2020 9:48:46 AM The invisible man: Text messages reveal former golfer's role in Ukraine scandal By Vicky Ward, CNN December 23,2019 New York (CNN) - When Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman traveled to Ukraine last winter to help Rudy Giuliani dig up dirt on President Donald Trump's political opponents, they were accompanied by a 44 year-old American named David Correia. A former pro golfer and restaurateur, Correia had gotten to know Parnas and Fruman in South Florida, where he'd gone into business with Parnas years earlier. While Parnas and Fruman, who had high-level contacts in Ukraine, worked to gather documents that they believed showed evidence of corruption by Joe Biden and his son Hunter, Correia was there to make the effort pay off in lucrative business deals, according to people who talked to him at the time, as well as copies of text messages obtained by CNN. Before the trip, Correia texted an American associate that he wanted to "be fully prepared to close specific deals in Ukraine while we are there," according to the message viewed by CNN. Though he had no experience in the gas or energy business prior to working with Parnas, Correia was bent on securing a deal to sell US liquified natural gas to Ukraine through a pipeline in Poland. When the three men were indicted in October for illegally funneling foreign money into Republican political circles, attention quickly focused on Parnas and Fruman, who have become key characters in the ongoing impeachment saga of President Donald Trump.
    [Show full text]
  • Trump's America First Policy in Global and Historical Perspectives: Implications for US-East Asian Trade
    Received By NSD/FARA Registration Unit 02/15/2019 11:54:04 AM Trump's America First Policy in Global and Historical Perspectives: Implications for US-East Asian Trade June Park and Troy Stangarone Since the end of World War II, the United States has played a leading role in shaping the global economic system. While US influence has waned with the reconstruction of Europe and the rise of China, it has remained the leading power in the international system. The election of Donald Trump, however, represents a significant shift in US trade policy. In its first days the Trump administration withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and has since taken specific steps to renegotiate trade agreements and protect US industries. Po­ liticizing the importance to reduce bilateral US trade deficits and to bring manufacturing jobs back home, the Trump ad­ ministration has also utilized trade remedies in addition to the seldom-used safeguards to advance its "America First" economic agenda. Although trade remedy actions—the im­ position of antidumping and countervailing duty based on the US Trade Act of 1974—have been critical instruments for US trade, prioritizing trade deficit reduction in US trade pol­ icy has the potential to erode the underlying international system and exacerbate rather than resolve the tensions that have spurred nationalistic economic movements. Against this backdrop, in this article we explore the implications of an abrogation of US global economic leadership for the international trading system and US influence more broad­ ly. We also consider the implications for East Asia and the global economy as a whole as China, the European Union, and Japan take on larger leadership roles within the global trading system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Trump Administration's Foreign Policy – Impacts of Changes in The
    Strategic Annual Report 2019 The Trump Administration’s Foreign Policy – Impacts of Changes in the United States The Trump Administration’s Foreign Policy – Impacts of Changes in the United States President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally, Oct� 2019, Minneapolis� (Photo AP/AFLO) Since its inauguration in January 2017, fundamentally change America’s role in the Trump administration’s America the international arena, what domestic First policy, which seems unhesitant changes have brought the Trump about confronting other parts of the administration to power in the United world while paying little attention to the States, and how these changes have been free and open international order it had and will be manifested in the Trump been leading, has had significant impacts administration’s foreign policy� on the international community� The policies of the United States, Japan’s Firstly, the foreign and security policies sole ally, have played a central role in of the Trump administration that are building and maintaining the free and of such vital importance to Japan were open international order in the Indo- devised at the initiative of Secretary of Pacific region, which has a direct impact State Pompeo, former National Security on the security environment and stable Advisor Bolton, and former Secretary economic development of Japan� It is of Defense Mattis, with the National hence critical to understand whether Security Strategy (NSS2017) released or not the Trump administration will in December 2017 formulated with 11 significant
    [Show full text]
  • Trumpism?: a Discourse Analysis of Trump’S Four Major Campaign Speeches Rachel D
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Seton Hall University Libraries Political Analysis Volume 19 Volume XIX (2018) Article 2 2018 What are the three characteristics of Trumpism?: A Discourse Analysis of Trump’s Four Major Campaign Speeches Rachel D. Beeman Seton Hall University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/pa Part of the American Politics Commons Recommended Citation Beeman, Rachel D. (2018) "What are the three characteristics of Trumpism?: A Discourse Analysis of Trump’s Four Major Campaign Speeches," Political Analysis: Vol. 19 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/pa/vol19/iss1/2 POLITICAL ANALYSIS · VOLUME XIX · 2018 What are the three characteristics of Trumpism?: A Discourse Analysis of Trump’s Four Major Campaign Speeches Rachel D. Beeman Rachel's goal in this paper is to advance a moderate voice on a controversial presidency. She uses text analysis techniques and a program outside her comfort zone called ATLAS.ti, with the help of her faculty mentor Dr. Roseanne Mirabella, to analyze four campaign speeches by President Trump. She hopes future research will take advantage of text analysis to explore how rhetorical patterns and cues might provide insight into the characteristics of leaders and elected officials. oday we are not merely transferring This paper will use an empirical and pragmatic power from one Administration to study of speeches given during the campaign to “Tanother, or from one party to another – illustrate the overarching ideological themes— but we are transferring power from Washington, populism, business-like approach to politics, and D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Per Curiam Opinion 2 HAWAI‘I V
    FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAI‘I; ISMAIL ELSHIKH, No. 17-15589 Plaintiffs-Appellees, D.C. No. v. 1:17-cv-00050- DKW-KSC DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF OPINION HOMELAND SECURITY; JOHN F. KELLY, in his official capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE; REX W. TILLERSON, in his official capacity as Secretary of State; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants-Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawai‘i Derrick Kahala Watson, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted May 15, 2017 Seattle, Washington Filed June 12, 2017 Before: Michael Daly Hawkins, Ronald M. Gould, and Richard A. Paez, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam Opinion 2 HAWAI‘I V. TRUMP COUNSEL Jeffrey Bryan Wall (argued), Acting Solicitor General; Edwin S. Kneedler, Deputy Solicitor General; Sharon Swingle, Anne Murphy, Lowell V. Sturgill Jr., H. Thomas Byron III, and Douglas N. Letter, Attorneys, Appellate Staff; August E. Flentje, Special Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General; Elliot Enoki, Acting United States Attorney; Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General; Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; for Defendants-Appellants. Neal Kumar Katyal (argued), Colleen Roh Sinzdak, Mitchell P. Reich, and Elizabeth Hagerty, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Washington, D.C.; Thomas P. Schmidt, Hogan Lovells US LLP, New York, New York; Sara Solow and Alexander B. Bowerman, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Douglas S. Chin, Attorney General; Clyde J. Wadsworth, Solicitor General; Deirdre Marie-Iha, Donna H.
    [Show full text]
  • Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus
    REPUBLICAN PLATFORM 2016 HHHHHHH HHHHHH We dedicate this platform with admiration and gratitude H H H H H To all who stand strong in the face of danger So that the American people may be protected against it — The men and women of our military, of our law enforcement, and the first responders of every community in our land — And to their families. Paid for by the Committee on Arrangements for the 2016 Republican National Convention Not Authorized By Any Candidate Or Candidate’s Committee www.gopconvention2016.com • REPUBLICAN PLATFORM 2016 • Preamble With this platform, we the Republican Party reaffirm the principles that unite us in a common purpose. We believe in American exceptionalism. American people are optimistic. We believe the United States of America is This platform lays out — in clear language — the unlike any other nation on earth. path to making America great and united again. We believe America is exceptional because of For the past 8 years America has been led in the our historic role — first as refuge, then as defender, wrong direction. and now as exemplar of liberty for the world to see. Our economy has become unnecessarily weak We affirm — as did the Declaration of with stagnant wages. People living paycheck to Independence: that all are created equal, endowed paycheck are struggling, sacrificing, and suffering. by their Creator with inalienable rights of life, liberty, Americans have earned and deserve a strong and the pursuit of happiness. and healthy economy. We believe in the Constitution as our founding Our standing in world affairs has declined document.
    [Show full text]