Trump’s Afghanistan Gambit: The Ghost of Abandoned US Weapons Haunts the Region

“We left billions, tens of billions of dollars’ worth of equipment behind,” former President Donald Trump lamented in his first cabinet meeting of his second term, reigniting debate over the $7.12 billion worth of US weapons left in Afghanistan after the chaotic 2021 withdrawal. But his call to ‘get a lot of that equipment back’ raises more questions than answers.

The abandoned arsenal—comprising over 40,000 vehicles, 300,000 rifles, and 17,000 air-to-ground bombs—has transformed Afghanistan into an unintended arms depot for militant groups. The security vacuum left behind has fueled insurgency, cross-border terrorism, and a regional power play that South Asia is still reeling from.

Afghanistan’s Militant Bazaar: A Byproduct of America’s Exit Strategy?

While the Pentagon insists that sensitive equipment was demilitarized before withdrawal, a significant portion of US weaponry was handed over to the Afghan National Army (ANA), which collapsed overnight. This rapid disintegration turned Kabul’s streets into a showroom of abandoned military-grade gear—some of it now resurfacing in conflict zones from the Pakistani border to Central Asia.

Pakistan is paying the price. Cross-border attacks from Afghanistan have surged, forcing Islamabad to divert critical security resources to counter an emboldened militant resurgence. The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), flush with US-origin weaponry, has intensified its offensives, prompting fresh military deployments and straining Pakistan’s counterterrorism framework.

Also See: Why Did the U.S. Leave $7 Billion Worth of Weapons in Afghanistan?

The Geopolitical Chessboard: Who Gains?

Trump’s statement raises an uncomfortable reality—Afghanistan has become a de facto arms marketplace. According to intelligence reports:

• Weapons left behind are being resold—some reportedly making their way into regional conflicts, from Kashmir to the Middle East.
• Foreign actors, including India and Iran, are alleged to be facilitating the rehabilitation of US weaponry, shaping new security dynamics.
• The Afghan Taliban is leveraging its inherited arsenal not just for governance but for military projection, internal suppression, and transnational militant networks.

Reclaim, Retaliate, or Reinforce? Pakistan’s Path Forward

While Washington debates a theoretical retrieval of lost arms, Pakistan faces a more pressing reality. Islamabad has consistently raised concerns over Afghan-based militancy, yet global responses remain muted. If unchecked, this militarization could:

• Escalate regional instability by enabling a free flow of arms to hostile groups.
• Undermine counterterrorism efforts as militant factions gain strength.
• Force Pakistan into unilateral security action, including intensified border control, counterinsurgency operations, and diplomatic recalibration.

If the Taliban-led government of Afghanistan does not take responsibility for securing these weapons, it must be held accountable through performance—ensuring internal stability, preventing arms proliferation, and fostering better regional ties.

Trump’s remarks, though politically charged, reignite an urgent debate: What happens when the world’s most powerful military leaves behind a war chest in one of the world’s most volatile regions? The answer, unfortunately, is unfolding in real time—on Pakistan’s borders.

SAT Commentaries’ are social media threads by various authors, reproduced here for website use. Views are their own.