Afghanistan is no longer a prominent non-NATO ally: More than a year after the Taliban seized control of Kabul. US President Joe Biden revoked Afghanistan’s status as a significant non-NATO ally.
Then we officially recognized Afghanistan as a major non-NATO ally (MNNA) in 2012. Which paved the door for the two nations to continue their defense and trade ties.
Regarding equipment and facilities for defense and security, Afghanistan received several facilities and concessions due to the designation.
In a presidential memo to the secretary of state Antony Blinken, Biden stated, “By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America.
Including section 517 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, I, at this moment, terminate the designation of Afghanistan as a significant Non-Nato Ally of the United States for the Act and the Arms Export Control Act.
Following Biden’s departure of US forces from Afghanistan last year. Which ended almost 20 years of conflict, Afghanistan‘s position has changed.
The Taliban soon reclaimed power of Afghanistan despite constantly assuring the international community that they would defend women’s rights.
In 1987, the MNNA status was first established. However, according to the State Department, the US will now have 18 significant non-NATO partners after Afghanistan’s designation revoked.
Those countries are Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Brazil, Colombia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, South Korea, Thailand, and Tunisia.
According to the state department, Taiwan is recognized as an MNNA despite not having an official classification.
Indian-American Rep. Ro Khanna proposed a resolution last month calling India a non-NATO ally.
Loans of material, supplies, or equipment for joint research, development, testing, or assessment may made to a significant non-NATO ally. In addition, they are qualified to host US-owned War Reserve Stockpiles on their soil outside of US military installations.
Suppose the financial arrangements are reciprocal and provide for payment of all US direct expenditures. In that case, these nations enter into agreements with the US for the joint provision of training on a bilateral or multilateral basis.