Now I’ve resisted for a long time that the US was losing in Afghanistan, but in some respects its turned into more of a problem than Iraq was, as there’s no viable exit strategy in place, and the government doesn’t seem competent enough to either govern the population, manage corruption, share power amongst its many ethnic groups or maintain the effectivness of its armed forces, and they are facing an enemy who isn’t interested in being integrated into Afghans body politic no matter how many times there has been diplomatic engagement with them, they are only interested in destroying all opposition to it and bringing back the style of government they had in 1990’s.
So I’m of the conclusion that after nearly 40 years of civil war, nearly 20 years of American involvement money and lives being spent, it’s time to leave, the US and its allies have tried their best, now Afghanistan should be left to regional actors such as China, Pakistan, India, Russia and Iran who have more of a vested interest in Afghanistan being stablised than the US ever will.
I’ve been wanting us out for a long time, for this very reason. But the politics will ensure that it doesn’t happen. No one, even Trump, wants to be known as the president who “lost Afghanistan”. We can probably prop up some sort of government in Kabul for many years to come if we are so inclined, and I believe we will be so inclined. Democrat or Republican in the WH, I don’t think it matters much on this issue.
While I’m not necessarily opposed to taking our ball and going home, I’m not sure this last bit is true. 9/11 affected the USA WAY more than it affected those regional actors. Another 9/11-level terrorist attack seems more likely to target the USA than those regional actors. Doesn’t that give us “more of a vested interest in Afghanistan being [stabilized]” than them?
Nobody ever wins in Afghanistan. There was a lot of cautionary talk about that when we went in (which was, of course, soundly ignored by the shrubby-rah-rah types). There’s a reason Afghanistan is called the place “where empires go to die”.
The problem with that approach is that an Afghanistan under the control of radicalized fundamentalist sect of Sunni Islam will serve as a hotbed for training and recruitment for terrorists as it did in the ‘Nineties. The real irony is that the United States contributed to this situation by arming and training mujahideen in an effort to draw the Soviet Union into an unwinnable fight, and the Septermber 11, 2001 attacks and other resurgence of Islamic terrorism is blowback from reality, and one that arguably could have been averted or mediated if the United States didn’t turn its back on Afghanistan after the fall of the Soviet Union and allow the most radical elements to take over and form the Taliban regime.
So in a real sense it is “our problem”, both in cause and effect. However, despite attempts to install a moderate government and build a modern infrastructure, the US-led coalition has unquestionably failed to control radical elements, and the degree of waste, fraud, and abuse in the effort has been extraordinary to say the least, with the attempts at infrastructure, education, and security having been almost complete and utter failures. Keeping American personnel on the ground in Afghanistan and performing ‘extraordinary renditions’ has led to situations where soldiers feel justified in committing execution independent of any operational oversight and covering up abuses by allies in order to maintain operational control. Even more than the ill-conceived invasion and regime change in Iraq, the indefinite occupation in Afghanistan has compromised the moral authority of the United States and its coalition allies in combatting Islamic terrorism.
A policy of containment, while hardly a panacea, is certainly a better option at this point, as is improving relations with Pakistan both for the purpose of limiting the mobility of would-be terrorists and limiting nuclear proliferation in general. Unfortunately, that does not seem likely in the current geopolitical climate. But abandoning Afghanistan wholesale without any plan to deal with those consequences is equally ill-advised.
The Taliban doesn’t give a shit about the US, except to the extent we are in their territory. I think they learned their lesson about allowing an al Qaeda type “guest” to establish itself within its control, and if they haven’t we can deal with that type of situation with air strikes, if need be.
“Getting out for good” is a recipe for something like ISIS.
Now, if we want that, or don’t mind that (after all, ISIS was always overrated, only “a few thousand men in pickup trucks carrying AK-47s,” as one Israeli official put it,) then maybe, sure. But we can’t just bail out without consequences. We learned that in Iraq in 2009-2014.
It’s always easy to say cut the losses and pull out, thinking nothing bad will happen afterwards.
I agree. I think (of course what do I know?) that it would be relatively easy to come to an agreement with these insurgent groups: You can grow all the opium you want; you can treat women however you want (we disagree, but we aren’t going to go to a WWII-like mobilization and have our guys die for it); you can rape, pillage and execute your enemies. Fine.
But you will not allow terrorists to train, and you will not allow anyone with a goal of committing a terrorist attack safe harbor. We will be spying and if we see that you do, we will bomb the shit out of the terrorist camp and send a cruise missile straight up the ass of the insurgent group in charge of the area where the camp is located.
I can’t imagine why the insurgent groups would not agree to keep the terrorists at bay so long as it meant that we would be out of sight.
Did you ever have the feeling that you wanted to go, but then you had the feeling that you wanted to stay…
I agree that the 80’s good guys became the 90’s bad guys. I agree that the US involvement in Afghanistan contributed to the creation of radical Islamism in the region.
Mistakes were made.
But attempts to fix things were also made. And I do believe that those efforts were either too little or too late in some ways. Afghanistan and bordering Pakistan regions are largely tribal and not welcoming to the kind of change that the west envisions and encourages them to embrace. They are telling the US, in no uncertain terms, that the kind of help that’s being offered is not the kind of help that’s wanted.
So yes, leaving would be bad and make things worse in some ways. But staying to maintain the status quo doesn’t seem to be the better alternative, IMO. Seems to me there are two options:
Try to wipe the Taliban and ISIS aligned forces/population off the map, with a large military intervention.
Get out and leave them to do what they want, how they want within their own borders.
Both will lead to a net increase in human suffering but the later will not cost US military lives and treasure. And while it may also lead to continued extremist inspired attacks around the globe, I think the final cost (lives & money) will be less than an all out ground war. The money spent on improving counter intelligence against potential increase of extremist attacks would be money better spent as well.
So in re-reading your post, I guess we both agree on the “Policy of Containment”, just not on the value of doing so by maintaining a military presence in country.
I really don’t think that most people believe that “nothing bad will happen afterwards”. There will be consequences, for sure. The question is, is leaving worse than staying?
Lots of bad things will happen in Afghanistan no matter what we do. Will things be worse for Afghans if we leave? Maybe. Will things be worse for Americans if we leave? I don’t think so.
In general, I agree with this approach. Afghanistan isn’t Syria. There aren’t neighboring countries for them to invade and set up as a “caliphate,” as their neighbors will kick the shit out of them. Get out, bid them good riddance, and keep the cruise missiles updated. They aren’t worth any American lives or any American money.
ISIS will grow in areas poorly governed even if US troops are not on the ground, Libya is a good example, as is Yemen, this ignoring the fact the Taliban oppose ISIS.