Much has been said and written about America’s excursions into Afghanistan and its lamentable scramble to get out. There is a ton of finger pointing. In fact, those that were part of the invasion in the first place and roundly proclaimed its noble purpose are now speaking out most loudly about what went wrong with the mission to extract Americans and American sympathizers. Who’s to blame? Those that brought us in, those that allowed us to stay, or those left holding the bag for wrapping up the whole mess?
Let’s talk first about the mission, and I have no more information here than the average newspaper reader. We hoped to put a stop to this as a working base for terrorists. We hoped to root out the Taliban and make over this beautiful, ancient land in our image. Another American-style democracy, like we did in Iraq. That worked out according to plan. My father was a military man, not by profession or career, but interest. He retired as a colonel in the Army. He always said that “you don’t go into any foreign country unless you have with it an ‘exit strategy’.” That’s the part to me that’s missing here, as it was in Vietnam, as it was in Lebanon, as it was in Cuba during the famous “Bay of Pigs”. Going in seems noble, honorable. Getting out is much less so.
Afghanistan should have been a case history. Russia was mired there not long before us, and their exit was pretty much like ours. Hasty and ill-conceived. We can even go back to the Afghan Wars of the British Empire. In 1842, about 4,500 British and Indian troops attempted to march out of Kabul. They were swarmed by Afghans and a bloodbath ensued. Does this sound vaguely familiar? The British, once again alarmed by Russian influence in the area, tried again in the late 1870’s. And again in 1919, just after World War I. The United States sent troops to Vietnam, ignoring the lessons of the French just a decade or two before. Do we not learn from history? Did Hitler not learn anything from Napoleon’s sojourn into Russia?
The recent images of Kabul strongly suggest pictures of the evacuation of Saigon years ago. People – mostly native citizens caught up in support for American troops, clinging to the landing skids of helicopters, people handing their young children up to others inside the aircraft. All of this is tragic, heart-wrenching, emotionally draining. Could it have been avoided? Who knows. The Taliban moved much faster than Americans anticipated. The Afghan government crumbled like an old cookie, and its military forces surrendered in record speed. So much from training and effective use of the most advanced weaponry. It could have been Dunkirk, but without the boats. It could have been Yorktown but without the Redcoats. It could have been Washington, D. C. in 1814, with the White House in flames. It could have been Napoleon’s armies departing Russia – in tatters, starving, frozen. There is no graceful, dignified way to evacuate, particularly if you’re the foreign power, you’ve lost the momentum, and the natives are turning against you. There is no cheering, no flag-waving, no parades, no show of strength and support. It’s a scramble, and it’s unbearably messy. History is littered with examples from the Crusades on .
So, who is to blame? The United States and its allies invaded in 2001, ousting the Taliban, which wasn’t Al-Qaeda but seemed to be painted with the same brush, to prevent the spread of terrorism after September 11th. Was President Bush II responsible? President Obama long said we should be getting out, but it didn’t happen. President Trump pulled American forces from Syria, setting the tone for Afghanistan, and that retreat led to a long string of carnage too. Mr. Trump was, let’s not forget, the one that set the deadline for America’s departure from Afghanistan. Was he to blame, then, for encouraging an embolden, revitalized Taliban? President Biden seems to be capturing a lion’s share of the blame for the evacuation, if not for the actual war. For a “lack of planning.” Could something like this have been planned? Could it have been organized, like a field trip to Museum of Science? Could we have somehow gracefully gathered up our belongings and our supporters and calmly boarded a plane while flight attendants with clipboards checked everyone off? Were peaceful lines waiting to get on jets really a possibility? I’m thinking . . . . . . . . doubtful. Are there actually four US Presidents to blame? Four Secretaries of Defense? Four Secretaries of State? Should we drag our allies in to share equally in the blame, the shame, the international disgrace?
I have no answers to those questions. I believe we have a complete and total failure to communicate and to understand. We completely misread the desires and the will of the Afghan people to assimilate and embrace our ideas, our philosophies. Or perhaps they did and it wasn’t showing. Or maybe we just needed more time for democracy to “sink in”. If we’d just planned to stay for another fifty or a hundred years? Or just maybe it never would. Maybe we don’t get their thinking. It’s possible, because we’re seen loads of violent incidents in Western Europe and in North American even among young Muslims that have grown up in the West. Is it that they don’t see anything of merit in what we’re offering them, or are their beliefs so ingrained that it’s too difficult to change? Have we, as white Europeans and North Americans, marginalized our minority populations to the point where they feel nothing but anger and resentment? And that’s not just young Islamists, it’s Hispanics, Africans, Asians.
Centuries ago, it was both fashionable and appropriate to build an army and attack one’s neighbors – whether hostility existed or not. We’ve seen “Game of Thrones” and read history books. Gaining control of land was building power. Somehow, many of us would like to think that we’ve moved beyond that perspective, but we really haven’t. If “invading to bring peace and stability” was a working solution, then America’s racial strife would have ended in 1865. The English, Scottish, and Irish would have been living in perfect harmony for four hundred years. North and South Korea would be the best of friends. Israeli citizens would be living in peace and prosperity, not looking over their shoulders. Russia and Ukraine would be sending each other postcards. Africans would be visiting their tribal cousins in Darfur, and Rwanda, and watching school children playing cheerfully together in Nigeria without fear of abduction.
It’s always a bitter pill when we lose. When our plans don’t go as, well, planned. When our intentions aren’t clear and our message a bit muddled. But those are the times that we just have to pull up our big girl and big boy pants and say, “oh well”. Those for whom we should rightfully feel sorry, and to whom we should apologize are those brave service personnel that have been in Afghanistan, working diligently, risking their lives. They’re the ones that are feeling the sting and the heartbreak most strongly, and we must be there to support and applaud them. To welcome them home as the heroes they are. Already we’re seeing what the Taliban is doing to its people, and by our standards, it’s going back centuries, even millennia. So perhaps we should concentrate our efforts with those folks that are working to move beyond, with those that need and actually ask for our help to create meaningful solutions to the world’s problems. We can’t help Afghanistan now, but we can work to build bridges to understanding where they don’t exist. We can work to change that which we can, provide positive influence where we’re able, and leave the rest to posterity.
I'm Thinking...No! 