{UAH} THE FRAUDLENT'S AFGHANISTAN FIRKIN DEBACLE

Biden's Afghanistan debacle

by Tom Rogan, Commentary Writer 

April 13, 2021 02:00 PM

The Biden doctrine seems to be that allies only count if they are in Europe.

The supporting evidence for that conclusion is President Joe Biden's looming announcement on Tuesday that the United States will withdraw all military forces from Afghanistan by Sept. 11. This is a major strategic error.

Afghanistan is led by a profoundly corrupt government. But its soldiers, our allies, continue to take thousands of casualties each year in an effort to defend the future of their nation and its 38 million citizens from the bared teeth of Taliban fanaticism. For a new U.S. administration that has proclaimed itself the beacon for global human rights and alliances, this withdrawal is an act of quite exceptional hypocrisy. Particularly ugly is the domestic public relations stunt symbolized by the Sept. 11 deadline.

Biden's decision actually slightly extends President Donald Trump's May deadline for a full troop withdrawal. Still, the delay doesn't make this decision any less idiotic. Defending the announcement, a White House official told the Washington Post that it was justified because there is no military solution in Afghanistan, and the U.S. military needs the troops to counter China and Russia. These excuses are as factually defective as anything the Trump administration ever offered.

The U.S. military has an adequate force reserve to deter Russia in Europe (especially if the Europeans ever start pulling their weight). Moreover, the U.S. Army's focus on supporting any conflict with China centers on logistics trains and long-range artillery rather than massed forces. In contrast, U.S. forces in Afghanistan are overwhelmingly involved in aviation, intelligence, training, and special operations activities. They provide the Afghan military with the critical capabilities it currently lacks, allowing those forces to target large Taliban formations and command structures. America's security interests are best served by keeping the 3,500 U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan exactly where they are.

True, there is no explicit military solution in Afghanistan, nor is there a wholly diplomatic solution, at least from the perspective of U.S. interests. As the scholar Thomas Jocelyn observed just last week, the Taliban are not living up to the pledges they made to the Trump administration as part of the 2020 peace deal. They have continued relations with terrorist groups, including al Qaeda, and they continue to escalate against Afghan forces in their quest for absolute power.

So why give the Taliban, which has a theological, ideological, and now, after 20 years of war, historical animus toward America, the space to pursue these interests?

The point would be worth debating, were the U.S. military still taking hundreds of casualties each month. But that's no longer the case. The U.S. military suffered 11 deaths in Afghanistan in all of 2020, most of which were not the result of combat. There have been zero deaths so far this year.

I don't mean to understate the human cost of these losses, for they are very real (read about some of those killed in 2020, here). We have also lost numerous CIA officers in Afghanistan, some recently, who are remembered by unnamed stars on the agency's Memorial Wall (the CIA's Special Activities Center will now likely surge to fill military gaps in Afghanistan). But the decision to stay or leave should be made on the basis of whether the mission and human cost is commensurate with our national security interests.

Considering the slow, uneven, but significant advances the Afghan military has made in recent years, I would argue that American interests are most certainly served by retaining a brigade-size presence in Afghanistan. We can help Afghanistan hold major population centers while simultaneously affording the Ghani government with massive leverage to extract a serious and sustainable accord with the Taliban.

Nor should we so casually abandon the gains that our own forces have so nobly and painfully earned for the Afghan people. In 2021, girls can go to school and grow up to become teachers, doctors, or parliamentarians. Afghanistan's economy is ten times larger than it was in 2001. People can listen to music, socialize, and vote.

Yes, these gains have their limits. In the hinterlands of Helmand and Paktika, it is the Taliban who control life. But no one is seriously suggesting the U.S. resend Marine expeditionary units through the Helmand river valley to clear and hold territory there. The question, rather, is why we should deny the Afghan military its ability to effectively respond to and contest Taliban offensives?

Biden's decision is a terrible mistake. Don't expect the editorial pages to lament Biden's choice as they did Trump's. Regardless, what the president has done will seriously damage America's moral authority and our security. The paper tiger has finally been crumpled. NATO partners just waiting for an excuse to walk away now have it.

Xi Jinping will surely take note of this new proof that America has limited staying power in a multigeneration struggle such as the one he is pursuing.

EM         -> {   Gap   at   46  }

On the 49^th Parallel          

                 Thé Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja and Dr. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda is in anarchy"
                    Kuungana Mulindwa Mawasiliano Kikundi
"Pamoja na Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja na Dk. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda ni katika machafuko"