[For his part, Ghani played the
stoic statesman, insisting he and his government “respect” Biden’s decision,
did not feel abandoned and will “manage the consequences.” But he invoked a
troubling metaphor, suggesting that Afghanistan was experiencing its own “1861
moment” — a nod to the start of the U.S. Civil War. “The then-young republic of
the United States was under attack, and unity, determination, and ensuring that
an exclusionary agenda was not allowed — [this] is the type of moment for
us,” Ghani told reporters Friday. In remarks before his
meeting with Biden, he said: “We’re determined to have unity, coherence, [a]
national sense of sacrifice and will not spare anything.”]
Just before the arrival of Ghani
and Abdullah Abdullah, his governing partner in Kabul, news broke of a U.S. intelligence assessment that suggested the
Afghan government could fall within six months of a U.S. military withdrawal.
The assessment “highlights an increasingly stark picture as the U.S. military
sends home troops and equipment: The Taliban continues to take control of
districts across the country, and Afghan military units are either laying down
their arms or are being routed in bloody clashes,” my colleagues reported.
Citing these concerns, Republican
lawmakers have urged Biden to delay the departure. Senate Minority Leader Mitch
McConnell (R-Ky.) said the administration has “chosen to abandon the fight”
against the Taliban “and invite even greater terrorist threats” — no matter
that Biden is carrying out exactly what President Donald Trump also promised.
For his part, Ghani played the
stoic statesman, insisting he and his government “respect” Biden’s decision,
did not feel abandoned and will “manage the consequences.” But he invoked a
troubling metaphor, suggesting that Afghanistan was experiencing its own “1861
moment” — a nod to the start of the U.S. Civil War. “The then-young republic of
the United States was under attack, and unity, determination, and ensuring that
an exclusionary agenda was not allowed — [this] is the type of moment for
us,” Ghani told reporters Friday. In remarks before his
meeting with Biden, he said: “We’re determined to have unity, coherence, [a]
national sense of sacrifice and will not spare anything.”
Such a proclamation should already be ringing alarms. The United States has spent two decades waging war and counterinsurgency in Afghanistan. It has lost more than 2,000 servicemen and women in the process and sunk trillions of dollars into its war effort and attempted nation-building projects. But now, just as it’s poised to exit, Afghanistan’s president believes an existential conflict in his country is about to begin.
To be sure, Ghani attempted to
sound a note of confidence, declaring that his country was “rallying to the
defense of the republic.” Biden offered reassurance, repeating his pledge to
maintain significant support to the weak central government in Kabul, albeit
mostly in the form of rhetoric and cash rather than American hard power. “The
senseless violence . . . has to stop, but it’s going to be very difficult,”
Biden said. “But we’re going to stick with you, and we’re going to do our best
to see to it you have the tools you need.”
The Taliban, though, appears to be
licking its chops already. The group is now believed to control roughly a third of the country’s districts and is
battling for many more. Its advances span a vast stretch of territory, from the
rugged northern borderlands near Tajikistan to areas close to Kabul.
“In the past week, fighters have
reportedly seized more than 20 districts and attacked more than 80,” wrote my
colleagues, who reported on the emergence of irregular militia units to
help buttress the flagging Afghan army. “In Kunduz province, a critical gateway
to the northern border, militia fighters have swarmed the capital city to help
besieged government troops, but the fighting has continued unabated and the
surrounding districts are in Taliban hands.”
Still, the U.S. imperative to leave
remains strong. According to various polls, a majority of Americans at
least somewhat approve of withdrawal. While a generation of lawmakers in
Washington have presided over the conflicts that sprawled across Afghanistan
and the Middle East in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, they know there’s little
public appetite for further interventions of the sort seen in Afghanistan —
where the United States toppled a Taliban government that had given safe haven
to terrorist group al-Qaeda, only to find itself marooned in a costly struggle
against a Taliban insurgency it found impossible to defeat, not least because
of the difficulties posed by a weak Afghan government riddled with corruption.
Skeptics of the White House’s
present strategy contend that leaving in current circumstances — and thereby
boosting a resurgent Taliban — is wrongheaded and may haunt Biden and future
administrations. “In many ways, the costs of staying seem shorter-term and
borne by the United States, while the costs of leaving will be predominantly
borne by Afghans over a longer time horizon,” wrote Madiha Afzal of the Brookings Institution in a Washington
Post op-ed earlier this month. “Yet, even if those costs seem remote
now, history tells us that they will be blamed on the United States.”
But Biden’s decision to withdraw
reflects a widespread strategic impatience with the U.S. mission. “We have
provided the Afghan people the blood
of thousands [of] our finest men and women, hundreds of
billions of our citizens’ dollars, and nearly 20 years for the Afghan
government to have gotten its house in order and forged a negotiated settlement
with the insurgents,” wrote Daniel Davis, a retired U.S. Army
lieutenant colonel who deployed twice to Afghanistan. “They have squandered
that opportunity.”
Afghans may counter that the price they have paid in blood is far
steeper — and that heavy-handed U.S. military action has, on numerous occasions, added to the civilian toll.
What is clear is that the United States is a party to cycles of conflict in the
war-ravaged country that long predated 9/11 and will continue after the United
States withdraws its main troop presence. The Biden administration will push
for a negotiated peace between Ghani’s government and the Taliban, but
diplomatic efforts remain stalled as the Taliban press their battlefield
advantage. A diverse set of regional powers — including China,
Pakistan, India and Russia — may all variously attempt to help broker some sort
of reconciliation between the ultraconservative Taliban and the Afghan
government.
Absent that, chaos looms. Even
American advocates of withdrawal recognize the commitment that ought to remain.
Andrew Bacevich, president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft,
which advocates foreign policy restraint, argued that the Biden administration
must make good on promises to resettle tens of thousands of Afghans whose
collaboration with U.S. forces in the country now leave them vulnerable to militant
reprisals. He added that the United States and U.N. agencies should be prepared
for a new Afghan refugee exodus should the Taliban manage to take over Kabul.
“Nothing was to be gained by
prolonging an undertaking that has definitively failed,” Bacevich wrote. “Yet ending America’s longest war does not
absolve the United States of responsibility for what may happen next.”
Read more:
China is contributing to the ‘Cold War mentality,’ too
Even the world’s most successful vaccination programs are
hitting hurdles
Other countries use ranked-choice voting. Has its moment in the
U.S. arrived?
