The dangerous rise of a new stab-in-the-back myth
The foreign policy elite are focused on defending their reputations and privileges, not in confronting failure in Afghanistan.
The foreign policy elite are focused on defending their reputations and privileges, not in confronting failure in Afghanistan.
It required a ‘whole of government’ response, but DC wasn’t firing on all cylinders. There is plenty of blame to go around.
Thursday’s ghastly bombings reflect a real threat to the Taliban’s new-found control over the country — and to the U.S. evacuation on the ground.
They were the media darlings of their times, but we are still living with ‘King David’s’ mistakes and his love affair with the press.
An historian points out that our partners weren’t equipped to win without air support — but neither are we.
There are too many careers and too much money tied to American power projection. So expect it to shift, not recede from the stage.
Cities are falling to the Taliban at a rapid pace, but the conditions for failure were set long before the US troop withdrawal this summer.
Another example of how our post-9/11 counterterrorism interests have emboldened violent leaders who seem to stay in power forever.
Expect the military officials who commanded Afghanistan to invoke ‘cutting and running.’ Let’s talk about why they failed.
President Biden announced plans today to start evacuating at-risk Afghan interpreters and families. No criticism here.
Leaving is the right thing to do, but failing to put effort into regional diplomacy now would be a real stain on his legacy.
For better or worse we stood up armed groups that are now operating under varying degrees of local, state and Taliban control.
But it shouldn’t be. Not all alliances should be treated the same, but China threat inflation drives the conversation that way anyway.
We stand almost exactly where we did nearly 50 years ago: leaving a failed war behind with little to show for it but pain and regret.
Two hearings this week revealed quite a bit of open-ended threat inflation and an embrace of military deterrence as the only solution.
Many of these 800 installations have been around since WWII and don’t have anything to do with today’s challenges.
The establishmentarians are talking “responsible withdrawal” and “safe havens” again. That only means one thing.
Blowing off the May 1 deadline for withdrawal would be a mistake, but that seems to be where the winds are blowing.
Biden signs order that elevates climate to a national security issue. Let’s see if the DoD takes on board their own role in the crisis.
There is no need to make a military challenge out of a battle over global network dominance.
An enclave that already harbored substantial weaponry before 2017 is now a major center of Moscow’s military power.