Don’t let the generals dictate the war’s legacy, make them answer for it
Expect the military officials who commanded Afghanistan to invoke ‘cutting and running.’ Let’s talk about why they failed.
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.
But Biden could turn it around by making the new Congress decide whether to put troops back into the country, or not.