I will resist the urge to join the pack. I cannot pretend to know any more than anyone else who reads the newspapers, but I share Fareed Zakaria’s opinion, that we lost the war a long time ago, not just in the last 72 hours. The speed at which the Taliban appeared to take the country was not strictly a matter of their military expertise but, I think, more a matter of our blinders being ripped off by a rapid withdrawal of troops from this 20-year conflict.
What we’ve seen in the last few days is the reality of Afghanistan, and Afghanis. Whether we delayed withdrawal for a month or a year, the outcome most likely would have been the same.
But that doesn’t count the human cost, does it?
Here’s a transcript of the speech Pres. Biden gave on Monday, during which he said, among other things:
We will continue to support the Afghan people. We will lead with our diplomacy, our international influence and our humanitarian aid. We’ll continue to push for regional diplomacy and engagement to prevent violence and instability. We’ll continue to speak out for the basic rights of the Afghan people, of women and girls, just as we speak out all over the world.
The sad reality of this outcome is best described by Afghani reporter Nazira Karima in her comments at a Monday press conference. Women have gained so much in Afghanistan, and now they stand to lose that and more. But then, this, too, has been the reality all along. This article, from a history website from The Ohio State University and Miami University, explains the one step forward, two steps back nature of women’s gains there. Here’s one takeaway:
For many westerners, nothing demonstrates the essentially "backward" or "medieval" nature of Afghan society more than its treatment of women. For many Afghans, nothing represents the perils of encroaching westernization more than the movement for women's rights.
So we can argue about the method and the timing and Biden’s speech and our culpability. I have nothing much to add there, but we hold in our hearts the women of Afghanistan, for whom the beacon appears, for now, to be dimming.
As one commentator wrote, Afghanistan was never really a nation. The British drew some arbitrary lines that encompassed some nomadic tribes. Here's one professional warrior's opinion: https://www.stonekettle.com/2021/08/bitter-pill.html
We can't time-machine our way back, but I do want to talk about what we should demand, as voters, citizens, and residents of the United States, if we are to go to war that isn't in response to no-argument-needed-to-explain-why-it's-an attack.
I think that the question points of Just War Theory are a good starting point, though I dislike nesting them into a determination of "when a war is just." They are basic sanity criteria and basic not-for-destruction's-sake criteria. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory