Sorry for my hiatus from the realties of the present moment. Have meant to write before now, but every topic chosen has demanded more focused research than I have the time or energy to undertake. The end of the military mission in Afghanistan has nurtured this writing, above all, to express sorrow for lives lost and harmed by this war, particularly in its final days, and to remind ourselves that their sacrifices and their service place some obligation on the rest of us to gather lessons learned from our losses. And to always remember the ultimate sacrifice bestowed by those who gave their lives.
=========================================================
The seeds of failure in Afghanistan were planted not at the
end of our engagement under Commander-in-Chief Biden, but at the beginning
under Bush who called for the “defeat of terrorism.” How many times does
history have to ‘speak’ to us before we listen and heed the lessons and the
warning signs about such broad and interminable quests? Must we always respond to acts of
belligerence against us with the same
military policies, strategies and tactics? And then find after years of war
that they are not working against enemies that use quite different tactics, as happened
in Viet Nam.
Mary Kaldor of The Guardian claims that “the main lesson
from Afghanistan is that the ‘war on terror’ does not work.” To a large extent that is true-- a military
response using traditional approaches does not always work to combat terrorism,
which happens to be spreading to more countries not fewer. In Afghanistan, our presence alone appears to
have exacerbated Taliban violence when their tactic of personal assassination
of leaders in several areas, including the judiciary was increased. Apparently, that was enough to scare off the
Afghan government, whose president fled the country after absconding with a
reported fortune in what was probably mostly American aid money.
If one more lesson should be drawn it is that a traditional
military response, and traditional aid packages, are not always effective and that it would
seem to be time to re-think our overall mission in and to the world
community.
Just who are we, anyway?
The world’s policeman? The
world’s leading bankrolling nation, or just plain “world’s leading nation” (and
just what does that mean)? As we have
indicated elsewhere on this Blog (August 16, 2020), we lead the world in very
few areas of endeavor. So just what do
we offer? – are we the leading nation-builder?
-- what a disaster that turned out to be!
As no expert in foreign policy, but with some expertise in
domestic policymaking and programming, I suggest that we begin to consider
foreign roles for our nation that emulate some of what we have valued in
dealing with the exigencies of domestic policy. It is my opinion that our major
purposes and priorities are already written for us by our Founders in the
Preamble to our Constitution. Why not
use them as well for the under-pinning of foreign policy?
FIRST, our government has a responsibility to
form a more perfect union.
When applied to the international community, it looks like we have an
obligation to bring people together in ways that unite rather than divide; to
confer and to consult rather than conflict and combat. To be specific, we need to take much more
seriously our roles in fighting diseases like COVID19 together, in making peace
together; in combatting global warming together, in working together to combat
international problems like refugees from oppression.
We should not be withdrawing from alliances and agreements that
acknowledge such but should be seeking to increase the effects of united
actions that bring benefits to more people on this globe. HOWEVER, we should not push our own agenda as the only
one worthy of consideration but should seek common ground on which many can
tread without being told what to do but being solicited instead for their
solutions and strategies. Learning to
listen and to accept the opinions and innovations of others is an attribute to
be much desired in a leader. If the US
wants to be a world Leader of note, we must learn to demonstrate our total
willingness to hear and act on what other nations can contribute. Thus, diplomacy becomes a major area of
expertise that the USA must emphasize and use long before using military
intervention. Thus, involvement in
worthy U.N. endeavors must be one of our priorities, improving on its record of
humanitarian assistance another goal.
SECOND, our nation is mandated to find methods
and practices that will enhance domestic tranquility, provide
for the General Welfare, and establish JUSTICE. Can we say that our nation is highly committed
to peace-seeking, boosting the general welfare and establishing Justice? Such roles perhaps come down to healing or
enhancing human life and human rights.
What we are not called to do is to force our concepts of these values on
others, but to demonstrate their validity in our own spheres of internal community-building,
and then extend their good outcomes to the world community.
In other words, we have no business criticizing or
sanctioning other national governments while our own is lacking in several areas
of building ideals into realities. For
instance:
1.
Discrimination related to Race,
Gender and Sexual Orientation, Religion and National origin
We have not only approved of and sanctioned certain forms of
discrimination, we have built inequities and deficits into our system of
governance and into our institutions as well.
If we are not taking definitive steps to undo those inequities, our
emphasis on equal rights, equal justice, and equality of opportunity ring
hollow as we attempt to bring (impose?) universal rights and freedoms to other
nations.
Let us realize that all the forms of discrimination practiced in our
society have an impact on our ability to spread our ideals to international
status. While we still have the ability
to spread ideals and values, we are hindered in influencing the actual
practices of non-discrimination.
We cannot continue to play “the leader” on the world stage until we
address voting rights, poverty, the income gap, immigration, climate change and
institutional racism. And we cannot make
real progress until we admit that our ideals are relevant but many of our
practices are flawed. We all know areas
that need to be addressed: police brutality against people of color;
homelessness, immigration policy that denigrates persons seeking new lives; inadequate
housing, restricted voting, tax breaks for the rich and added burdens for the
poor – and so on.
THIRD, the preamble to our Constitution envisions government as a dedicated Protector, providing for the common defense and securing the promise of liberty for ourselves and our Posterity. We need to ask ourselves: Is it possible to act and react in a hostile environment in ways other than with military might and a general attitude of belligerence? Can we react to terrorists in any other manner than with belligerence of counterterrorism? Maybe it depends upon the crime being perpetrated.
Of
one thing I am certain: we need no more wars declared by presidents seeking to
justify themselves as strong, powerful, unintimidated leaders. We must reclaim the important role of
Congress in giving voice to the People and due consideration to any declaration
of war. There should never be another war without specific congressional
approval and oversight.
FOURTH, there is, of course, the importance of
seeking justice for people wronged by terrorism both foreign and
domestic. But maybe there is also room
for another lesson from Afghanistan:
Imposing our need for justice, or our form of governing on a host
country is not going to make for equal partners in whatever measures are needed. Giving money and equipment, and training to
host forces, can solve little unless an agreed-upon mutual plan is in place and seriously evaluated on a regular basis. And such Agreement must include commitments
by the host nation to the provisions of that Plan and Agreement.
If a host nation and army cannot demonstrate achievement of planned
goals, then the money attached to those goals, and the goals themselves, must
be modified. All joint arrangements in
another country should be instituted by contractual obligations and
responsibilities agreed to before money and equipment flow and before American
lives are endangered. We are not a money-machine
nor a world bank, nor a provider of humans for sacrifice. Instead, we must become
contractual partners in any foreign war or theater where our resources are tied
to a mutually-arrived-at plan that can be carried out or adjusted to fit
circumstances.
FIFTH, one more thing
we learned about this conflict: you cannot simply train a small fighting force
and expect a universal result. The
people – the larger population--must see their role and responsibility in what
is happening. Why wasn’t there a plan in
place for training civilians in ways for them to resist the Taliban? Why weren’t annoying mechanisms like confiscating
or disabling motor bikes, slitting tires or planting small bombs part of a plan for involving and training the
people to resist during initial phases of this war? I dare say that we failed in recruiting the people of Afghanistan to this war because
we operated from a centralized concept of governing and decision-making rather
than considering the local tribal nature of decision-making in Afghanistan
society.
We ignored not only their history
but their religious and societal differences and proceeded as though the
American model was the only sure way to
conduct this war. How did that work
out? We should have consulted Great
Britain and Russia plus a few other smaller countries who have also failed in
Afghanistan to win wars on their own terms.
The story of the Afghanistan War was being written long before
this evacuation occurred. The loss of
this war was determined when American government ignored the history and
religious divisions of this nation; when it ignored the expulsion of other
great nations of the past. We failed
when we accomplished the goal of finding Osama bin laden and eliminating
him. Instead of saying “mission accomplished”
and leaving the scene, we stayed there trying to nation-build! We failed because four different
administrations attempted to eliminate all Terrorists to establish a viable
democratic-like government that could defend itself. We ended up with neither. And now, we are seeing the rise of ISIS-K who
are said to feel that the Taliban are too moderate a force, so they bombed the
crowd at Abbey gate of the Kabul Airport and killed or injured 37 Americans military
and many more Afghans.
We need to learn
from failure in Afghanistan, but just as well, we must not assign failure to
one administration. President Biden did
not start this war; he did not order its continuation, despite a torrent of criticism. If anything, he recognized that we must end
our involvement and had the courage to stick to his conviction that it was time
to leave NOW. And he headed up the most
immense airlift ever undertaken to bring out over 127,000 Americans and
Afghans. It was another example of Joe
Biden organizing government to do what needed to be done quickly and effectively.
The
Republicans who attempt now to place all blame on him for not getting out
sooner or for not planning withdrawal sooner, or for glitches in execution; these are
the same moronic hypocrites who pushed former presidential pretender
Donald Trump, not only to prolong this war, but to ignore COVID, to put
Governors in charge of soliciting needed equipment and supplies, and to allow
the unmitigated flow of misinformation regarding the pandemic.
President
Joe Biden has once again shown these Republican misfits how to make government
work . These grumblers know that Bush and Trump (with some of them agreeing)
share much of the blame for the major failures of this 20-year War, simply
because they were so mired in outmoded ideology and policy that they were
totally incapable of creative innovation and effective operation of government
resources.
What may be
more to the point is that Republicans are so committed to private industry that
they have allowed certain industries like Lockheed-Martin to make enormous
profits off war contracts. How many
decisions about keeping troops in losing situations like Viet Nam, Iraq, and
Afghanistan can be traced to just such chicanery? I don’t have that answer (and neither is it
generally advertised) but here are some interesting links to articles on war
profits:
How the defense industry helped
prolong the war in Afghanistan – Responsible Statecraft
https://inthesetimes.com/article/military-contractor-caci-international-weapons-military
We need to re-think
our approach to world community participation.
We are not the only “leader of the free world”, nor are we the only nation
designated to help build other nations; nor should we assume it is our role or obligation
to mete out justice for crimes against humanity. Our presumed purposes and
roles are just not working and must be evaluated, debated and adjusted to meet
our national goals and world-wide needs, according to our basic constitutional
values outlined in the Preamble.
Can we be
Uniters, Justice-makers and Peacemakers, boosters of the general welfare of
societies and Protectors of people and their liberties? We won’t know until we try! And we won’t ever
know by being less than we are called to be or by thinking we know what is best
for places like Afghanistan!
We do have an opportunity however, because of the evacuation of Afghan families to the U.S. and elsewhere to return to our role as humanitarians. Afghans who helped us during the ‘war’ as translators a well as other personnel, and their families, have left their homes and records and possessions behind as they are air-lifted to the USA and other countries. They need our help and they need it right away. This is the time to bring out one accepted definition of who we are. The usual charities are ready to assist—the Red Cross, www.savethechildren.org/us/where-we-work/afghanistan, International Rescue Committee, Mercy Corps, etc. The list is virtually endless so contribute today if you can – these families gave up their homes, their livelihoods, their extended families – all because they chose to work with Americans. We can’t ignore that kind of sacrifice and bravery.
