Toppling the Taliban after 9-11 made a lot of sense. Being there 19 years later, propping up a an Afghani kleptocracy that will be gone 15 minutes after we are, makes absolutely no sense at all. Deal with future military threats from Afghanistan as they occur, but say farewell forever to this costly, and futile, attempt to export democracy to a land which has known little peace since Alexander the Great.
Thought For the Day
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
It was never going to work because we were never going to go Full Japan on the country. To change a country you have to be willing to occupy it, and rule it, for multiple generations. And even then, the people in the country have to have some willingness to change.
The Middle Eastern people–and I realize Afganistan is not in the Middle East, nor are they Arabs–have worn face coverings for centuries. The women anyway, and no doubt men under certain circumstances. Afghanistan falls in that group whose religion/culture demands it, though.
.
As a skin cancer survivor, I have wondered if face coverings there started for perfectly legitimate reasons. The natural elements just are not nice to bare skin.
.
But what do face coverings do for the socio-pathology rates and violence?
Our occupation of Japan lasted for seven years.
But we are still there*, and they were still making really big changes in the 70s, per an Army(? Possibly Marine, was a very messy divorce before I was even born, so I didn’t get many details) wife I know who was stationed there. It came up in discussing their current low crime rate vs the insane crime rate when she was there, I think it was Okinawa.
Japan also started at a much, much higher level of bedrock to build a functioning society on. And yes this is said with full knowledge of various atrocities and even horrifying societal norms of pre-WWII Japan.
Toppling the Taliban after 9-11 made a lot of sense. Being there 19 years later, propping up a an Afghani kleptocracy that will be gone 15 minutes after we are,
Najibullah’s government lasted for several years after the Soviet withdrawal. The parliamentary politicians in Iraq are still there, nine years after we pulled 97% of our troops out. (The level of lethal violence exacted on civilians is as low as it has been the last 18 years). NB, Nguyen Van Thieu’s regime fell not to an insurgency, but to a conventional military invasion.
Whether it’s a good idea or not, it’s Trump’s call. The non-compliance he’s received from the Defense Department has been maddening.
It was never going to work because we were never going to go Full Japan on the country. To change a country you have to be willing to occupy it, and rule it, for multiple generations. And even then, the people in the country have to have some willingness to change.
Japan had a parliamentary regime from about 1890 to about 1936 (although in a state of decay from 1931 onward). The occupation made some adjustments in land tenures and the distribution of landholdings and the post-war constitution made of the Emperor an odd purely ceremonial figure imprisoned by his household staff. Parliamentary institutions had also been the norm among the German states from 1860 to 1933.
You run through the Near East, North Africa, and Central Asia, and you see much more in the way of electoral institutions and political competition than you did 40 years ago. The one major regression in this regard has been Turkey.
The Middle Eastern people–and I realize Afganistan is not in the Middle East, nor are they Arabs–have worn face coverings for centuries.
If the survey research I’ve seen is accurate, the modal preference in the Arab world and points adjacent is for an ‘amina’ or ‘hijab’ which covers the hair and neck, not the face. The niqab, which covers the face, is preferred in Saudi Arabia, but doesn’t have much of a constituency elsewhere.
Some “conservatives” are downright angry about this. Even a Senator said if trump brings them home they’re coming back in body bags…which doesn’t make much sense
Even a Senator said if trump brings them home they’re coming back in body bags…which doesn’t make much sense
It makes perfect sense to me, because I remember what usually happens when we announce we’re leaving.
Can’t claim you drove off the infidel if you aren’t blowing stuff up when they leave.
“Najibullah’s government lasted for several years after the Soviet withdrawal.”
The Soviets withdrew in 1989. They maintained heavy military aid till 1991. Kabul fell to the insurgents in 1992.
The Taliban control or contest about one-third of Afghanistan. I’d give the current government of Afghanistan six months to a year after we leave.
The effect of the recent election is difficult to predict but I suspect we may have a period of great political instability. If Biden becomes president what he has proposed could collapse the economy. Some nations may decide to test the new and apparently cognitively challenged leader and perhaps settle some old scores.
There is significant risk of having our forces exposed in a distant, isolated land locked nation, and many who want forces to remain are not making a compelling case about how this continued occupation benefits our nation.
Perhaps it is prudent to withdraw while it is still the period of calm before a storm.
One of the best parts of Donald Trump’s rise to the presidency was exposing how much of the Republican party was centered on the principles “military action forever, maybe some kickbacks for my corporate cronies, and that’s it.”
Something to put things into perspective:
The freshest enlisted troops into the Middle East were born after 9/11, and have had US troops in Afghanistan for their entire lives
At this point either annex it or leave it..
At this point either annex it or leave it..
Not sure why you fancy those are the choices.
If I’m not mistaken, about the only annexations which have abided have been Morocco’s annexation of the Western Sahara, Israel’s of a section of Jerusalem, Turkey’s of a slice of Cyprus, Israel’s of a portion of the Golan Heights, and Russia’s of the Crimea. IOW, three tiny pieces of territory, one nearly empty piece of land with only a sketchy political organization, and another piece of land more akin ethnically to the seizing country and theretofore run by political parties favorable to the seizing country.
If we keep troops there for decades for the purpose of suppressing local dissent, it’s effectively annexed whether we officially say so or not.
Pakistan’s ISI has the last say in what happens with Afghanistan. That intelligence bureau has a nearly-seamless connection with the Taliban, and fully intends to keep the nation in its grasp.
suppressing local dissentMurderous terrorists more like. However, in the final analysis it is up to the local government to defend itself, and if it can’t do it after 19 years it probably will never be able to do so.
Local government can’t defend itself because the people can’t defend themselves– partly by design of various wanna-governs in the area, partly by stupid people tricks here, partly because of more normal outside interference.
The UN’s stupid trick of “disarm everyone in return for your “help,” abandon them, express shock that they’re destroyed” is still a fury button for me.