That "peace deal" is an abomination; Trump's inflationary use of cringy superlatives isn't going to change that. The Taliban are going to violate the agreement the moment NATO's left the country and we will be powerless to stop them. And all the men and women who've lost their lives over there will have died in vain. A bloody shame.
Trump criticised the Iran nuclear agreement, and rightly so. Yet still he pushes for a deal with the Taliban under very similar circumstances: religious zealots, abiding by an ideology that makes them utterly untrustworthy, strive after absolute power and freedom of movement in their sphere of interests. They get all and we get none. It only goes to show he doesn't understand foreign politics.
All that's left for us is to hope America's learnt its lesson and won't start any more military interventions if it doesn't have the stomach to get the job done no matter how long it takes.
Saying Trump does not understand foreign policy is a bold statement, if not coming from a misplaced sentiment of arrogance. Disagreeing with his decisions do not mean his decisions are bad and/or coming out of a magic ball.
The very idea of a Taliban “peace deal” is, indeed, something one can struggle with. Something a lot of veterans will struggle with, there is no doubt about it. We have the 9/11 generation, the GWOT babies, etc... settling with the Taliban will be a no go for many.
That being said, the war lasted for 19 years, claimed more than 2000 deaths and more than 20k wounded. A war with no real goal, with no real strategy, finding itself somewhere in between war on terrorism and nation building (which can't be done at the same time for obvious reasons). Accepting a drawdown without a "absolute victory" is a big no-no for some.
The thing is, that is a finite and limited mindset in a war that is nowhere near limited and finite. Expecting anything else is naive. The enemy made their intentions clear. Fighting Taliban, ISIS, Al Qaeda, or any other Jihadi-Salafist organization is fighting an ideology manifested as a physical enemy; and wars of ideas are rarely won in absolute terms.
There will not be a WW2 victory, you can remove that from your mind and dreams right now. The only way to "win", or mitigate, is an agreement. Without agreement, countless lives will be sent and lost for the years and decades to come. Meanwhile, other actors (Iran, Russia, Pakistan, etc...) will just enjoy the show and its results.
With an agreement there is a chance in witnessing an actual reduction in violence and negotiated settlement as a responsible conclusion to a conflict marred with many complexities near impossible to completely unpack.
Your “But what about all we’ve lost over the years?” is especially disingenuous and borderline offensive. I have lost friends and know people who have lost friends and family members. Trust me, I have not forgotten, and never will. Viewing lives of those who gave their lives as some sort of "sunk cost" is despicable, it only brings bitterness and regret. Would they want to see that conflict go on forever, or to go home and live our lives we dreamed of? You are not in position to answer it.
A drawdown in Afghanistan aligns with current policies and politics of Trump. “America first” is a slogan Trump believes in and “MAGA” doesn’t stand for “Make Afghanistan Great Again". Continued dabbling in
Democratic Peace Theory and execution of the
Powell Doctrine without a planned withdrawal has proven ineffective be it for societies or conflicts.
The US military is in a state of transition. After 19 years of counter-terrorism and counterinsurgency, there is now a rebalancing towards Great Power Competition, Multi-Domain Operations, Large Scale Combat Operations, etc... Resources expended in the Middle East have come at a cost to the US competitive advantage against near peer threats like China and Russia. Reinvestment in technology, innovation, and focus on the Indo-Pacific region are a necessity. The other "competitors" have adopted the previously mentioned "infinite mindsets" and are looking ahead, and it is time for the US to do so as well (well, not only the US in fact, Europe, as it turns out, is years if not decades behind).
That being said, shifting focus doesn’t mean or imply any form of safety from violent extremist organizations. Jihadists will not stop focusing on their objectives against the “far enemy” just because we have decided to move on.
All these years of fighting in Afghanistan have proven, among other things, that safe havens cannot be completely eliminated. Disturbed, yes, though. The ability to continue doing so with a reduced footprint, in concert with Afghan and foreign partners, will be part of the problem statement policy makers and military leaders have to sort out moving forward.
And, if you know anything about prospect theory and/or loss aversion it will be very hard to compromise on anything. However, if the Intra-Afghan Negotiations do indeed take hold, who are we to impose on a solution they collectively work out? It is their country and the Afghan people deserve a chance at peace.
Let's be satisfied with what has been done, and recognize that despite the enemy’s best efforts, there’s not been another 9/11.
I'd rather listen to actual veterans and/or people who got involved and/or took part in the whole thing.
news.sky.com
www.theguardian.com
