Trump Lost the Gamble
Published in Süddeutsche Zeitung
(Germany) on 29 November 2019
by Tobias Matern (link to original)
(Germany) on 29 November 2019
by Tobias Matern (link to original)
Translated from
by Mallory Matsumoto.
Edited by Laurence Bouvard.
The U.S. president wants to renew talks with the Taliban after he had declared discussions to be over. The price of peace is increasing.
Wars end either because one party capitulates or because both parties believe that they no longer have anything to gain. They reach a compromise that is arduously negotiated by diplomatic emissaries. In the case of Afghanistan, the longest war in U.S. history, time is ripe, after 18 years, for the realization that we have nothing more to gain here; we need to compromise with the Taliban.
The American president now wants to renew talks with the Islamists after he had—in a tactically very imprudent move—raised expectations for a peace deal so high in September that he risked losing face. Then, following his own unique logic, Donald Trump declared the negotiations to be over, even though his negotiators had conducted judicious grunt work.
One Trumpian about-face later, the price for peace has now risen for the West. The Taliban may also want to go back to living unmolested in their villages and placing their leaders in important positions in Kabul. But combat fatigue is much more apparent in Washington than in the ranks of the Islamists. Trump’s martial expressions that the rebels want peace at any cost are hollow. Other major powers have already taken to their heels in Afghanistan.
A Big Piece of Power Cake for the Taliban
It is already clear from how the Taliban relegated the Afghan government to observers at the peace talks, and flanked the talks with even more military power, who has actually dictated the terms up to now. But without the Kabul government, which is the best alternative even though its legitimacy is just passable, the U.S.-Taliban talks will not lead to a peace that is even somewhat stable.
This peace is becoming unappetizing. A big peace of the power cake will have to go to the Taliban in order for them to lay down their arms. Or they may oversee compliance with Islam. That would be devastating for women and liberals. Whatever solution may come, it will not justify the longest war in U.S. history, which now can only be concluded at the bargaining table.
Wars end either because one party capitulates or because both parties believe that they no longer have anything to gain. They reach a compromise that is arduously negotiated by diplomatic emissaries. In the case of Afghanistan, the longest war in U.S. history, time is ripe, after 18 years, for the realization that we have nothing more to gain here; we need to compromise with the Taliban.
The American president now wants to renew talks with the Islamists after he had—in a tactically very imprudent move—raised expectations for a peace deal so high in September that he risked losing face. Then, following his own unique logic, Donald Trump declared the negotiations to be over, even though his negotiators had conducted judicious grunt work.
One Trumpian about-face later, the price for peace has now risen for the West. The Taliban may also want to go back to living unmolested in their villages and placing their leaders in important positions in Kabul. But combat fatigue is much more apparent in Washington than in the ranks of the Islamists. Trump’s martial expressions that the rebels want peace at any cost are hollow. Other major powers have already taken to their heels in Afghanistan.
A Big Piece of Power Cake for the Taliban
It is already clear from how the Taliban relegated the Afghan government to observers at the peace talks, and flanked the talks with even more military power, who has actually dictated the terms up to now. But without the Kabul government, which is the best alternative even though its legitimacy is just passable, the U.S.-Taliban talks will not lead to a peace that is even somewhat stable.
This peace is becoming unappetizing. A big peace of the power cake will have to go to the Taliban in order for them to lay down their arms. Or they may oversee compliance with Islam. That would be devastating for women and liberals. Whatever solution may come, it will not justify the longest war in U.S. history, which now can only be concluded at the bargaining table.
Previous article![]( "It’s Not Macron, It’s Trump: The NATO Situation")
/https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/world/europe/2019/12/03/trump-attacks-french-leader-macron-over-nato-criticism/TH104-123_2019_092106.jpg "It’s Not Macron, It’s Trump: The NATO Situation")
Next article![]( "China and Its Relations")
