Bitter Exit from Afghanistan

Published in El País
(Spain) on 17 August 2021
by Editorial (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Rebecca Reekie. Edited by Elizabeth Cosgriff.
The debacle of institutions in the wake of the Taliban's advance is a failure that will haunt the West.

The images of hundreds of people storming the runway at Kabul airport as military planes try to make their way out of the country will haunt the U.S. military for a long time to come and will mark much of Joe Biden's presidency. These are scenes of desperation, moments the world will not forget. Comparisons with the flight from Saigon in 1975, after the failure of Vietnam, are outdated. The chaotic flight from Kabul these days, after the debacle of a state supposedly built over two decades, as of now has its own place in the history of U.S. military humiliation.

“[T]he likelihood there’s going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely,” Biden said on July 8. Although one can sense the need to sell the withdrawal politically, his words will haunt him forever. On Sunday, after only a month of its offensive, the Taliban were giving a speech from the office of fugitive President Ashraf Ghani, having taken Kabul in a matter of hours. Afghanistan's institutions were an empty shell. In a message to the nation, Biden called the images "painful" and "gut-wrenching."

It is opportunistic to criticize, in retrospect, the withdrawal itself. While the decision was underpinned by the melancholy of futile effort, Biden took upon himself a responsibility that has eluded three presidents, to take on a decision that had been widely agreed upon for years. The military leadership had proposed maintaining a small force in the country, but Biden rejected it; he wanted the end to be definitive. What is not so clear is that the White House would have foreseen the current chaotic scenario. In fact, it has had to send in new troops to protect the departing ones. That is where more clarity should be demanded of the United States. Biden covertly blamed the Afghan government's promise to stand up to the Taliban. At best, this is an incomprehensible miscalculation for an army that has been on the ground for 20 years. Something has not gone as planned and it is up to the U.S. to explain what and why. The chaos has not only put its soldiers in danger: Spain has had to improvise within hours a repatriation of 500 people. The debate has already erupted in Washington. The Republicans, after a period of distracted silence (the pact of peaceful coexistence with the Taliban was signed by Donald Trump in 2020 and sold as the key to withdrawal) have already begun to level accusations of incompetence.

But any political analysis pales in the face of the situation that develops for Afghans who do not get on those planes, especially women. What is urgent is to articulate the operational and logistical arrangements to take care of those who suffer from the violence if the Taliban end this period of grace in which their priority is apparently to maintain order without revenge. It has been at least a week since the direction of events became clear. Concrete aid commitments from the European Union and the U.S. are urgently needed.

Complete withdrawal from Afghanistan was always a high-stakes gambit in which the United States staked its international prestige as a military partner. The Afghans were gambling with their lives. Both are now at the mercy of the magnanimity of a band of fanatics.




Las imágenes de cientos de personas invadiendo la pista del aeropuerto de Kabul mientras los aviones militares tratan de abrirse paso para salir del país perseguirán al Ejército de Estados Unidos mucho tiempo y marcarán en buena medida la presidencia de Joe Biden. Son escenas de desesperación, momentos que el mundo no olvidará. Las comparaciones con la huida de Saigón en 1975, tras el fracaso de Vietnam, han quedado obsoletas. La caótica huida de Kabul de estos días, tras la debacle de un Estado supuestamente construido durante dos décadas, tiene desde ahora su propio lugar en la historia de la humillación militar de Estados Unidos.

“Es muy improbable que los talibanes se hagan con todo el país y tomen el poder”, dijo Biden el 8 de julio. Aunque se intuye la necesidad de vender políticamente la retirada, sus palabras lo perseguirán para siempre. El domingo, tras solo un mes de ofensiva, los talibanes daban un discurso desde el despacho del fugado presidente Ashraf Ghani, después de tomar Kabul en cuestión de horas. Las instituciones de Afganistán eran un cascarón vacío. En un mensaje a la nación, Biden calificó las imágenes de “dolorosas” y “devastadoras”.

Resulta oportunista criticar en retrospectiva la retirada en sí. Si bien el sustrato de la decisión era la melancolía del esfuerzo inútil, Biden se echó a la espalda una responsabilidad que han eludido tres presidentes para asumir él una decisión que contaba con un amplio consenso desde hacía años. La cúpula militar le había propuesto mantener un pequeño retén en el país, pero Biden lo rechazó, quería que el final fuera definitivo. Lo que no está tan claro es que la Casa Blanca hubiera previsto el actual escenario de caos. De hecho, ha tenido que enviar nuevas tropas para proteger a las que se van. Es ahí donde se le debe exigir más claridad a Estados Unidos. Biden culpó veladamente a la promesa del Gobierno afgano de plantar cara a los talibanes. En el mejor de los casos, se trata de un error de cálculo incomprensible para un Ejército que lleva 20 años sobre el terreno. Algo no ha salido como estaba previsto y corresponde a EE UU explicar qué y por qué. El caos no ha puesto solo a sus soldados en peligro: España tiene que improvisar en horas una repatriación de medio millar de personas. El debate ya ha estallado en Washington. Los republicanos, tras un periodo de silencio distraído (el pacto de convivencia pacífica con los talibanes fue firmado por Trump en 2020 y vendido como la llave para la retirada) ya han comenzado a elevar acusaciones de incompetencia.

Pero cualquier análisis político palidece ante la situación que se abre para los afganos que no se suban en esos aviones, especialmente las mujeres. Lo urgente es articular el operativo y la logística para atender a cuantos padezcan la violencia si los talibanes dan por finalizado este periodo de gracia en el que su prioridad es, aparentemente, mantener el orden sin venganza. Hace al menos una semana que se hizo evidente la dirección en la que se movían los acontecimientos. Son urgentes compromisos concretos de ayuda por parte de la UE y EE UU.

La retirada completa de Afganistán siempre fue un gambito de alto riesgo en el que Estados Unidos se jugaba su prestigio internacional como socio militar. Los afganos se jugaban la vida. Ambas cosas se encuentran ahora a merced de la magnanimidad de una banda de fanáticos.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: US Sanctions against the EU

Germany: Peace Report 2025: No Common Ground with Trump

Spain: Trump to Students — ‘Don’t Come’

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Austria: Whether or Not the Tariffs Are Here to Stay, the Damage Has Already Been Done*

Topics

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Germany: Peace Report 2025: No Common Ground with Trump

Australia: America’s Economic and Political Chaos Has Implications for Australia

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Turmoil in Los Angeles: Key Test of Trump’s Power

Germany: Friedrich Merz’s Visit to Trump Succeeded because It Didn’t Fail

Related Articles

Spain: Spain’s Defense against Trump’s Tariffs

U.K.: The Guardian View on Donald Trump’s Industrial Policy: Inward Turn by Ultimatum

Israel: Trump’s Friendship with Israel Is a Double-Edged Sword

South Africa: The Oligarch Era: Is Democracy Finally Fighting Back in the Land of the Free?