The Pak Banker

The world at risk now?

- David J Wasserstei­n

In politics, as in life generally, we play the hand we are dealt, not with the hand we wish we had been dealt. Following 20 years of war, and some $2 trillion in costs, as well as far too many lives lost and shattered, the war in Afghanista­n is over.

The Taliban won. America has left. These are the facts. The questions that arise concern where we and the world go from here. What does the exit from Afghanista­n mean for the U.S., for America's position in the world and for the world itself?

For Douglas Schoen and Carly Cooperman, writing recently in The Hill, the exit "comes with grave risks, and at a steep cost to global democratic and anti-terrorist objectives." They claim the withdrawal means "the inevitable spread of terrorism in the Middle East, threats to Ukraine's eastern front, and most of all Beijing's undemocrat­ic actions in Taiwan."

But that claim confuses two very different things: one, the withdrawal from Afghanista­n; and two, how the withdrawal was executed. It should be clear that 20 years of war left the U.S. and the country with few achievemen­ts to boast of. A 300,000man army equipped and trained at immense cost collapsed at the first sign of danger. Major advances in women's rights look likely to be turned back more or less immediatel­y.

The country will not want or be able now to continue the dramatic improvemen­ts to children's education. Half the population now faces the risk of starvation or famine. In the era of COVID-19, Afghanista­n stares at health catastroph­es with no money, collapsing infrastruc­ture and the threat of internatio­nal isolation and financial sanctions being used as political bargaining tools. Above all, even the faux democracy that the U.S. imported is gone.

But all that relates to the aftermath of the Taliban victory and the accompanyi­ng, if greatly belated, U.S. recognitio­n of political disarray and military defeat. Withdrawal itself, getting out, walking away from this disaster, is not and should not be at issue. After 20 years of increasing­ly predictabl­e failure in Afghanista­n, someone in the White House finally called it quits.

The real concern of Schoen and Cooperman is with how the withdrawal was carried out.

They claim that Islamist terrorists, the Russians and the Chinese will all see what has happened and take heart from a "botched" withdrawal, seeing it as an opportunit­y to spread violence in the Middle East, Russian power in the Ukraine and Chinese suzerainty over Taiwan.

Is this really so? Their vision is a globalized version of the domino theory. This held that if Vietnam fell to communist influence, so, one after another, would the rest of the countries of South-East Asia. Well, Vietnam did fall, following U.S. defeat half a century ago, but the rest of South-East Asia, while it entered upon an extremely ugly era of political instabilit­y and occasional­ly genocidal violence, remained largely free of those feared domino effects.

No one suggests that the coming years are going to be easy or comfortabl­e for people in Afghanista­n. But Schoen and Cooperman draw a straight line from the "botched" ending of America's longest war to coming disaster in those three areas. Let's take a look at the arenas that worry Schoen-Cooperman.

First, the spread of Middle East terrorism. The Taliban victory in Afghanista­n does not spread terrorism. It restores the pre-U.S. invasion government to that country. That's not something to celebrate, but it cannot be described as a spread. From its beginnings, the Taliban has proclaimed that its aim and its mission concern its own country, not others. Its hosting and support for al Qaeda may belong to the past.

At the moment, the Taliban looks different from before. It may not be, but if it tries to continue supporting terrorism abroad, there are other ways - ways that need not cost hundreds of thousands of U.S. and Afghan lives - to make our point of view felt.

As to spreading terror over the Middle East, there must be some doubt. Despite the attention it grabs when it occurs, non-homegrown terrorism outside the Middle East has largely died down over the last two or three decades.

 ??  ?? ‘‘It restores the pre-US invasion government to that country. That's not something to celebrate, but it cannot be described as a spread. From its beginnings, the Taliban has proclaimed that its aim and its mission concern its own country, not others.”
‘‘It restores the pre-US invasion government to that country. That's not something to celebrate, but it cannot be described as a spread. From its beginnings, the Taliban has proclaimed that its aim and its mission concern its own country, not others.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Pakistan