The Scottish Mail on Sunday

This shabby and perilous retreat could prove to be the West’s worst own goal this century...

- CHAIR OF THE DEFENCE SELECT COMMITTEE By TOBIAS ELLWOOD

WARS are not won by evacuation­s,’ said Winston Churchill after Dunkirk. He was right. Eighty years on, another evacuation – our abrupt retreat from Afghanista­n – could prove the biggest own goal the West has scored this century.

The perilous consequenc­es grow more obvious day by day.

This shabby withdrawal is not how we envisaged success when, in 2001, we jointly led the most powerful multinatio­nal military alliance the world has ever seen.

Yet here we are abandoning the country to the very insurgency that drew us there in the first place.

Unless we wake up to the reality of what is taking place, Afghanista­n might once again become a terror state. This, remember, is the country that brought us 9/11.

Moreover, by leaving, we are giving up a strategica­lly crucial space to an expansioni­st China bent on taking our place.

We would lose not just the achievemen­ts of the past, but our hold on the future as well.

In our eagerness to retreat, we have abandoned our original objectives.

Sure, we went in to clear out the Taliban, who had done so much to help Al Qaeda mount its deadly assault on America in September 2001.

But we also promised the Afghan people we would rebuild their war-torn state so they could live in peace.

The mission was never going to be simple. Afghanista­n is a deeply corrupt country paralysed by decades of conflict, proxy interferen­ce and internal tribal strife.

Britain played its part. We helped stabilise Helmand Province in the south, a key region in the ‘Pashtun Belt’ from where the Taliban gets most of its recruits.

More than 150,000 British troops would eventually spend time in the province. Incredibly, the airstrip at Camp Bastion handled more flights a day than Gatwick.

At one point, we were manning more than 130 military outposts.

It is heartbreak­ing to see that valiant effort wasted and the sacrifice of so many British men and women cast aside.

The campaign cost 475 British lives, with many more wounded, often terribly.

Countless others have had their lives blighted by the devastatin­g effects of post-traumatic stress.

District after district has returned to a Taliban now poised at the gates of the regional capital, Lashkar Gar. Two regional capitals have fallen since Friday. If Lashkar Gar falls – and other regional hubs follow, including Kandahar and Herat – only the besieged capital Kabul will remain free. And if Kabul falls, it’s game over.

Why did it go so wrong? Our own Government is refusing to conduct a review, but the answers are as plain as day.

As I saw on my frequent visits to the country as Defence Minister, too little was done to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people.

As we learned in Northern Ireland, you cannot defeat an insurgency by military means alone.

In fact, we made schoolboy errors. First, we failed to invite the Taliban to the table. They had requested a seat at the 2001 Internatio­nal Conference on Afghanista­n held in Bonn, but Donald Rumsfeld, then US Defence Secretary, said no.

How different Afghanista­n might look today if he had said yes, allowing the full range of Afghan voices to come together and build a new nation.

Second, we failed to train local security and police forces until 2005, by which time the Taliban had regrouped, rearmed and retrained on the other side of the border in Pakistan.

Finally, we imposed a Western model of centralise­d governance on a country where it is tribal power that truly holds sway.

While there have been strong overall leaders in Afghanista­n in the past, the situation has been more like that in medieval England where, for example, King John shared power with regional barons.

When Britain and America rebuilt Germany after the war, the blueprint was clear: Keep it local. But that was a blueprint we chose to ignore in Afghanista­n.

AS A result of these and other failings, we found ourselves in a ‘forever war’, one which both candidates in the last US Presidenti­al election promised to end. I have spoken privately to numerous serving and retired generals on both sides of the Atlantic. Not one believes withdrawin­g is a good idea.

A watching – and increasing­ly hostile – world has seen that a US-led alliance is unable to defend internatio­nal standards and values.

Had we abandoned Germany in the same way after the war, the Iron Curtain would have probably brushed up against the French border. But we stayed the course for decades, helping Germany mature into a democratic powerhouse.

Allowing Afghanista­n to fail will see mass migration for those who can afford to flee to Europe and a humanitari­an disaster for those who have no choice but to remain.

The country will once again offer a haven for terrorism to flourish and it will soon become a battlegrou­nd for neighbouri­ng giants to exert their proxy influence.

It is not too late to prevent a full-scale civil war. But it would require a complete rethink of our present strategy.

Without immediate assistance, the Taliban will soon begin seizing Afghanista­n’s cities.

We must retain a 5,000-strong coalition assistance force with sufficient ground, air and intelligen­ce support to give the Afghan army enough fighting edge to contain the insurgency (as they’ve succeeded in doing over the past couple of years). Such a commitment would also give the Afghan people faith in their own government. In sum, we need an overhaul of Western strategy, with – for example – a more federal, less Kabulcentr­ed model of administra­tion.

We must secure the backing of Pakistan and end its support for the Taliban cause. We need to bring transparen­cy and accountabi­lity to Afghanista­n’s state finances.

This is a turning point in history. Do we stand up for our principles and do the right thing? Or do we allow an internatio­nal catastroph­e with long-term consequenc­es to unfold?

The outlook was bleak for Britain following Dunkirk, but Churchill knew he had to carry on, ‘if necessary for years, if necessary alone’.

The peace has not been lost yet in Afghanista­n. But if we simply give up, then the fight is over.

If the phrase ‘Global Britain’ means anything, it must mean stopping internatio­nal terrorism – and preventing an immoral Chinese state from exploiting growing world divisions.

Churchill’s Britain stepped forward when others hesitated. We must do so again – for the sake those who have died and those yet to suffer.

Do we stand up for our principles… or do we allow an internatio­nal catastroph­e to unfold?

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? STANDING DOWN: Troops lower the Union Jack in Afghanista­n
STANDING DOWN: Troops lower the Union Jack in Afghanista­n

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom