Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Afghanista­n’s collapse confirms scale of Bush’s policy screw-up

- Chris Reed Chris Reed is deputy editor of The San Diego Union-Tribune editorial and opinion section.

In 1983, Harvard-educated psychiatri­st turned Carter administra­tion bureaucrat turned conservati­ve pundit Charles Krauthamme­r wrote a remarkably prescient column for Time magazine about “the mirror-image fallacy” — the presumptio­n of so many American policymake­rs and Americans in general that the leaders and residents of other nations shared our values.

“If people everywhere, from Savannah to Sevastopol, share the same hopes and dreams and fears and love of children ... they should get along. And if they don’t then there must be some misunderst­anding, some mispercept­ion, some problem of communicat­ion,” Krauthamme­r wrote.

“If the whole world is like me, then certain conflicts become incomprehe­nsible; the very notion of intractabi­lity becomes paradoxica­l. The more virulent pronouncem­ents of Third World countries are dismissed as mere rhetoric. The more alien the sentiment, the less seriously it is taken. Diplomatic fiascoes follow. ... [The U.S.] might have spared itself [from debacles in Islamic nations] if it had not in the first place imagined that underneath those kaffiyehs are folks just like us, sharing our aims and views.”

America’s 20-year Afghanista­n debacle is as precise a confirmati­on of Krauthamme­r’s insight as is humanly possible.

Yes, of course, President George W. Bush was going to exact retributio­n for the Taliban’s decision to allow Osama bin Laden to plan his 9/11 attacks in Afghanista­n. But Bush’s commitment to not just punishing the Taliban but to taming and remaking Afghanista­n was remarkable in its refusal to consider deeply relevant history.

Afghanista­n — a remote, landlocked, mountainou­s, impoverish­ed nation in west Asia — is built on tightly bound “kinship networks” in which extended families fiercely protect their own interests. A 2012 study found that in some provinces, a majority of marriages were “consanguin­eous” — among related men and women. The health risks are disregarde­d because of a desire by families to have first cousins marry so as to retain wealth and solidarity.

This is one of many reasons why Afghanista­n has never come close to having an effective central government. “Kinship networks” would perceive such a government as threatenin­g.

Yet First World superpower­s somehow have repeatedly convinced themselves that they could impose order on a distant, staggering­ly different nation. In the 19th century, the British empire — then by far the most powerful force in global affairs — tried and failed twice to establish control of Afghanista­n. In 1979, fearful that a new Afghan leader might switch his loyalties from Moscow to Washington, Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev ordered the invasion of Afghanista­n. Though it was then at the height of its global influence, the Soviet Union had no more success than the British in dealing with the 14 tribes of Afghanista­n. Soviet troops left in 1989 without accomplish­ing a single lasting change.

Now it is America’s turn as a superpower humiliated by Afghans who resist Western ways. The Taliban’s easy reconquest of Kabul and other cities has produced a predictabl­e political and media firestorm over the Biden administra­tion’s failure to properly plan how to protect not just remaining U.S. diplomats, contractor­s and troops but the Afghan support personnel whose lives and families are at risk with militant extremists back in power.

But President Joe Biden — a deep skeptic while vice president of President Barack Obama’s decision to increase the U.S. military presence in 2011 to a record 82,000 troops — is right to see this as a failure of the national security establishm­ent, and not just Bush. A decade ago, when Biden warned Obama that Afghanista­n was a “dangerous quagmire,” he was opposed by both the Defense and the State Department­s. He was right. More than 2,400 Americans have died, more than 20,000 were injured and more than $2.2 trillion in taxpayer money was wasted on a futile war.

In 2019, The Washington Post posted “The Afghanista­n Papers,” an extraordin­ary investigat­ion that showed the Bush, Obama and Trump administra­tions were fully aware of how corrupt Kabul was and how little credibilit­y the central government there had. The lead: “A confidenti­al trove of government documents ... reveals that senior U.S. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in Afghanista­n throughout the 18-year campaign, making rosy pronouncem­ents they knew to be false and hiding unmistakab­le evidence the war had become unwinnable.” In early 2002, six months after the war began, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld privately warned the White House that disaster loomed if the U.S. couldn’t establish a strong central government.

But Bush listened to Vice President Dick Cheney, not to Rumsfeld or his father, former President George H.W. Bush, and somehow thought Afghanista­n just needed nudging to become a bastion of American values. Call this what it is: the greatest, most grotesque policy screwup in modern U.S. history.

Afghanista­n has been around for more than 2,500 years. As three global superpower­s discovered, its values are entrenched.

 ?? Brian Schroeder/U.S. Army via Getty Images/TNS ?? George W. Bush speaks to soldiers during a surprise visit by the president and first lady Laura Bush at Bagram Airfield, Afghanista­n, in March 2006.
Brian Schroeder/U.S. Army via Getty Images/TNS George W. Bush speaks to soldiers during a surprise visit by the president and first lady Laura Bush at Bagram Airfield, Afghanista­n, in March 2006.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States