Afghanistan Is Not Germany

The editors of the Wall Street Journal are outraged at the notion that we might actually remove our troops from Afghanistan:

History shows the great danger in failing to distinguish between fighting wars and deterring them. That’s especially true now that the authoritarian nations of Russia, Iran and China are seeking to dominate their regions and sometimes join forces against U.S. interests.

One lesson is that keeping troops abroad is often cheaper than bringing them home. An unwavering commitment to the defense of Western Europe under NATO prevented the Cold War from becoming a hot one. Some 300,000 U.S. troops across Europe deterred Moscow for decades until the Warsaw Pact imploded.

They can’t seem to get their heads around the idea that Afghanistan is not Germany. There has never been a cohesive modern state in Afghanistan. We aren’t detering the Russians or Chinese there. We’re trying to pacify the Afghans themselves. A bare handful of American soldiers were killed in Europe after the conclusion of World War II. More of our soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan practically every year since 2001. If we’d experienced the kind of resistance in Germany we’re experiencing in Afghanistan, we’d’ve left there, too.

Afghanistan is a country of zero strategic interest to the United States as long as they’re not hosting Al Qaeda bases. We can’t even supply a base in Afghanistan without paying off the Pakistanis. There are cheaper ways to prevent Afghanistan from hosting Al Qaeda bases than propping up a state there, the purpose of counter-insurgency operations.

9 comments… add one
  • steve Link

    Whenever we leave something bad will happen not long after we leave. Whoever is in charge of the country will be blamed. The WSJ dense was that to be the GOP. At least that is my guess. Is it possible that they are really advocating for a permanent occupation? I hope not.

    Steve

  • Is it possible that they are really advocating for a permanent occupation?

    That’s certainly what the neocons and American Greatness conservatives (e.g. John McCain–not to confused with MAGA Republicans) are angling for.

    This is a point I have made before. Movements like Al Qaeda or DAESH are endemic in Islam, a natural outcome of its being a universal religion that is sola scriptura and without a magisterium with a scripture that can be interpreted as encouraging spreading Islam by the sword.

    Consequently, whenever anyone says “we’ve got to remain until Al Qaeda and DAESH or any other organization like them is stamped out” that is to be interpreted as “forever”.

  • TastyBits Link

    @Dave Schuler

    That’s certainly what the neocons and American Greatness conservatives (e.g. John McCain–not to confused with MAGA Republicans) are angling for.

    I think that they believe that there is some point when we can leave, and that is more disturbing.

  • We’re still in Germany and Japan. “Forever” seems like a pretty good first order approximation to me.

  • Gray Shambler Link

    I wonder to what extent Afghanistan gives the US an intelligence presence with an eye toward an unstable, nuclear Pakistan? Just a thought. I would rather let that be India’s problem.

  • That’s an interesting question which I’ve posted on from time to time. Troops in Afghanistan certainly gives us a forward base for rapid response in case of problems with Pakistan.

    However, if that’s the argument, I think the proponents should make it. I’d also like a list of countries for which such an argument COULD NOT be made. Practically every country would make a good base for a threat from somewhere. For example, Syria makes a good base for threats from Turkey as does Iraq. Or Russia for that matter.

  • TastyBits Link

    @Dave Schuler

    We’re still in Germany and Japan. “Forever” seems like a pretty good first order approximation to me.

    That is not how they see it. The original mission of pacification was accomplished long ago, but keeping the Soviets out replaced it. When the Soviet Union collapsed, The mission became defending against the Russians. The same goes for the occupation of Japan.

    There will always be another reason. If the Russians became NATO members, the threat will be werewolves and vampires.

  • Vampires and werewolves are mythical but the zombie apocalypse threat will always be with us.

Leave a Comment