Perhaps it’s worthwhile to consider what the editors of the New York Times were saying nearly 8 years ago about Afghanistan:
Mr. Obama’s decision to send an additional 30,000 troops — and ask NATO allies for several thousand more — is unlikely to end the political debate. Republicans are certain to point out that it is still short of the 40,000 requested by the top field commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, and object to the president’s pledge of a quick drawdown. Many Democrats and the president’s own vice president had opposed any escalation.
At this late date, we don’t know if even 100,000 American troops plus 40,000 from NATO will be enough to turn the war around. But we are sure that continuing President Bush’s strategy of fighting on the cheap (in January 2008, the start of Mr. Bush’s last year in office and more than six years after the war began, there were only 27,000 American troops in Afghanistan) is a guarantee of defeat.
The only circumstances that have changed since then are the mere passage of time, the letter after the name of the president, and the temperament of the president. Counter-insurgency was a feckless policy then and it’s a feckless policy now.
The only way we’ll ever withdraw from Afghanistan is if we bring the tribal approach to politics we have now to an end.
An interesting question raised by the idea that the Taliban are only interested in being masters of “Pashtunistan” is does such an entity have definable borders?
Without such borders, it is an invitation for continual war between the Taliban and everyone who is not a Pashtun and a temptation for the Taliban to invite “help” of the Al-Qaeda variety. Creating such borders would be a very messy business.
But its not an impossible idea. The fact the Taliban and ISIS have fought each other is a sign the Taliban could be steered away from hosting global terrorist movements.
The very idea of definable borders is an artifact of thinking in terms of Westphalian states. For them Pashtunistan is wherever Pashtun people live.
CO- The Taliban fight with each other sometimes. Wouldn’t take too much comfort in Taliban fighting IS.
Ending the tribalism might do it. Lessening the influence of the neocons who dominate the right and have too much influence among elites on the left would also help a lot. They are the true believers who really think we can win in Afghanistan.
Steve