Fool’s Errand:

US Sending More Occupying Troops to Afghanistan

Rasa - At a time when more US troops are committing suicide than are being killed in active service in Afghanistan, the Pentagon regime says it is definitely going to be sending more ground troops to the war-torn country soon.

News ID: 430421

Date: 18 June 2017 - 22:04

RNA - The exact number is yet to be determined, and that might suggest they are leaning toward an even bigger number, with Pentagon generals suggesting that they need to send up to 20,000 more ground troops if they want to win the war, saying they believe the 4,000 figure is not likely to change the direction of the war.

Per usual, it’s a fool’s errand:

-This longest war in American history is not winnable.
Repeat, there will be no victory of any kind for war-party Washington in Afghanistan. The illegal war hasn’t exactly been popular among the international community, and while the roughly 8,500 troops there presently mostly fly under the radar, moves to double or triple that number could prove very silly and controversial, particularly since, 16 years into the war, the US seems further than ever from something resembling victory.

-The Trump White House’s decision to expand the kinds of missions US troops can engage in this year means no deadline for complete withdrawal, no limits to the small number of troops that will be left, and certainly no limits to the number of civilians they can murder in violation of International Humanitarian Law.

-It’s one of the longest continuous military operations in US history, which makes it hard for some observers to take seriously the argument that it hasn’t lasted quite long enough. What could the United States achieve in the seventeenth year that it has not already achieved? What conceivable national interest is at stake in the “Graveyard of Empires” that demands the continued investment of American blood and treasure?

-The US bears responsibility for facilitating mass atrocities in Afghanistan. It has repeatedly and publicly promised to stand by the Afghans and help them secure their country. Given the recent terror attacks and mass murders, the Afghans are no longer betting their future on Trump’s promises. They have risked their lives to fight America’s enemies. Countless Afghan soldiers, policemen, and intelligence agents have fought on the frontlines, and far more of them have been killed than US troops. But America never feels obliged to help protect them.

-Iraq and Syria could hardly be a clearer cautionary tale: The withdrawal of US troops almost certainly would mean the end of the drone assassination program in South Asia. The US should reverse course and withdraw troops. Afghan security forces have the logistics, international support, intelligence, and transportation capabilities they need to sustain their fight against the Taliban, defend their borders, or deny safe haven to Al-Qaeda and ISIL. The terrorist groups and their many affiliates and allies have not been defeated and, as illustrated by recent developments, are likely to grow stronger if US occupation and troop surge continues.

-The mission is illegal, unjust, and not winnable. Few observers would argue that the Afghans are not prepared to go it alone. Even as President Trump ordered a surge of more troops in 2017, he also began to reassess whether emerging victorious was as necessary as he had once proclaimed. He escalated the war while simultaneously doubting whether it was very important or even winnable.

-On top of these errors are a host of others - including poor coordination and management of occupation; European allies’ reluctance to employ hard power; and some troops’ abuse of international aid to line their own pockets. But historians are likely to conclude that the most significant failings were that Trump gave the United Nations too few options and not enough role; and that he gave it too little time and not enough faith.

Long story short, war-party Washington cannot secure its colonial goals in Afghanistan. This is not US troops stationed in postwar Germany or Japan. US troops in those countries helped stabilize Europe and East Asia. In Afghanistan, they seek to project power, exercise influence, maintain regional hegemony, and threaten Afghanistan’s neighbors, including Iran and Pakistan. In this view, new deployments are almost always bad; America has no willing host, and it should stop sending more troops.

Finally, the US can’t intervene in every issue in the world, nor should it try. If there is any single place in the world where the United States is most well postured to defeat terrorism where they are likely to win, it is Washington, not Afghanistan.

847/940