We noted yesterday that President Trump is eager to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Yet, he’s been president for three years and hasn’t done so. Why? Clifford May, President and Founder of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies explains why in today’s Washington Times:
I suspect his advisers have painted a picture of what could happen were he to cut and run:
A historic Taliban victory and U.S. defeat; helicopters evacuating diplomats from the U.S. embassy; pro-American Afghans having their heads chopped off with videos going viral; America’s enemies around the world redoubling their efforts to hasten what would be seen as America’s imminent decline and fall.
Not the results Mr. Trump wants to produce—least of all in an election year.
Trump himself made this same point, essentially, during a July 1, 2019, interview with Fox News’ Tucker Carlson.
Trump told Carlson that he would “like to just get out” of Afghanistan; but “the problem is that it [Afghanistan] just seems to be a lab for terrorists… I call it the Harvard of terrorists..”
Trump noted that the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center in New York City were trained in Afghanistan; and that the country’s history as a terrorist training ground and terrorist base of operations makes withdrawing U.S. troops there problematic.
“I’ll give you a tough one, if you were in my position,” he told Carlson:
A great central-casting general walks up into your office. I say we’re getting out. “Yes, Sir, we’ll get out. Yes, Sir.”
I say, ‘What do you think of that?” “Sir, I’d rather attack them over there than attack them in our land.” In other word, them come here.
That’s always a very tough decision, you know, with what happened at the World Trade Center, etcetera, etcetera.
When they [U.S. military leaders] say that, you know, no matter how you feel…
When you’re standing there and you have some really talented military people saying “I’d rather attack them over there than have them hit us over here and fight them on our land”— it’s something you always have to think about.
Now, I would leave and will leave—we will be leaving—very strong intelligence, far more than you would normally think, because it’s very important. And we can do it that way, too. But we have reduced the forces very substantially in Afghanistan.
First off, kudos to Tucker Carlson for asking an important and straightforward question about Afghanistan and giving the president the time and space that he needed to answer that question fully and completely.
I am not a fan of Carlson. His snide anti-interventionist views do not comport with my own perspective, but credit where credit’s due.
Carlson, obviously, has earned Trump’s trust; and, as a result, Trump shares with him his thinking. This is something that Trump rarely does (at last in a serious and thoughtful way), and the result here is great journalism and a genuine public service.
Reassuring. Moreover, it is reassuring to know that Trump sometimes listens, seriously and with due respect and consideration, to his military advisers, and doesn’t always act out impulsively as he often seems wont to do.
It also is reassuring to hear Trump say that, so long as he is president, the United States will retain a robust intelligence apparatus in Afghanistan.
This almost certainly means that some number of troops will be kept there indefinitely to collect and analyze intelligence and ensure that Afghanistan never again becomes a terrorist base of operations from which to attack the United States.
The fear with Trump, though, is that what he says one day he may not mean the next day. He can and does change his mind impulsively. Policy decision-making, consequently, can be inconsistent and erratic.
Syria. Look at what happened in Syria, for instance. Trump abruptly announced last fall that he was withdrawing U.S. troops. This set off an unnecessary military and humanitarian disaster.
The president then announced soon thereafter that he would keep some U.S. troops in Syria, ostensibly to “protect the oil,” but the strategic damage already had been done: U.S.- and allied-controlled territory had been ceded to Russian- and Iranian-backed regime forces; the Islamic State had been given a new lease on life; and chaos reigned—and still does.
However, at least with respect to Afghanistan, Trump seems to be proceeding carefully, cautiously and deliberatively, with greater situational awareness and understanding of the longer-term strategic ramifications of his actions and what these actions might mean for the safety and security of the American people.
Trump’s caution may be surprising in light of his more reckless rhetoric about wanting to leave Afghanistan. Yet it is nonetheless reassuring, and it makes Trump a more successful president. More importantly, the American people are better served—and better protected—as a result.
Feature photo: DoD/DVIDS via KNOP News.
