Skip to main content

New top story from Time: Leaving Afghanistan Isn’t Enough to End America’s Forever Wars

https://ift.tt/3tMYNyC

The Russian soldier, it was said, had suffered a concussion, then total memory loss. When he woke up in Kabul, in the waning days of the Soviet War in Afghanistan, he had trouble figuring out what was going on. As the journalist Artyom Borovik told the story, when his fellow soldiers tried to reorient him, he just kept asking the same question: “What are we doing in Afghanistan?” No one could give a definite answer.

Even with America in charge, the answers to that question haven’t gotten much better since the 1980s. In 2001, we were conducting “comprehensive and relentless operations” to drive terrorists out of Afghanistan and bring them to justice. In 2009, we were surging 30,000 troops to “seize the initiative, while building the Afghan capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our forces out of Afghanistan.” In 2017, we were “obliterating ISIS, crushing al-Qaeda, preventing the Taliban from taking over the country, and stopping mass terror attacks against Americans before they emerge.” But since none of that really happened, other rationales emerged. There was the humanitarian argument, exemplified by a 2010 TIME cover photo of a mutilated Afghan girl, her nose severed, beside the words, “What Happens if We Leave Afghanistan.” Then there was the credibility argument, that if we don’t stay in other countries will wonder, as the journalist Eli Lake put it, if “the US will have their backs to confront bullies like China.” Finally, the war has been reframed as not a war but a necessary commitment for maintaining global order, in keeping with long-term troop presences in South Korea, Japan, and Germany.

And so now President Biden has announced a withdrawal date from Afghanistan exactly two decades after 9/11. It’s fitting. Politically determined deadlines invested with great importance by presidents have long been a staple of the war. The question for Americans concerned about “forever wars,” though, is how meaningful this withdrawal will actually be.

After all, over the decades the war in Afghanistan hasn’t just generated endless rationales for its own existence, it’s generated rationales for other wars as well. Soon after 9/11, Congress passed an Authorization for the Use of Military Force that allowed the president to use all “necessary and appropriate force” against those who “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the September 11th attacks. Though intended for the Taliban and al Qaeda, this language later stretched to justify attacks on al-Shabaab in Somalia, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, the Khorosan Group in Syria, and others. By the Trump administration the precedent was firmly set. If you’d like to occupy Kurdish-controlled Syrian oilfields, or kill an Iranian general, the AUMF was your justification. “Dems should raise the minimum wage using the 2001 AUMF” joked Yale Law professor Scott Shapiro recently on Twitter. And why not? Using an authorization intended to fight the Taliban as an excuse to operate in 17 other countries (Iraq, Somalia, Syria, Niger, and so on) while leaving Afghanistan itself is only slightly less ludicrous.

If President Biden truly wants “to end the forever war,” as he declared on April 14, dealing with the over-broad AUMF is a critical piece, and one he has responsibility for. As the conservative legal scholars Curtis A. Bradley and Jack L. Goldsmith point out, “almost every issue about the AUMF’s meaning and scope remained unresolved at the end of the Bush presidency,” and it was during the Obama administration that it transformed into “a protean foundation for indefinite war against an assortment of terrorist organizations in numerous countries.” A key moment came in September of 2014, when the Obama White House announced, three years after supposedly ending the war in Iraq, that it could launch an air war in both Iraq and Syria against ISIS without Congressional approval because the fight fell under the old 2001 authorization—despite that ISIS didn’t exist in 2001 and was competing with al Qaeda, which had excommunicated it.

Scholars debate how much of a stretch this was, but the legal wrangling obscures the its political utility. Obama had come into the White House as a critic of the Iraq War, and would advocate a “Don’t do stupid” stuff foreign policy. Pulling troops out of Iraq with great fanfare only to watch the country implode and then put troops back in did not fulfill that particular strategic vision. Relying on the 2001 AUMF allowed Obama to bypass arguing for renewed war to Congress and to the American public, and it gave Congress a pass on taking a tough vote (who wanted to be the next Hillary Clinton, on the hook years later for a vote that was popular at the time). Instead Obama suggested revisions to the 2001 AUMF (something President Biden has also done) while simultaneously expanding its scope.

By 2015, as we ramped up military involvement, Obama and senior officials still bragged about having “ended two wars.” When in 2016 a Navy SEAL, Special Warfare Operator 1st Class Charles Keating IV, died during a firefight with ISIS in Northern Iraq, the White House Press Secretary clarified that he “was not in a combat mission,” but had merely found himself “in a combat situation.” The ambivalent American public didn’t like the wars but also feared the rise of ISIS, and so the administration let them know we were tackling ISIS and al Qaeda and the Taliban and “associated forces” in Iraq and Afghanistan and Syria and Somalia and Yemen and so on while somehow also not fighting a war. Good politics, perhaps, but hardly leadership. Donald Trump’s later chaotic approach to military policy, in which allies learned of things like a withdrawal of forces from Syria by tweet, was deeply irresponsible but ultimately a further extension of the precedent that it was the executive at war, not the American people. And fickle changes to a policy that has never been seriously argued for or debated carries no real political costs.

No wonder plenty of veterans don’t trust the Biden’s recent declaration. “There’s no such thing as a full withdrawal under any president,” Army veteran and journalist Jacob Siegel tweeted. “There will absolutely still be CT and covert SOF assets in the country after ‘the war has ended.'” It’s happened before, and in fact the Pentagon is already discussing where to reposition forces, possibly in Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, to enable strikes inside the country. As a friend texted last week, “I find it amusing that people think AFG is ending, and the shell game of ‘troops on the ground’ is suddenly over.” As long as the open-ended authorization for war continues, with no time limits, or geographic limits, or specificity about targets, so does the war.

Repealing the AUMF is not necessarily a pro or antiwar position. Congressman Peter Meijer, a Republican from Michigan who recently joined bipartisan legislation to claw back the Congressional role in warmaking, sees it as a precondition for responsible statecraft. “I strongly think repeal would create responsible policy and force Congress to make tough decisions,” he told me over the phone. “What we can’t have is another situation like we had in Niger, where troops die and Congress says, ‘We didn’t even know troops were there.’”

Critics of the withdrawal suggest we’ll have to return, that it will cause a collapse of government, a humanitarian disaster, and a spread of terrorism that will necessitate more intervention, as in Iraq. Perhaps. But if we do return, we should do so after the President has made a case to the American public articulating why, and what it will cost, and then our representatives should debate and vote. Without the approval and commitment of the American people, we’re unlikely to have either a successful war, or a durable peace. And our soldiers won’t have the bare minimum they’re owed by a democratic citizenry—the answer to the question, “Why are we here?”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Powered Scooters Charge City’s Transportation Recovery

Powered Scooters Charge City’s Transportation Recovery By Jason Hyde The SFMTA is releasing its next round of Powered Scooter Share permits on July 1. Scooters remain a sustainable mode of travel and a complement to Muni and public transit service as the city recovers from the pandemic and San Franciscans begin to travel more. The SFMTA’s Powered Scooter Share Program is essential in ensuring that shared scooter operations support the city’s economic recovery in a safe, sustainable, and equitable way.  The SFMTA received four submittals for the permit program and will issue permits to two operators : Spin and Lime. Permits will be in effect for a one-year term, with the option to extend for another year at the discretion of the SFMTA based on compliance with various program metrics. While the new permit program does not set a limit on the number of scooters each operator may deploy, it does limit the overall citywide fleet size at 10,000. Starting at a base of 2,000 scooters...

Muni Highlights in 2021: More Service to More Destinations

Muni Highlights in 2021: More Service to More Destinations By Jonathan Streeter Our goal for Muni in 2021 was to match the service we offer with the changing travel patterns of an unpredictable era, as San Franciscans grappled with a second year of the COVID-19 pandemic.  To achieve this, we expanded on the core routes that formed the nucleus of our early 2020 pandemic network by adding and improving service in key areas throughout San Francisco. We focused on access in neighborhoods where essential workers live, as well as on adding service in busy corridors and even creating new lines. At the beginning of the year, even with our reduced schedule, 91% of San Franciscans were within two or three blocks of a Muni stop. This included 100% of residents in San Francisco’s neighborhoods identified by the Muni Service Equity Strategy . By summer 2021, we added enough additional service so that 98% of San Franciscans were within two or three blocks of a Muni stop. To the relief of ma...

Watch San Francisco’s Bike Network Bloom

Watch San Francisco’s Bike Network Bloom By Eillie Anzilotti From just a few stretches of scattered lanes in 2013, San Francisco’s protected bike network now stretches like a green web connecting more and more of the city. See how much has changed over the last eight years:   In just the blink of an eye, San Francisco has become one of the most bike-friendly cities in the U.S. To date, San Francisco has 464 miles of bikeways, including: 42 miles of protected bike lanes 78 miles of off-street paths and trails 21 miles of buffered bike lanes 139 miles of striped bike lanes As we’ve expanded the network of safer bicycle routes through San Francisco, more people are choosing to ride bicycles for recreation and transportation every year. Since 2006, travel by bicycle has grown by 184 percent citywide. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, bike counts hit an all-time high: in 2019, approximately 52,000 bicyclists were observed at 37 locations during peak periods, a 14 percent incre...

FOX NEWS: Woman who had to cancel birthday trip because of coronavirus recreates entire vacation at home in viral video

Woman who had to cancel birthday trip because of coronavirus recreates entire vacation at home in viral video There will be no crying for this birthday. via FOX NEWS https://ift.tt/2Xwfa4W

New Muni Service Changes Start Saturday, August 19

New Muni Service Changes Start Saturday, August 19 By Clive Tsuma 28R 19th Avenue will run on weekdays between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. starting Monday, August 21.  Back to School  With SFUSD students returning to school August 16, many families who rely on Muni to get to school will see service increase after school as part of the new schedule. Because Muni vehicles often become crowded during morning peak hours and sometimes pass up stops when there is not enough room for more riders, families are encouraged to plan their trips ahead of time and hop on Muni early to make sure students get to school on time.  With every public school in the San Francisco Unified School District being served by at least one Muni route , students can expect extra Muni service on the first day of the school this fall and continue providing service throughout the school year. While the Muni service changes won’t be implemented until August 19, school tripper service will be offered starting Au...

Muni Metro Fix It! Week Improves Rail Service, Safety and Reliability

Muni Metro Fix It! Week Improves Rail Service, Safety and Reliability By Jessie Liang Overhead Line Department replacing wire and custodians cleaning metro station during Fix It! Week, April 19, 2022 A new quarterly effort to increase work time to accomplish necessary Muni Metro system maintenance in April 2022 was a resounding success. Here is a behind-the-scenes video recap . The maintenance initiatives aimed at making subway operations more reliable and preventing feature breakdowns. The maintenance teams were able to perform an entire month of work within the 10 days when subway service was substituted by bus service to provide SFMTA workers the extended Fix It! Week work window.  Every night after Muni Metro subway service hours, SFMTA maintenance crews work to maintain the tracks and equipment underground. On most nights, this gives our teams only about two hours to get work done. During the first Fix It! Week, from April 14 to April 23, 2022, buses provided substitute s...

San Francisco's Taxi Medallion Program Moves Onward

San Francisco's Taxi Medallion Program Moves Onward By In early October, a San Francisco jury found that the SFMTA did not breach its taxi medallion program Lender Agreements with the San Francisco Federal Credit Union.  Throughout this litigation, the SFMTA has continued to focus its attention on supporting purchased medallion holders and drivers.  In fact, over a year ago, the SFMTA made an offer to settle the lawsuit by providing millions of dollars in loan forgiveness to medallion holders.  Unfortunately, the SF Credit Union opted to continue its lawsuit against us.  With the trial now behind us, we are hopeful that the Credit Union will engage in the necessary dialogue with us and agree to participate in a loan forgiveness program.  We understand the challenges faced by individuals who purchased taxi medallions.  Specifically, the fixed $250,000 price for a medallion is unsustainable, and needs to be lowered. Unfor...

FOX NEWS: Man built ‘hillbilly hot tub’ in backyard out of boredom: 'It is not very efficient'

Man built ‘hillbilly hot tub’ in backyard out of boredom: 'It is not very efficient' He decided to build his very own budget hot tub using an old, pre-formed pond base he had dug out from his garden. via FOX NEWS https://ift.tt/2Y7FilX

Muni Forward Gets San Francisco Moving

Muni Forward Gets San Francisco Moving By Shalon Rogers The SFMTA’s Muni Forward program is delivering transit reliability improvements that are transforming the Muni system and enhancing the customer experience. With 80 miles of upgrades since 2014 that often bring travel time savings of 20% or more, Muni Forward is making a big difference in how San Francisco moves.  These upgrades, which can be seen in this Muni Forward Photo Map , draw from a “toolkit” of over 20 reliability and customer experience improvements, such as transit lanes that provided dedicated space for Muni vehicles to cut through traffic, transit bulbs that reduce delays at transit stops and traffic signals with transit priority that give the green light to transit vehicles as they approach the intersection, when possible. The recently completed Van Ness Improvement Project thrust Muni Forward back into the spotlight with San Francisco’s first Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridor. While the Van Ness Improve...

Riders are Feeling the Difference on Geary

Riders are Feeling the Difference on Geary By The results are in: the Geary Rapid Project has delivered a faster, more reliable bus trip and a safer street, according to the SFMTA’s recently published evaluation report for the project.   A faster, more reliable bus ride  One out of every ten passengers stepping onto a Muni vehicle will ride on Geary Blvd., which makes reducing travel time on the corridor a key piece of improving transit in the city. The transit lanes installed as part of the Geary Rapid Project protect buses from traffic congestion, while smarter traffic signals allow buses to get green lights more often. Similar transit upgrades have been made across the city as part of the Muni Forward program , making your next San Francisco destination closer than ever.  Transit travel time improved after the quick-build phase of the Geary Rapid Project in late 2018 and early 2019, and again after the full project was completed in 2021 — with savings as g...