We've Seen This Before. Saigon, April, 1975.
Canada's embassy staff in Kabul are preparing to exit di di mau-style, fearing the Taliban could take the capital in the coming weeks. They've plenty of company as other embassies are also packing their diplomatic pouches to beat a hasty retreat.
Until recently the American intelligence figured Kabul could be overrun within six to twelve months.
One official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the issue’s sensitivity, said Tuesday that the U.S. military now assesses a collapse could occur within 90 days. Others said it could happen within a month. Some officials said that although they were not authorized to discuss the assessment, they see the situation in Afghanistan as more dire than it was in June, when intelligence officials assessed a fall could come as soon as six months after the withdrawal of the U.S. military.“Everything is moving in the wrong direction,” said one person familiar with the military’s new intelligence assessment.
Deja vu all over again.

For the Taliban to be so successful they must have the common peoples support or the USA installed government is very corrupt or lacking in ability to govern.
ReplyDeleteIn any case it's back to basics once again for Afghanistan, the country that cannot be ruled.
TB
The Talibs seem determined to topple the government quickly so they can deploy their forces to prevent the Northern Alliance to be reconstituted.
DeleteNo longer are the Talibs based in Pashtun territory only. This time they've occupied much of the north, the territory of the Tajik, Hazara, Uzbeks and smaller tribes.
So now for the dueling narratives*.
ReplyDeleteMay the best lies win! And may the odds be ever in your favour. ;-)
*Biden's biggest mistake (per today's G&M headline)
vs
A 20-year fantasy/misadventure in the land armies go to die.
I read that crap in the Globe, NPoV. Bush/Cheney created this never-ending blunder. Even Colin Powell, then Secretary of State, couldn't get his president to heed the Powell Doctrine:
ReplyDeleteIs a vital national security interest threatened?
Do we have a clear attainable objective?
Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
Is the action supported by the American people?
Do we have genuine broad international support?
The Doctrine holds you do not commit US forces to land war unless you meet all of those criteria. From the git-go the White House failed on six criteria out of eight. Today's result was pre-ordained.
Yes, perhaps the Cheney-is-most-responsible culprit.
DeleteOTOH, Obama & Trump persisted.
Kudos to Biden for one good foreign policy decision amongst the all the bad war-mongering.
And another tiny hat tip to Harper, who in 2014 read the room (ie Canadian voters) and also pulled out. (ok, after trying to out-do Paul Martin for 8 long years).