“On May 1, 2012, President Obama and President Karzai signed the Enduring Strategic Partnership Agreement between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the United States of America.” “In this Agreement, we commit ourselves to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Afghanistan.”
The U.S. guarantees to protect the government of Afghanistan, which is an Islamic Republic. The U.S. Constitution states “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,…” Afghanistan is not a “State in this Union”, but the U.S. acts as if it is a “State in this Union” via the guarantee signed by Obama.
Specifically, “The Strategic Partnership Agreement formalizes mutual commitments in the areas of:
Protecting and Promoting Shared Democratic Values
Advancing Long-Term Security
Reinforcing Regional Security and Cooperation
Social and Economic Development
Strengthening Afghan Institutions and Governance”
The U.S. intervention and commitments in Afghanistan have never been purely military, as this GAO report makes clear. This agreement makes their status more formal and permanent.
This is a very costly endeavor with no visible benefits, which makes it an excellent example of what an effectively “America Last” approach to foreign affairs means.
The U.S. already has fully engaged Afghanistan socially, economically, politically and militarily for years as a way of eliminating Al Qaeda. This particular document, for example, says that the Agreement “contributes to our shared goal of defeating Al Qaeda and its extremist affiliates.”
A 15-year full court press, however, has failed to eliminate Al Qaeda or the Taliban. The policies set in stone by this Agreement have failed. Why continue them?
Three years ago we find: “A clear majority of people in the U.S. say the 2001 decision to attack Afghanistan as a response to the events of September 11th was a mistake and that the current withdrawal of U.S. troops is not moving fast enough…”
It was wrong at the outset to confuse Al Qaeda with the Taliban. It was wrong to bring down the Taliban government of Afghanistan. It was wrong to start a war with Afghanistan when the objective was bin Laden. It has been wrong from the outset to employ war as a means of reducing terrorism or finding individual terrorists or terrorist organizations.
These bad policies began with an additional very bad idea, which was the notion of identifying “state-sponsored terrorism” and using that identification for campaigns of hate, vilification, fear, intervention and war. This list should be terminated before political forces succeed in adding other states to it, such as Russia.
The U.S. Department of State’s list began in 1979 with Libya, Iraq, South Yemen, and Syria. It is no accident that the U.S. attacked Iraq, attacked Libya, has supported strongly the attack on Yemen by Saudi Arabia and has intervened in Syria.
In all these cases, U.S. intervention has strengthened the ranks, the numbers and the organizations of terrorists, as well as placed arms in their hands.
Aren’t 15 years of bad anti-terror policies enough?
2:18 pm on May 22, 2016
