What I fear is that American impatience with "forever wars" and "nation-building", has displaced strategic judgements about the value of low cost, "forward defensive operations" and the value of keeping terrorists occupied elsewhere.
Biden says his options were either to leave or to surge.
As he has done all along, he is magnifying the costs of the decision to stay to make the decision to leave appear better. NATO hasn't been losing many people for years. Any surge would have been shortlived as the Afghan army was more effective when it had support from the allied coalition. It was bearing the brunt. Not us.
Similarly, he minimises the costs of leaving to make it seem an inexpensive option. But the expense will become clear if ISIS and AQ metastasize and attack us. And if Putin seizes another country. Or if China reabsorbs Taiwan. Leaving Afhanistan doesn't mean leaving terrorism behind or isolating the US from consequences. Consequences follow. That's what they do.
It is hard to trust a person who claims terrorism is defeated, just a few days after it caused 150 deaths, having also minimised it to justify leaving. He appears to be ignoring the risks of his decisions and magnifying the benefits. This is many things. But convincing is not one of them.
| 