Premature withdrawal is not good foreign policy
President Trump is spending these first days of his “lame duck” presidency sulking out of public sight and playing golf. He fired the Defense Secretary on Twitter and has installed yes-men throughout the upper echelon of the Defense Department. His minions there are plotting a rash of US troops withdrawals from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Somalia, and perhaps from South Korea and more from Germany.
I’d be more than happy to see US troops come home, not least because I’ve got a beloved daughter-in-law slated for deployment, I know not where. She is a lieutenant colonel physician in the US Army and has already done three tours in Afghanistan in recent years as well as one in South Korea. It would be more than nice if she could stay home rather than leave a toddler behind in the care of her admittedly very capable husband.
But we know from bitter experience the trouble premature withdrawal of US troops can cause. We don’t have to harken back to Vietnam, graphic though the evacuation was. The Soviet-sponsored regime in Afghanistan lasted a few years after Moscow’s withdrawal, but the civil war and Taliban rule that followed weren’t good news for either the US or the Soviet Union, never mind the death and destruction they wrought in Afghanistan. President Obama’s premature withdrawal from Iraq in 2011 opened the door to sectarianism and the rise of the Islamic State.
There is little reason to believe the government in Kabul will survive if the preconditions for US withdrawal specified in Washington’s agreement with the Taliban are not met. The government in Mogadishu is even weaker than the one in Kabul. Baghdad’s government would be more likely to survive, but in a pro-Iranian form that won’t be to Washington’s liking.
The sad fact is that withdrawal requires at least as much diplomacy as military intervention. Zal Khalilzad has been doing the right thing by negotiating the US exit from Afghanistan with the Taliban and insisting also that the Taliban reach an agreement with Kabul. But that negotiation can’t be successful if President Trump pulls the carpet out from under it. There is no reason to believe that any withdrawal decided because it is time for the President to leave office will be done at the right time. Withdrawal, like intervention, should be decided based on conditions in the country concerned, not only in the US.
President-elect Biden should of course be informed if not consulted on any decisions for withdrawal, or military action, during this lame duck period. That won’t happen so long as Trump is disputing the election result. Even thereafter he may avoid Biden, but at least the Pentagon and State Department people should be allowed to talk with Biden’s transition teams. Some of Trump’s mistakes will be correctable. He is unlikely to get the troops out of Germany in an irreversible fashion. But once the troops are out of Iraq, it will be hard to get them back in.
You don’t have to think the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, or Somalia, were good ideas to appreciate that ending them abruptly on a timetable determined by American politics is a bad idea. Each will require careful diplomatic preparation to ensure that US interests are preserved as much as can be reasonably expected. Premature withdrawal just isn’t good any better for foreign policy than it is for birth control.
PS: For more on the mendacity of the troop withdrawal announcement, list to this from NPR:
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
One thought on “Premature withdrawal is not good foreign policy”
Comments are closed.
RSS - Posts
Bringing US troops home from hundreds of assignments in countries all around the globe is a positive in many respects. I would replace many of the troops with civilians who know something about entrepreneurship, especially working in conflict prone states…. Let´s push the discussion of how to reduce, by a factor of hundreds of billions, the DOD budget, perhaps transferring to peace building civilian led budgets or reducing the US debt….