Michael Hughes: U.S. President Donald Trump sent the foreign policy establishment into a rage for suggesting the Soviets intervened in Afghanistan because they were concerned about terrorism. The comments, rather predictably, drew immediate rebukes from members of the military-industrial-media complex who were beside themselves that a U.S. president would dare claim the Soviets were motivated by
The Atlantic: Even if American troops come home in a timely fashion, they will likely return before long. In conventional campaigns against foreign countries, such as World War II, war and peace are clearly defined. The United States gears up for the fight and battles the enemy, there’s a surrender ceremony, and then the troops come
CNA: As Ghani seeks a second term, the announcement by former national security adviser Mohammad Hanif Atmar that he would contest the presidential polls positions him as a leading contender in the electoral fray. Click here to read more (external link). Related Mohammad Hanif Atmar has picked Mohammad Yunus Qanooni and Mohammad Mohaqiq as his
Michael Hughes: President Donald Trump appears to be delaying the implementation of the order he reportedly gave to draw down troops in Afghanistan in light of fierce criticism for announcing the withdrawal of all 2,000 U.S. personnel from Syria. His communications strategy could certainly be questioned but to oppose the intention to extirpate the United States
The American Conservative: Put simply, our presence in Afghanistan (and other places) doesn’t prevent terrorism; in fact, our presence likely causes terrorism. There are 17 years of practical experience in Afghanistan countering theories about the “stabilizing” factors of American and NATO forces. Who wants to see American values corrupted and cheapened as we kill innocents in
Michael Hughes: Washington still lacks any viable strategy for ending the 17-year-old war in Afghanistan outside of a last ditch bid to strike a Faustian bargain with Taliban contacts in Doha. Beijing, on the other hand, appears to have a workable regional solution that can bring stability and prosperity to Afghanistan if the United States
Safiullah Taye via Al Jazeera: If the peace process proceeds along the unilateral paths that the US and Russia have taken up, this would result in a weaker Afghan government (whether Ghani-led or not) which would undermine whatever peace agreement is eventually reached. Afghanistan needs a strong state to ensure stability and security, not a
The Washington Post: The war lasted for nearly a decade. Among its consequences were 1 million civilian casualties; the rise of Islamist fundamentalist groups (backed by the West as a counterweight to the Soviets); and the collapse of the Soviet economy, which precipitated the end of the Soviet Union, which is now so lamented by both
Shazar Shafqat via the Hill: So, President Trump seems to have paid heed to what the “experts” have been saying, as he no longer appears ready to cut and run in Afghanistan. At least, that’s what we’ve been told. Now that the operation in Ghazni is intensifying and the insurgents will likely have to regroup after
Michael Hughes: There is clear evidence based on declassified publicly available U.S. intelligence reports that Saudi officials were directly involved in the funding, plotting and orchestration of the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001. No member of the Saudi royal family, however, has yet to face a tribunal – or any type of