The war in Afghanistan is over. The foreign-policy debate is not.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/01f3a/01f3a948670586c943d3c83bef523ab24c104a12" alt="President Biden and George W. Bush."
After 20 years, the war in Afghanistan is finally over — and the foreign-policy debate remains frozen in 2001.
To vast swathes of the national security elite and numerous elected officials, a largely Taliban-run Afghanistan is as likely to serve as the homebase for terrorist attacks against the United States and its allies as when we invaded in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks nearly two decades ago.
There is as much consternation about an "over the horizon" approach to counterterrorism, as some argue it repeats the past failures of airstrikes and drones to truly defeat threats even as they continue to generate collateral damage that plays an important role in stirring up anti-Western radicalism. In Washington, there still remains no consensus on whether the real problem was interventionism run amuck in the 2000s and 2010s or neglect of terrorism in the 1990s.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/26e60/26e60cb924a49f61d1c912d9db390eb10f6d3fa2" alt="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg"
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Even before the last troops left Afghanistan, there was talk that there is no such thing as a forever war — or that such wars can never really be ended. Some people essentially said both things.
It may yet be that all the king's horses and all the king's men will discover that not even skipping town can put Humpty-Dumpty back together again. From Vietnam to Iraq, we have seen dead-enders argue that more time, money, and bodies could have made the difference, that these wars failed because we lost our will to fight. These debates carry on until this day, even though the Soviet incursion into Afghanistan proved far more costly to their Cold War ambitions than America's messy departure from Vietnam.
But the war in Afghanistan was related to an attack on America as direct as any since the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor. It is different.
And yet the fact that so little else is should give us pause about attempting a nation-building exercise of that scale, in such an underdeveloped country, ever again.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
W. James Antle III is the politics editor of the Washington Examiner, the former editor of The American Conservative, and author of Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?.
-
5 exclusive cartoons about Trump and Putin negotiating peace
Cartoons Artists take on alternative timelines, missing participants, and more
By The Week US Published
-
The AI arms race
Talking Point The fixation on AI-powered economic growth risks drowning out concerns around the technology which have yet to be resolved
By The Week UK Published
-
Why Jannik Sinner's ban has divided the tennis world
In the Spotlight The timing of the suspension handed down to the world's best male tennis player has been met with scepticism
By The Week UK Published
-
Will Trump lead to more or fewer nuclear weapons in the world?
Talking Points He wants denuclearization. But critics worry about proliferation.
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Why Trump and Musk are shutting down the CFPB
Talking Points And what it means for American consumers
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Are we now in a constitutional crisis?
Talking Points Trump and Musk defy Congress and the courts
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
What can Democrats do to oppose Trump?
Talking Points The minority party gets off to a 'slow start' in opposition
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?
Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?
Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Palestinians and pro-Palestine allies brace for Trump
TALKING POINTS After a year of protests, crackdowns, and 'Uncommitted' electoral activism, Palestinian activists are rethinking their tactics ahead of another Trump administration
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Ukraine hints at end to 'hot war' with Russia in 2025
Talking Points Could the new year see an end to the worst European violence of the 21st Century?
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published