It was expected, Afghanistan's capital Kabul will fall under the hands of the militant group Taliban. It was expected that it will be swift, that it would be shorter than 90 days as calculated by the United States intelligence. But Taliban's hastiness did not fail to surprise me, and a sudden surge of the feeling of devastation entered my mind. It then also produced a couple of views, which I cannot explain for long that I may write these in individual pieces. I have to compound these in one instead.

Who started it?

Because the responsibility on the American president to withdraw the country's troops fell on the incumbent Joe Biden, we are quick to blame him, and it is totally understandable for me. He was told by his people to reconsider the agreement, yet he insisted; he kept the promise that American troops shall be no longer in Afghanistan by the end of this month. Other countries followed suit as Taliban's demand was that no foreign troops shall be present by 11 September 2021, the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, and they are not spared from criticism.

Okay, blame Biden, but who started this? Even his Republican opponents joined the train of condemnation against the American president, and his predecessor, Donald Trump, called for his resignation. The audacity Trump has to demand Biden to leave office-- the Republican politician, whom the majority of his partymates refuse to surrender support for, is the one who struck a deal with the Taliban in Doha last September 2020 for foreign forces to depart the country a year later. Trump's followers love to abhor Biden, but they hate to recognise the liability of the proponent of the "America First" policy over this fall of Afghanistan.

Trump shall share the same (or more) amount of blame and shame Biden is currently receiving. Trump helped make the Fall occur.

Hypocrisy

Trump's presidency was one of the United State's darkest periods, and when Biden defeated him, he declared in the front of the international community, "America is back!".

Really?

The Venezuelan opposition did not lose a backer, nor did the Chinese democracy movement, the Belarusian democracy movement gained a major supporter, and the Burmese Civil Disobedience Movement utilised the influence of the West to cripple the country's new junta, the so-called "State Administrative Council". But how much support would they receive from the United States and its allies? All the West and the international community can do is to impose sanctions and sanctions and sanctions; they see the demands of military intervention as a border to avoid crossing, learning the "lessons" from Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Instead, they kept their complicit behaviour like they have on Syria, and now they applied it on Afghanistan. All the hard-won freedoms and rights will go to waste like the victories of the first months of the Invasion. And democracy movements have to face this truth: the West they are relying on can abandon them anytime, and it cannot give them full support. Limiting to sanctions can never be a display of full support. Look at Belarus-- the crisis is running for more than a year. It will only get international attention when something significant happens (like Roman Protasevich' arrest and the hijacking of his flight, and the threats against sprinter Sviatlana Tsimanouskaya (Svetlana Timanovskaya) during the recent 2020 Olympics in Tokyo). Look at Myanmar-- the coup was conducted more than six months ago, yet the interim National Unity Government (NUG) is yet to gain formal recognition from sovereign states, even if it is represented in the United Nations.

The demonstration of the West and the international community on the defence of freedom and democracy is never enough, and the withdrawal from Afghanistan proves their very weakness and incompetence, their weakness that they are not willing to commit for these causes. Now Biden is planning to hold a "Summit for Democracy"? I really love the idea of convening leaders of democracy movements and the free world, but here's my recommendation: he ditch that plan and not go ahead; it would just show his hypocrisy more.

Dishonour to 9/11 victims

But even if he disregard the Afghans and just focus on Americans, it would be still a total dishonour. Why was Afghanistan invaded in the first place? It's an act of vengeance against the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, which killed more than three thousand people (the Taliban regime was harbouring al-Qaeda in accordance with the Pashtunwali custom of hospitality). The West was at first winning, but it comes at a heavy cost of billions of dollars and thousands of lives. But how about the sacrifices the troops have done for Afghanistan? What is now the sense of these? Veterans like Ben Parkinson of the British Armed Forces, who was severely injured in the conflict, evoke the same question; their efforts are just wasted just because of this withdrawal.

Let's say the West invaded Afghanistan not in the name of the Afghan masses, the immediate victims of the dictatorship, but that of the 9/11 victims.  This is still a dishonour to them-- you avenged them, just to revert all of your gains. 20 is a significant value for an anniversary, and for the 20th anniversary, the West will just be serving not only Afghans but also the 9/11 victims injustice.

If Massoud were alive,

Lastly, imagine if Ahmad Shah Massoud, renowned guerilla fighter who challenged the Soviets and one of the most powerful figures of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, were still alive; what if he survived al-Qaeda's assassination attempt two days before 9/11? He would have scolded the West for not heeding his warning about the attack when he addressed the European Parliament earlier (something we should be thankful to him for), he would have also been glad that most of Afghanistan was liberated from the clutches of the Islamist totalitarians, and he would lambaste the West for this reversal of trends. With him being revered as the Afghanistan's national hero, the Fall is a disgrace to the Afghan nation as it is to him.

The Withdrawal served no good, especially to the interests of the Afghan nation, the fighters fallen for the country, the 9/11 victims, and those who are fighting for freedom and rights, things the Taliban loves to hate. Now how to oust the militant group from power without intervention? Peoples like of Belarus and Myanmar are united against their dictatorships, but the current situations of their struggles show their unity and solidarity is not enough, thus saying Afghans should fight on their own is never helpful. And now the Taliban, once isolated, is asking for help from fellow dictatorships like of Russia and PR China. Tell us how this issue will be solved; "let them be" is really totally and entirely helpful, that it would just lead to all of Afghanistan gone.

 

I want to remind everyone that the world is not an island, that no one lives for self.

 

Article posted on 16 August 2021, 14:55 (UTC +08:00).

 This free site is ad-supported. Learn more
​