All
 
|
 
 


The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan as a sign of a new era
 
PIIS086919080019307-4-1
DOI10.31857/S086919080019307-4
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Alexey Davydov 
Occupation: Research Fellow
Affiliation: Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO), Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Journal nameVostok. Afro-Aziatskie obshchestva: istoriia i sovremennost
EditionIssue 2
Pages63-74
Abstract

The end of the U.S. presence in the Afghan conflict by the 20thanniversary of events of September 11 2001 is a significant and symbolic event. In this article the author formulates an assessment by posing a question – how does the withdrawal of the US armed forces from AfPak region correlate with its strategy? The article examines the transformation of Washington’s policy goals towards the Afghan conflict throughout the last 20 years by comparing the approaches of four U.S. presidents, it also examines the conflict dynamics, internal and international factors of how the decision of withdrawal was presented and formulated.

The author concludes, that if the U.S. policies in Afghanistan and the withdrawal are seen in the logic of previous strategical goals, the view on the campaign results as a defeat is accurate. Global war on terror and democracy promotion in the region was also focused on nation-building and the creation of a loyal and self-sufficient regime that could be used to project the U.S. interest in the region, which clearly didn’t happen. 

A different assessment arises in the new U.S. strategical framework to contain China and Russia. The author makes an assumption, that the announcement made by Beijing of the "Belt and Road" initiative and the Crimea crisis could have been one of the factors that postponed the initial NATO presence deadline. In this framework the US withdrawal from Afghanistan can be viewed as a step in the logic of Washington's new confrontation with Moscow and Beijing. 

KeywordsUSA, US Foreign Policy, Democracy Promotion, Joseph Biden, Afghanistan, Taliban, Terrorism
AcknowledgmentThe article was prepared within the project “Post-crisis world order: challenges and technologies, compe-tition and cooperation” supported by the grant from Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation program for research projects in priority areas of scientific and technological devel-opment (Agreement № 075-15-2020-783).
Received25.04.2022
Publication date11.05.2022
Number of characters27602
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.
Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной

Table of contents

ВВЕДЕНИЕ
ОСТАВАТЬСЯ НЕЛЬЗЯ ВЫХОДИТЬ
КОНТЕКСТ РЕШЕНИЯ О ВЫХОДЕ
ЗАКЛЮЧЕНИЕ
1

ВВЕДЕНИЕ
2 Cовременникам не нужно объяснять масштаб значимости даты 11 сентября. Для целого поколения она стала одним из стержневых символов, системообразующей частью развивающейся на наших глазах эпохи. С бó‎льшим удалением этой даты в историю она всё нагляднее становится определенным ориентиром, точкой отчета системных процессов развития международных отношений.
3 В настоящее время теракты 11 сентября 2001 г. видятся событием скорее из другого времени. «Однополярный момент», «конец истории», «глобальная война с терроризмом», прямые вторжения в страны для «продвижения демократии», построение «демократического мира» – все это хоть и остаётся заметной частью международной повестки, однако уже уступает вниманию к проблемам американо-китайского противостояния, борьбы с пандемией, изменения климата.
4 Качественно изменилось и смысловое наполнение неразрывно связанной с событиями двадцатилетней давности войны в Афганистане. Начавшаяся для Соединенных Штатов как ответный удар на внешнюю агрессию, а для стран-членов организации – как защита своего союзника в рамках 5-й статьи Устава НАТО, военная кампания сил Североатлантического альянса на своем завершающем этапе зачастую оценивалась исследователями-наблюдателями как попытка «не ударить в грязь лицом» перед уже состоявшимся поражением.
5 Действительно, нельзя утверждать, что апрельское решение администрации Дж. Байдена о выводе вооруженных сил США из Афганистана было принято в силу сложившейся благоприятной обстановки, которую так долго ждали и старательно пытались сформировать предшествующие администрации. Вместе с тем не наблюдалось и никакого давления ни изнутри самих Соединенных Штатов в лице протестующих пацифистов, как во времена Вьетнамской войны, ни извне – ввиду неконтролируемого прежде продвижения сил противника. В условиях только начавшегося президентского срока, идущего переговорного процесса, разворачивающихся негативных, но не катастрофических тенденций в ходе конфликта новая команда Белого дома решила пойти на рискованный шаг и объявить о выходе прямо в самом начале своих полномочий. Более того, выбор финального срока пребывания пал на столь символически чувствительную не просто для вашингтонского истеблишмента, но для всех рядовых американцев дату 11 сентября.
6 Подобные обстоятельства актуализировали необходимость системного осмысления принятого решения о выходе Соединённых Штатов и их союзников из застарелого конфликта, что приводит к размышлению по ряду важных вопросов. Первый и ключевой из них – об императивах. В какой степени вывод войск в текущих условиях соотносится со стратегическим целеполаганием Вашингтона по отношению к конфликту? Можно ли оценивать выход Соединённых Штатов из Афганистана как поражение?

Number of purchasers: 2, views: 646

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Voitolovsky F.G. Prospects for NATO's Exit from Afghanistan. Year of the Planet. 2012. Pp. 105–117 (in Russian).
2. Gelaev V. US and China Clash for a Trillion. Gazeta.ru. 05.09.2014 (in Russian) https://www.gazeta.ru/science/2014/09/05_a_6203945.shtml  (accessed: 02.07.2021).
3. Davydov A.A. Has Democratization Disintegrated Iraq? The Role of Promoting Democracy in the Process of Iraq's Disintegration. Bulletin of Perm University. Political Science. 2017. No. 1. Pp. 73–86 (in Russian).
4. Kortunov A. Afghanistan Will Test SCO's Capacity. Russian International Affairs Council. 15.06.2021. (in Russian) https://russiancouncil.ru/analytics-and-comments/analytics/afganistan-kak-stress-test-dlya-shos/  (accessed: 10.07.2021).
5. Migunov D. Useless Riches. Lenta.ru. 16.06.2010 (in Russian) https://lenta.ru/articles/2010/06/16/lithium1/  (accessed: 10.07.2021).
6. Stepanova E.A. ISIS and the Phenomenon of Foreign Terrorist Fighters in Syria and Iraq. Moscow: IMEMO RAS, 2020 (in Russian).
7. Yusin M. Afghan Subsoil Closed to Discoverers. Kommersant. 05.12.2011 (in Russian) https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1831252  (accessed: 02.07.2021).
8. Questions About the Vietnam War Answered. Britannica. 17.06.2021. https://www.britannica.com/list/9-questions-about-the-vietnam-war-answered  (accessed: 08.07.2021).
9. Afghanistan Fatalities Total. iCasualties.org. http://icasualties.org/App/AfghanFatalities  (accessed: 04.07.2021).
10. Afghanistan. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). https://explorer.usaid.gov/cd/AFG  (accessed: 08.07.2021).
11. Afghanistan’s Taliban. Now on China’s Border. Seek to Reassure Beijing. The Wall Street Journal. 08.07.2021. https://www.wsj.com/articles/afghanistans-taliban-now-on-chinas-border-seek-to-reassure-beijing-11625750130  (accessed: 10.07.2021).
12. After 17 Years of War in Afghanistan, More Say U.S. has Failed than Succeeded in Achieving Its Goals. The Pew Research Center. 05.10.2018. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/05/after-17-years-of-war-in-afghanistan-more-say-u-s-has-failed-than-succeeded-in-achieving-its-goals/  (accessed: 04.07.2021).
13. Americans' Views of Impeachment. Trump's Record on Issues. Gallup. 08.02.2021. https://news.gallup.com/poll/329423/americans-views-impeachment-trump-record-issues.aspx  (accessed: 04.07.2021).
14. At War with the Truth. The Washington Post. 09.12.2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/  (accessed: 04.07.2021).
15. China Watches Afghanistan Anxiously as the US Withdraws. Financial Times. 06.07.2021.  https://www.ft.com/content/49d266c6-a6c2-4ab2-bf52-ed34d72b22c1  (accessed: 10.07.2021).
16. China’s Afghan Moment. Foreign Policy. 03.10.2012. https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/10/03/chinas-afghan-moment/  (accessed: 10.07.2021).
17. Clayton T. Afghanistan: Background and U.S. Policy. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, 2019.
18. Downs E. China Buys into Afghanistan. SAIS Review. 2012. Vol. 32. No. 2. Pp. 65-84.
19. Dobbins J., Cohen R., Chandler N., Frederick B., Geist E., DeLuca P., Morgan F., Shatz H., Williams B. Extending Russia. Competing from Advantageous Ground. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 2019.
20. Full Text: Clinton Testifies before House Committee on Benghazi. The Washington Post. 22.10.2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/22/transcript-clinton-testifies-before-house-committee-on-benghazi/  (accessed: 08.07.2021).
21. Hearing Before the Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of House of Representatives. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Congress. 16.06.2009. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-111hhrg50504/html/CHRG-111hhrg50504.htm  (accessed: 08.07.2021).
22. How Trump’s Plan to Secretly Meet With the Taliban Came Together, and Fell Apart. The New York Times. 08.09.2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/08/world/asia/afghanistan-trump-camp-david-taliban.html  (accessed: 08.07.2021).
23. Huasheng Z. Afghanistan and China's New Neighborhood Diplomacy. International Affairs. 2016. Vol. 92. No. 4. Pp. 891–908.
24. Interim National Security Guidance. Washington, D.C.: The White House, 2021.
25. Katzman K., Humud K. Iraq: Politics and Governance. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, 2016.
26. Kelemen B. China’s Economic Stabilization Efforts in Afghanistan: A New Party to the Table? Middle East Institute. 21.01.2020. https://www.mei.edu/publications/chinas-economic-stabilization-efforts-afghanistan-new-party-table  (accessed: 02.07.2021).
27. Kronstadt A. Pakistan–U.S. Relations. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service. 08.07.2021. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11270  (accessed: 02.07.2021).
28. Majorities of U.S. Veterans, Public Say the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan Were not Worth Fighting. The Pew Research Center. 10.07.2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/10/majorities-of-u-s-veterans-public-say-the-wars-in-iraq-and-afghanistan-were-not-worth-fighting/  (accessed: 04.07.2021).
29. Mattis Signs Orders to Send Additional Troops to Afghanistan. Reuters. 31.08.2017. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-afghanistan-military/mattis-signs-orders-to-send-  additional-troops-to-afghanistan-idUSKCN1BB2JC (accessed: 19.06.2021).
30. New High in Perceptions of China as U.S.'s Greatest Enemy. Gallup. 16.03.2021. https://news.gallup.com/poll/337457/new-high-perceptions-china-greatest-enemy.aspx  (accessed: 04.07.2021).
31. O’Hanlon M., Livingston I. Afghanistan Index. Washington, D.C.: Brookings, 2020.
32. Press Release on Consultations with a Taliban Delegation. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. 08.07.2021. https://www.mid.ru/en/web/guest/foreign_policy/international_safety/conflicts/-/asset_publisher/xIEMTQ3OvzcA/content/id/4810299  (accessed: 10.07.2021).
33. Public Law №116–145 «Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act of 2019». Washington, D.C.: U.S. Congress. 17.06.2020. https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ145/PLAW-116publ145.pdf  (accessed: 04.07.2021).
34. Rank D. Leveraging US-China Cooperation to Build a Regional Consensus on Afghanistan. The United States Institute of Peace. 2018. https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/2018-03/sr420-leveraging-us-china-cooperation-to-build-a-regional-consensus-on-afghanistan.pdf  (accessed: 02.07.2021).
35. Remarks by President Biden on the Drawdown of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan. The White House. 08.07.2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/07/08/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-drawdown-of-u-s-forces-in-afghanistan/  (accessed: 09.07.2021).
36. Remarks by President Biden on the Way Forward in Afghanistan. The White House. 14.04.2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/04/14/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-way-forward-in-afghanistan/  (accessed: 17.06.2021).
37. Remarks by President Trump on the Strategy in Afghanistan and South Asia. The White House. 21.08.2017. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-strategy-afghanistan-south-asia/  (accessed: 17.12.2019).
38. Scobell A. China Ponders Post-2014 Afghanistan. Asian Survey. 2015. Vol. 55. No. 2. Рp. 325–345.
39. Struggle for Kabul: The Taliban Advance. London: The International Council on Security and Development, 2008.
40. Swenson G. Why U.S. Efforts to Promote the Rule of Law in Afghanistan Failed. International Security. 2017. Vol. 42. No. 1. Pp. 114–151.
41. The Elements of the China Challenge. Washington, D.C.: the U.S. Department of State. 2020.
42. The U.S.–Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement. The White House. 01.05.2012. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/01/fact-sheet-us-afghanistan-strategic-partnership-agreement  (accessed: 10.07.2021).
43. What Did the U.S. Get for $2 Trillion in Afghanistan? The New York Times. 09.12.2019. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/09/world/middleeast/afghanistan-war-cost.html  (accessed: 08.07.2021).

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up