Quitting Afghanistan: President Biden’s Amateur National Security Follies
The American historian Daniel J. Boorstin (1914 – 2004) once wrote, “History should be our Cautionary Science” and argued we should not “underestimate the probability of the unexpected” in gaining an understanding of past events¹. This not to argue that we should disregard the probability of expected outcomes based on the demonstrated past performance of individuals and nations. As Robert Gates, who served as Secretary of Defense to both President George W. Bush and President Obama famously observed, President Biden “has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades (Bob Gates Memoir Slams Joe Biden for Being ‘Wrong’ on Foreign Policy – ABC News (go.com).” Four decades of poor judgment on national security issues have now culminated in a disastrous performance in Afghanistan which is now an ineradicable part of American history.
Almost no one would argue that the time had not come for the United States to end its longest running war in Afghanistan. Wars can end in one of two ways – with dignity and honor, or with chaos and confusion. President Biden appears to have made a deliberate decision to end the American commitment in Afghanistan in an atmosphere of chaos and confusion. This was not only a poor decision; it was an amateur decision.
President Biden has been in office for eight months. From the moment he first sat behind the desk in the Oval Office, as America’s Chief Executive and Commander-in-Chief he “owned” not only Afghanistan but all of America’s other security challenges. Clearly, a professional politician of his wide experience should be expected to understand that such responsibility is inherent in the office he sought and that ultimate responsibility for orchestrating the American withdrawal from Afghanistan would lie with him.
Yet what Americans and the rest of the world have witnessed during the past two weeks has hardly been a demonstration of professional competence. In a blatant display of seeking to evade the responsibilities of his office during his address to the nation on 17 August, President Biden both stated “the buck stops with [him]” while simultaneously seeking to lay off responsibility for his actions across the board.
Almost immediately, public statements by elected officials and leaks from within the national security community began to paint a picture of the President having made his decision against the best professional advice of his defense, diplomatic, and intelligence advisors. During an interview with PBS, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnel reported he was present at several briefings during which President Biden disregarded his senor military advisors’ recommendations regarding the Afghanistan withdrawal. “Just based on what we were hearing in these briefings, I know for a fact that the President’s military leaders argued against this decision,” McConnell stated. (Mitch McConnell Reveals the Division Between Biden and His Military Leaders on Afghanistan – RedState).
According to reporting that first appeared in the Wall Street Journal, “Military and intelligence officials told Mr. Biden that security was deteriorating in Afghanistan, and they expressed concerns both about the capabilities of the Afghan military and the Taliban’s likely ability to take over major Afghan cities. (Intelligence community pushes back on claims of Taliban surprise – Axios).” As one anonymous U.S. intelligence official told ABC News, “[U.S.] leaders were told by the military it would take no time at all for the Taliban to take everything…. No one listened. (Afghanistan’s collapse: Did US intelligence get it wrong? – ABC News (go.com).”
In response to questions during a televised address to the nation on 26 August, the day after a terrorist attack killed 13 U.S. service members at the Kabul airport, President Biden repeatedly stressed he was in contact with “commanders in the field,” all of whom fully concurred with the concept of operations. While we do not now (but probably eventually will) know the content of those conversations, anyone familiar with military planning understands that after an action has commenced is not the time to discuss the concept of operations. Which begs the question: Was the President trying to demonstrate that he was actively seeking the advice of senior military leaders, or was he setting the conditions to shift the blame to them in the event of further U.S. casualties?
While we have not heard much from the Director of National Intelligence or the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (both Biden appointees) over the past two weeks, leaks from further down the chain suggest America’s much-maligned Intelligence Community is not going to accept the charge that the debacle in Afghanistan resulted from an intelligence failure. As ABC News reported, key intelligence assessments had consistently informed policymakers that the Taliban could overwhelm the country and take the capital within weeks. An unnamed senior congressional staffer stated that intelligence officers had warned the U.S. leaders that the Taliban was capable of a swift and total victory in Afghanistan. ”
And then there is the issue of the impact of President Biden’s performance in Afghanistan on America’s alliance relationships. The President is apparently schizophrenic on his commitment to U.S. friends and allies. During his election campaign, he regularly castigated the Trump Administration for neglecting and weakening the U.S. alliance system. He then made a unilateral decision to withdraw from Afghanistan without consulting those same allies, particularly the NATO countries who have been our partners in Afghanistan for two decades. This not only speaks to his carelessness on Afghanistan; it also suggests his real level of commitment and concern for America’s global security partners. If foreign policy is a test of credibility the Biden Administration is failing that test.
One of the key functions of the U.S. national security system is to provide the best information and professional advice available to support presidential decision-making. But advisors only advise; presidents make decisions, create policy, and issue guidance for its implementation. President Biden owned the end game in Afghanistan, and he chose to end it in a welter of chaos and national disgrace, deepened by a demonstrated lack of concern for the people of Afghanistan who have helped us over the years.
Americans may be far more likely to remember how their wars end than how they began or how they were managed. While our enemies have probably already discerned this truth, the key lesson the American people should take away from President Biden’s precipitate decision to quit Afghanistan is this: for as long as the Biden Administration is in office, it will be National Security Amateur Night at the White House.
*****
The author is a retired U.S. Army officer and a retired senior civilian employee of the U.S. Department of Defense. He is a regular contributor to The Prickly Pear on national security issues.
1. Daniel J. Boorstin, Hidden History: Exploring Our Secret Past (New York, NY: Vintage Books, 1989), p. xi.
