Afghan Gods relentless / News / News agency Inforos
Rate it
Afghan Gods relentless

No foreign army is able to stay in Afghanistan for long

Afghan Gods relentless

A few years ago, at the height of NATO's presence in Afghanistan, which began exactly two decades ago, the impression was already formed that the Westerners would not stick around there. I wrote back then: "It seems as if the Afghan Gods themselves are driving out every invading foreign army from this land."

Indeed, the British crept into Afghanistan twice in the XIX century, and they were twice thrown out of there – once the Afghans left only one British officer alive, who returned to his fellow troops and warned against horning in ever again. Then the Soviet army arrived and left as a friend, Shuravi, to everyone's amusement. And now NATO's multinational forces are showing a clean pair of heels, as the metaphor goes. President Biden has announced he will withdraw virtually all of his troops from Afghanistan by September 11, 2021. Those will be followed by columns of US NATO allies, who has once displayed solidarity and sent military formations to help Brother Jonathan. The list of Washington's most loyal friends is impressive – in the mid-2010s, for instance, there were 45 states eager to show their flag in Kabul as a mark support to the United States, most of which not even NATO members. Back-scratchers. Having cut no ice, they are now packing their kit to go back where they came from.

After the American special services' false-flag operation of September 11, 2001, the US Afghan campaign is coming to an end. By the way, Afghanistan's engagement in that "performance" was rebuffed by former Afghan President Hamid Karzai, a close ally of the United States: "I can state with confidence that neither the Taliban (banned in Russia) nor any other Afghan organization has been involved in these terrorist attacks. The tragedy of New York, Washington, and all of America has become a tragedy for us. But I can say for sure that Afghanistan is a victim of circumstance." So, the "Afghan campaign" is coming to an end not with a smashing defeat, like it was in Vietnam, but not with a victory either.

The Afghan Gods are booting out another foreign army.

What benefits are there for Joseph Biden, who gave the go-ahead to quit? First of all, it is saving money which the US budget is sorely lacking. Savings from the Afghan campaign will prove pennyworth to Washington amid huge Federal Reserve injections into their financial system, but that's something at least... Trump, while in power, claimed that the US military intervention in the East cost $6 trillion. He used to add that this amount could be used to upgrade the entire infrastructure of the United States. But those days are over when the dollar financial system was at least somehow balanced.

Trump is no longer in charge, while Biden does, apparently, have a particular objective of spending the available dollars in the Pacific instead of Afghanistan. After all, an "unnamed", that is, anonymous, representative of the US administration recently uttered the following maxim: after withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, the United States will send its resources "to deal with challenges in the Indo-Pacific". China has become the bane of its existence, fancy that!

And to prevent Afghanistan from "exploding" again after America's departure, Biden, oddly enough in the context of ordinary US ambitions, suddenly urged Pakistan, Russia, China, India and Turkey to promote Afghanistan's stable future. Biden virtually reached out to... our SCO.

By the way, we do seek to deal with this challenge single-handedly. A recent Moscow meeting on Afghanistan involving Russia, China, Pakistan, and the United States proved pretty much efficient and demonstrated common stands between the parties, as stressed by US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken himself.

So why does Washington need helpers in this case? One explanation is that it needs a safe way out of the "Afghan trap" for US Army soldiers. And this is not an exaggeration, as the Americans simply cannot independently ensure the withdrawal of troops with no direct marine access, while the surrounding countries have fragile relationships with the US due to various reasons. The Pentagon will have to face the incomprehensible moves by the US administration which has broken up with Pakistan, whose territory has been used for decades to relocate the US contingent in Afghanistan. Or are they going to bow heads to Moscow for the sake of opening a path to withdraw their fighters through our territory? Poor arrogant fellows, have they ever thought at least two moves ahead?

Another key issue is Pentagon's opposition to the Biden-announced withdrawal of troops. The Wall Street Journal writes that the US president's decision found no support with senior military and security officials, including Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. According to the Pentagon, at least 2,500 troops should be left in Afghanistan, to say nothing of private security contractors comprising a significant contingent. Such a Biden's flubdub, pardon me.

Another question arises here as to who will scoop US weapons arsenals that have accumulated here over the past two decades? They won't drag them back after all. Militants of Islamist terrorist organizations created here by the US special services themselves? And then another proxy war?

But the ultimate question for us is whether the Islamists fed by the Americans aren't going to move northwards, to Central Asian countries. A couple of attempts of such a breakthrough have been recorded in recent years. And there has been panic as regards the Central Asian republics' defense. Isn't the time ripe for them to create a joint army for the sake of their own security, if it's not too late? Meanwhile, Russia along with Iran, Pakistan, India, China, which is nervous over Afghanistan's threat looming over its Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, as well as other interested parties, will simply help the Central Asian states to repel any possible aggression.

Or is it time to talk and negotiate with the Taliban, who occasionally become our guests at the negotiating table, although banned in the Russian Federation? They are a substantive force able to take the frills out of the American Islamist creatures in their own territory.

The prospects are slim. Brother Jonathan, along with his NATO allies, are drawing off the anger and irritation of the Afghans famous for their various addictions. Even in the presence of NATO troops, the civil war persists for years on end. Opium is grown and exported to Europe and beyond onboard American military transport planes via Kosovo. The flow of drugs is also seeping through the southern borders of Central Asian countries. The Basmachi movement may be revived in some new forms. All the more so as a ration of Islamist militants whose strength in Afghanistan is estimated 5 to 10 thousand people from ISIS (banned in the Russian Federation), have combat experience gained in Afghanistan itself, as well as in Syria, Libya and other hot zones that resulted from the US-orchestrated Arab Spring.

When one examines a map, Russia is seen to be getting unstable borders all the way round: Ukraine, the Baltic States, Central Asia, Japan... This is the so-called "Anaconda loop" of American political science, a plan to surround our country with hostile territories. And everything is much in evidence.

We can certainly put trust in the Afghan Gods, who will eventually drive the alien ISIS dirt out of Afghanistan, but it is also vital to keep our powder dry.

Add comment
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Загрузка...

Сообщите об орфографической ошибке

Сообщить
Выделенный текст слишком длинный.