Rather than focus on how the U.S. got out of Afghanistan, focus on how it got in, washingtonpost.com

Katrina vanden Heuvel, columnist

While politicians and pundits debate “who lost Afghanistan,” that question will likely seem very distant from many Americans’ lives. Indeed, more than two-thirds supported the decision to withdraw. If anything, most Americans might wonder how the United States came to be in the position to “lose” Afghanistan in the first place?

There should be a serious accounting for the Afghanistan debacle. The United States waged its longest war in a distant, impoverished country of only minimal strategic importance. After two decades, more than 775,000 troops deployed, far more than $1 trillion spent, more than 2,300 U.S. deaths and 20,500 wounded in action, tens of thousands of Afghani civilian deaths, the United States managed to create little more than a kleptocracy, whose swift collapse culminated in the death and panic seen at the Kabul airport on Monday.

Rather than focusing on how we got out, it would be far wiser to focus on how we got in.

Under President George W. Bush, the early mission — to defeat al-Qaeda and get Osama bin Laden in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — quickly turned to nation-building. The United States would seek to build a democratic state in an impoverished country with entrenched divisions and cultural, language and religious traditions of which U.S. national security managers and military officials remained utterly ignorant. […]

We also need accountability and truth-telling in Congress. As Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) has proposed, it’s time for public hearings to probe the bureaucracy about its pattern of lying, while strengthening the War Powers Act and congressional oversight. Läs artikel

The Afghanistan disaster shows it’s time for a Nato rethink, berliner-zeitung.de

Dave Keating, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council

[…] It is easy to forget, given Washington’s unilateral withdrawal without consultation, but this was in fact a Nato war with the heavy participation of European countries. It is Germany’s largest military intervention since the Second World War, with around 150,000 German soldiers deployed there over the past two decades and 12.5 billion Euros of German taxpayer money spent in 20 years of training for an Afghan army that collapsed in just a week. At the war’s end, Germany had the second largest contingent of troops in Afghanistan after the United States.

And yet, despite those 20 years of German commitment and the refugee risks presented by the hasty withdrawal, Germany and other European Nato members were not consulted about when and how to end this war. President Trump unilaterally made his peace deal with the Taliban last year, setting an exit date of May 2021 in contravention of the Nato policy of conditional withdrawal.

President Biden promised to be different than his predecessor and consult with Europeans about their shared war, saying: “We went in together, we’ll go out together.” But in the end, he ran roughshod over concerns expressed by Italy and the UK at the June 2021 Nato summit about the pace of withdrawal, delaying the exit date by just four months. […]

the UK, Germany and eastern Europe. CDU chancellor candidate Armin Laschet broke some major German taboos on Monday when he called this “the biggest debacle that Nato has suffered since its founding” which must prompt “a no-holds-barred analysis of errors in Germany, with our allies and in the international community”. Former British Prime Minister Theresa May went even further in a speech to the House of Commons on Wednesday, saying: “Surely one outcome of this must be a reassessment of how Nato operates … What what does it say about us as a country, what does it say about Nato, if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral position taken by the US?” Läs artikel

Nato Multi-Domain Exercise on Norwegian Coast, ac.nato.int

Norwegian F-35 fighter aircraft operated with NATO AWACS and U.S. Air Force and Navy assets in a multi-domain exercise off the Norwegian coast on August 18, 2021.[…]

Norway supported the exercise with F-35 fighter aircraft from 332 Squadron based at Ørland and F-16 fighter aircraft from 331 Squadron based in Bodø. Both Squadrons are under the command of 332 Air wing at Ørland.

”Norway is dependent on this type of exercise and cooperation with Allied forces. Today’s training is a good example of us moving in the right direction and that we are on the right track in utilising F-35 effectively in a multi-domain operation, with Allies, under a significant Anti-Access/Area-Denial or A2AD threat,” says Lieutenant Colonel Ole-Marius Tørrisplass at Norwegian Air Operations Centre, Royal Norwegian Air Force.

United States Air Force in Europe-Air Forces Africa supported the event with personnel from Combat Communications Squadron out of Ramstein Air Base, Support Operations Group personnel from U.S. Army Garrison Wiesbaden, Germany and Air Control Squadron personnel out of Aviano Air Base Italy. USS Arleigh Burke, a U.S. Navy Europe guided missile destroyer and assets from U.S. Space Command contributed to this complex combined training event. Läs artikel

Förbud mot terroristorganisationer? clarte.se

Ingemar Folke

För två år sedan gick regeringen på pumpen i Lagrådet, när man genom en vanlig lag ville straffbelägga ”deltagande” i en terroristorganisation. De höga juristerna i lagrådet ansåg att förslaget var oförenligt med föreningsfriheten i regeringsformen (RF).

Vad betyder det då att en lag eller ett lagförslag är ”oförenligt” med RF, som är en grundlag? Om en grundlag som RF garanterar exempelvis att medborgarna ska ha en viss rättighet eller att det inte får förekomma dödsstraff, så får inte en vanlig lag innehålla något som strider mot det. Ifall riksdagen trots det stiftar en sådan lag, så får domstolarna ändå inte tillämpa den. Det beror på att grundlagen har, som man säger, högre konstitutionell valör än vanlig lag. För att ändra grundlag krävs två riksdagsbeslut med mellanliggande val.

Enligt RF är det redan idag möjligt att genom lag begränsa föreningsfriheten.  Men bara ifall det handlar som ”sammanslutningar vilkas verksamhet är av militär eller liknande natur eller innebär förföljelse av en folkgrupp på grund av etniskt ursprung, hudfärg eller annat liknande förhållande”. RF ger således inget stöd för att genom lag förbjuda folk att bilda terroristorganisationer eller att delta i sådana. Läs artikel

Nytt lovforslag vil ramme ytringsfriheten, forsvaretsforum.no

Sindre Granly Meldalen, jurist, Norsk presseforbund, Ina Lindahl Nyrud, advokat, Norsk journalistlag, Arne Jensen, Generalsekretaer, Norsk redaktorsforening

Ifølge et nytt lovforslag vil Justis- og beredskapsdepartementet straffe «den som rettsstridig samarbeider med fremmed etterretningstjeneste om å utøve påvirkningsvirksomhet». Med «påvirkningsvirksomhet» mener departementet «virksomhet som fremmed etterretningstjeneste utøver med sikte på å påvirke beslutninger eller den allmenne meningsdannelse».

Departementet erkjenner at det å «påvirke beslutninger» eller «den allmenne meningsdannelse» er i kjernen av ytringsfriheten. Like fullt mener man at dersom ytringene har sitt utgangspunkt i en annen stat som vil forsøke å påvirke beslutninger eller meningsdannelsen i Norge, så vil dette «i alminnelighet være av begrenset samfunnsmessig interesse og kan bidra til å undergrave den offentlige debatten i samfunnet.»

Det er all grunn til skepsis når noen vil innføre straffebestemmelser som bygger på at politiet og PST skal avgjøre hvilke ytringer som har samfunnsmessig interesse. Et annet spørsmål er om man kan gradere ytringsfriheten ut fra hvem det er som ytrer seg. Etter Grunnloven er ytringsfriheten lik for alle.

Det er ikke ytringen i seg selv som skal gjøres straffbar, men påvirkningen. Dette vil etter vår mening være en nærmest umulig oppgave å bevise. Läs artikel

China urges US to honor agreements on Taiwan, stop arms sales, china.org.

A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson urged the United States to abide by the provisions of the three China-U.S. joint communiques, sever military links with Taiwan and stop arms sales to the island.

There is only one China in the world, and Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory, said spokesperson Hua Chunying at a daily press briefing on Tuesday, which marks the 39th anniversary of the issuance of the August 17 Communique.

Citing relevant U.S. commitments made in the August 17 Communique concerning arms sales to Taiwan, Hua said the three China-U.S. joint communiques constitute the political foundation of bilateral relations, the essential core of which is the one-China principle, which the U.S. side should strictly follow.

Hua said that, in fact, the United States has conducted ”official” exchanges with Taiwan and sold various kinds of weapons to the island in constant breach of its own promises, to help Taiwan expand the so-called international space. She cited multiple batches of arms sales to Taiwan by U.S. administrations, including a plan recently announced by the Biden administration to sell weaponry to Taiwan worth around 750 million U.S. dollars. Läs artikel

Katastrofen i Kabul, militarhistoria.se

Hodder Stjernswärd

Under 1800-talet låg Afghanistan klämt mellan två expansiva stormakter: Ryssland i norr och brittiska Indien i sydost. Kampen om inflytande i den här delen av Asien – i kolonialistisk anda kallat the Great Game – har kommit att prägla Afghanistan långt in i vår tid.

Indien var det brittiska imperiets pärla och från denna position kände sig Storbritannien hotat av det makthungriga Ryssland. Dess tsarer kom under 1800-talets lopp att lägga en rad khanat och emirat kring Kaspiska havet under sig. I London såg många en ockupation av ”buffertstaten” Afghanistan som lösningen på problemet. I den brittiska pressen beskrevs landets härskare, Dost Muhammed Khan, som oroväckande ryssvänlig och röster höjdes för att han borde ersättas av en mer brittisktrogen regent.

Hertigen av Wellington var skeptisk, men utrikesministern lord Palmerston och generalguvernören i Indien, lord Auckland, blev allt mer entusiastiska, ivrigt påhejade av journalister och allmänhet. Läs artikel

Can NATO Survive the Afghanistan Debacle? ip-quarterly.com

Dave Keating, american journalist based in Brussels

For the first time, the transatlantic alliance has lost a war. The trauma of that experience—and the sidelining of its European members—has big implications for NATO’s future.

In early May, as European countries were waiting for an answer from US President Joe Biden on whether he would stick to the Afghanistan withdrawal timeline his predecessor Donald Trump had agreed with the Taliban, European Union foreign ministers met in Brussels to discuss the situation. From the meeting notes, it’s clear they weren’t happy.

There was a consensus that a cast-iron guarantee was needed from the Taliban of their commitment to a ceasefire and political solution before withdrawal could take place. They noted that the consequences of a hasty withdrawal would be felt more by Europe than by the United States, posing a “direct threat to European key security interests” and “triggering mass migration flows to Europe.”

Yet despite these misgivings, the Europeans felt completely powerless in the situation. […]

So what action was decided in Brussels and London to respond to these grave concerns? Nothing. They simply waited to be instructed by President Biden on what they were all going to do. There is perhaps no more poignant and catastrophic illustration of the central problem confronting the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. […]

This is the biggest debacle that NATO has suffered since its founding,” said Armin Laschet, the leader of the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) who is expected to replace Merkel as German chancellor after September’s election. “We will talk about the causes and conclusions drawn after this rescue mission—a no-holds-barred analysis of errors in Germany, with our allies and in the international community,” he said. Läs artikel

Security Council Press Statement on Afghanistan, un.org

August 16 th.

The members of the Security Council called for an immediate cessation of all hostilities and the establishment, through inclusive negotiations, of a new Government that is united, inclusive and representative — including with the full, equal and meaningful participation of women.  They underlined that institutional continuity and adherence to Afghanistan’s international obligations, as well as the safety and security of all Afghan and international citizens, must be ensured.

The members of the Security Council called for an immediate end to the violence in Afghanistan, the restoration of security, civil and constitutional order, and urgent talks to resolve the current crisis of authority in the country and to arrive at a peaceful settlement through an Afghan-led, Afghan-owned process of national reconciliation.  They underscored that a sustainable end to the conflict in Afghanistan can only be achieved through an inclusive, just, durable and realistic political settlement that upholds human rights, including for women, children and minorities.  The members of the Security Council called on parties to adhere to international norms and standards on human rights and put an end to all abuses and violations in this regard. Läs uttalandet

Big oil, gas and coal making headway on Russian Arctic coast, thebarentsobserver.com

Atle Staalesen, journalist and Publisher of the Independent Barents Observer

Over the past year, ships have crowded along the coast of the Gydan Peninsula where natural gas company Novatek is developing its new Arctic LNG 2 project. Massive volumes of construction goods are needed for the building of the port terminal that ultimately will handle almost 20 million tons of liquified natural gas per year.

The shipments to the area culminated after sea-ice in the shallow bay melted this July, and up to 50 ships have lately simultaneously amassed in the waters near the Utrenny port terminal.

On the 16th of August, a total of 45 ships were located in the waters near the new seaport. In addition, another about 100 vessels were located in other parts of the Ob Bay, most of them near the Sabetta port, the Novy Port oil terminal, and the drill site of jackup rig. Läs artikel

Afghanistan-veteran: Endte krigen opp for selvrealiseringens skyld? midtnorskdebatt.no

I 2011 kunne jeg deployere til min første internasjonale operasjon, i den Nato-ledede koalisjonen ISAF og til den tyske militærleiren Camp Marmal ved byen Mazar-E-Sharif.

Som etterkommer av en tvangsflyttet finnmarking fra 2. verdenskrig, turte jeg aldri å fortelle bestemor at jeg var under kommando av en tysk general. Til det var minnet hennes om konsekvensene av den brente jords taktikk altfor sterk, selv etter nesten 70 år.

Det militære engasjementet iAfghanistan satte sitt preg på Forsvaret som organisasjon.

Skulle du ha en sjanse på å få en attraktiv stilling hjemme, avansere i grad eller få skoleplass på en av krigsskolene, var det en klar forventning om at man hadde tikket av internasjonale operasjoner generelt, men Afghanistan spesielt.

Verdien av en tjenesteuttalelse har vel aldri vært høyere, verken før eller etter. […]

Norsk Afghanistan-politikk stadfestet at det skulle være et klart skille mellom det sivile og militære engasjementet. Pikeskoler og kvinners rettigheter var likevel et militært anliggende når det kom til legitimering av tilstedeværelsen i Afghanistan.

Argumentasjonsgrunnlaget for å i det hele tatt være i landet endret seg derfor like ofte som ansvarlige politikere og utskremte generaler svarte på spørsmål om dette. […]

USA har de siste 20 årene angivelig brukt like mye penger per måned i Afghanistan som det årlige budsjettet for alle FNs fredsbevarende operasjoner utgjør til sammen, cirka 8 milliarder dollar.

Sceneteppet har falt og teateret er lukket.

Tilbake står bi-rollehaverne – afghanske tolker og andre lokale ansatte. Overlatt til en skjebne noen få Nato-land har innsett realiteten og tatt konsekvensen av. Mens jeg har avansert videre i karrierestigen. Läs artikel

 

En mörk dag som får mörka konsekvenser, carlbildt.wordpress.com

Denna dag har det skrivits historia, om än mörk och mycket bekymmersam sådan. Afghanistans president Ghani har lämnat landet, talibanerna rycker in i Kabul och helikoptrar har evakuerat den amerikanska ambassaden. […]

När historien skrivs kommer det nog att sägas att Sovjetunionen på sin tid skötte sitt uttåg ur Afghanistan bättre än vad USA gjorde. Läs artikel