The United States is well known for its military intervention in numerous countries, so it came as no surprise when it entered another war in the Middle East. However, nobody expected it to continue for this long—especially with the hefty price tag that comes with it. The Washington Post has published an extensive series of documents that it dubbed the “Afghanistan Papers.” These documents include hundreds of interviews and reports obtained over a few years worth of legal battles, and were finally released to the public on December 9, 2019.
The interviews were conducted as part of a government project called Lessons Learned that aimed to investigate the failures of American involvement in the Afghanistan conflict. The documents demonstrate that the United States government failed to develop a coherent, executable plan that ensured positive outcomes. As General Dan McNeil put it, “So for better or for worse, a lot of what we did, we did with some forethought, but most of it was reacting to conditions on the ground... We were opportunists.”
The government constantly made “rosy pronouncements they knew to be false” and took extensive action to hide any evidence that could expose the true lack of progress made in Afghanistan. According to unusually blunt interviews of military officials at the time, even as troops touched down, there was no clear goal. Who was the enemy? Why were they conducting seemingly arbitrary operations? Even at the highest levels of the military, there was an ever-present confusion of what to do, how to do it, and why they were doing it. What makes it massively scandalous is the fact that the government blatantly lied to the American public for eighteen years straight, and through the last three administrations, has constantly failed to competently organize an effective war effort.
It was not just the military operations. According to the Washington Post, the United States has spent over $133 billion in nation-building that both Barack Obama and Donald Trump promised to end. However, the trend predictably continued. A State Department official summarized Washington’s attitude and approach to the massive project: “We weren’t seriously into it — didn’t have our heart in it. We were pushed into state-building.” Claims of rebuilding a broken nation became another extravagant display of the United States putting its pro-war interests first, and the well-being of the people last. The nation-building effort was just as poorly organized and executed as the military effort in that few people had clearly defined goals for Afghanistan.
George W. Bush and Barack Obama presented opposite approaches to ending the conflict. Bush, being the head of the administration that started the war, promised that it would end year after year. However, these promises would fall flat as US involvement dragged through his years of service. Nearing the end of Bush’s term, Obama promised to put an end to American operations in Afghanistan once and for all. However, he too would take the path of war. In December of 2009, Obama attempted to minimize the damage caused by his blatant breaking of his promises, saying “As your commander in chief, I owe you a mission that is clearly defined.” Despite his pronouncements of transparency, the American government would continue to lie through his tenure. This disastrous approach would continue through the presidency of Donald Trump; smashed promises of ending US involvement would come to litter his administration, continuing to pave the road to war with lies.
The United States continues its military and nation-building operations in Afghanistan, despite countless projects imploding due to poor organization and lack of effort or care. As government accountability deteriorates, lies and cover-ups of ridiculously expensive failures abroad will continue to fester underneath the seemingly-positive surface. Even if it requires years of legal struggles akin to what the Washington Post attempted and succeeded at, it is an increasingly necessary action the public needs to take in order to save democratic principles from an aggressive government.
Comments