An interrogation of David Petraeus' Afghanistan revisionism, plus China's live-fire exercises mapped, the upside of Putin's delusions, and more.

KABUL REVISITED

Lack of American commitment is not why the war in Afghanistan went wrong

A U.S. Air Force B-52H Stratofortress flies alongside Royal Air Force of Oman F-16s, right, and RAFO Eurofighter Typhoons, left, above Oman, March 29, 2022. Photo: Staff Sgt. Jerreht Harris / DoD

The case from Petraeus

In a lengthy new article at The Atlantic on Monday, former CENTCOM Commander David Petraeus purported to explain why America failed in Afghanistan. Key arguments included:

That a more aggressive and costly strategy "might have precluded withdrawal entirely." E.g. Petraeus says c. 2010, with around 100,000 U.S. boots on the ground, we "finally [got] the inputs roughly right."
That "[n]ation building was not just unavoidable; it was essential," and that to "manage" Afghanistan on a "sustained, generational" scale was not just acceptable but desirable.
That "[o]ur foundational mistake was was our lack of commitment," and "the outcome came down to a lack of American strategic patience." [all quotes via The Atlantic / David Petraeus]

What it gets right

The U.S. has an unfulfilled obligation to Afghan interpreters who supported U.S. troops and are now in danger of reprisal from anti-American groups. [Politico / Daniel L. Davis and Sarah Feinberg]
U.S. resource allocation was poor, and Washington failed "to appreciate fully and deal with adequately the country and region in which we were operating." [The Atlantic / David Petraeus]

What it gets wrong

"Strategic patience" here is a euphemism for permanent warfare, a condition under which every success is used as a rationale to double down and every failure becomes an excuse for escalation.
Early U.S. victory in Afghanistan "was squandered when policymakers transitioned to a transformative nation building project, rather than withdraw U.S. forces and deter future terrorism through narrowly focused operations." [DEFP / Daniel L. Davis]
The swift collapse of the Afghan government demonstrates not that a generational occupation would have succeeded but rather the futility of the whole project. [Business Insider / Bonnie Kristian]
The war in Afghanistan sapped limited resources from other strategic priorities. Ending it "strengthen[ed] American prosperity and security by staunching a bleeding wound." [DEFP / Benjamin H. Friedman]
Petraeus is right that we "very much need to learn from what transpired in America’s longest war." But he's overwhelmingly wrong about the lessons to be had.

MAPPED

China's live-fire exercises around Taiwan

China's live-fire military exercises, conducted around Taiwan in the aftermath of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's visit to the independent island last week, encroached on both Taiwan's sovereign territorial waters and the Japanese economic zone.

UPDATE: China extends military drills around Taiwan

WAR & CONSEQUENCES

The upside of Putin's delusions

[Foreign Affairs / John Mueller]

"Some analysts now fear that the long decline of interstate war may be about to reverse."
"But five months into the current phase of the war in Ukraine, it seems more likely that Putin's venture will reinforce and revitalize the aversion to and disdain for international war."
"The key objective is not so much about winning as making sure that the country that started the war is far worse off than if it had not done so. That has already been substantially achieved."
"Russia's war against Ukraine has backfired and proved to be counterproductive in ways that will likely give pause to any would-be imitators."

GRAND STRATEGY

"The United States can recognize the status quo, commit to not change it, and lose nothing. In fact, America would benefit from dropping ideological and regime change rhetoric. Governments from Latin America to the Indo-Pacific may be more open to U.S. diplomacy—allowing Washington to more effectively secure and advance American interests."

[Stars and Stripes / Quinn Marschik]