Skip to main content

Common Dreams. Journalism funded by people, not corporations.

There has never been—and never will be—an advertisement on our site except for this one: without readers like you supporting our work, we wouldn't exist.

No corporate influence. No pay-wall. Independent news and opinion 365 days a year that is freely available to all and funded by those who support our mission: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.

Our mission is clear. Our model is simple. If you can, please support our Fall Campaign today.

Support Our Work -- No corporate influence. No pay-wall. Independent news funded by those who support our mission: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Please support our Fall Campaign today.

In the most important foreign policy decision of his presidency so far, Trump has chosen to perpetuate and to expand the war.

In the most important foreign policy decision of his presidency so far, Trump has chosen to perpetuate and to expand the war. (Photo: FibonacciBlue/flickr/cc)

The Conflict in Afghanistan Is Trump's War Now

Andrew Bacevich

With President Trump’s Monday night speech, prospects for ending the Afghanistan war anytime soon have vanished. Whether that bodes well for U.S. national security is another matter.

Nearly 16 years after U.S. forces first entered Afghanistan, there they remain. Success, narrowly defined as creating Afghan institutions capable of preventing that nation from once more becoming a haven for terrorists, has proved elusive. Among those noting that absence of success was Trump himself. Prior to becoming president, he denounced the war as a “terrible mistake,” a “total disaster,” and a “complete waste.” In 2013, he tweeted that “We should leave Afghanistan immediately.”

"The principal effect of the ongoing war on terrorism has been to exacerbate the problem that it purports to solve. The entire enterprise has been what Trump once understood it to be: a terrible mistake, a total disaster and a complete waste. Now, in effect, he has recanted."

Now in the most important foreign policy decision of his presidency so far, he has chosen to perpetuate and to expand the war. Acknowledging that Americans are “weary of war without victory,” Trump promised to press on. “In the end,” he insisted, “we will win.” His commitment to that goal is unambiguous, even if his strategy for achieving it is devoid of specifics. Yet from this point forward, blaming President Obama for whatever happens in Kabul or Kandahar or the Hindu Kush won’t work. Afghanistan is Trump’s war now.

Furthermore, given the president’s pronounced aversion to admitting error, his embrace of the Afghanistan conflict is almost certainly irreversible. Apparently, he will support a request from his field commander to send a few thousand additional U.S. troops into battle. Yet barring the prospect that a handful of reinforcements will suddenly turn the tide and “win”— an outcome that at this point only the naïve or the gullible will expect — America’s war in Afghanistan is almost certain to continue for the duration of Trump’s presidency. He will bequeath to his successor a conflict that is already the longest in our nation’s history.

Trump’s supporters will likely applaud his move. So too will the foreign policy establishment he once ridiculed. The establishment’s success in turning Trump around on Afghanistan has implications that go far beyond that particular country.

At least implicitly, Trump now endorses the twin assumptions that since 9/11 have formed the basis for the larger war on terrorism: First, that sustained U.S. military action provides the most effective means of defeating terrorism; second, that the physical presence of U.S. forces in vulnerable Muslim-majority countries provides a means to render them inhospitable to terrorist entities.

In short, if we keep killing bad guys and persist in nation-building (an effort Trump derides at the same time he implicitly endorses it), the problem will eventually solve itself.

Little evidence exists to support those propositions. Indeed, the post-9/11 U.S. military experience not only in Afghanistan but also in Iraq and elsewhere points to precisely the opposite conclusion: The principal effect of the ongoing war on terrorism has been to exacerbate the problem that it purports to solve. The entire enterprise has been what Trump once understood it to be: a terrible mistake, a total disaster and a complete waste. Now, in effect, he has recanted.

A decision to stay the course in Afghanistan tells us nothing about what Trump may do next week or next month with regard to China or North Korea or Russia, not to mention truly momentous matters such as the threat posed by climate change. He remains utterly unpredictable. Yet in an ironic but illuminating way, his decision on Afghanistan tells us one thing: Trump has abandoned what once ostensibly formed the foundation of his presidency — a commitment to “America first.”

Whoever or whatever benefits by prolonging the war in Afghanistan, it certainly won’t be the United States.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Andrew Bacevich

Andrew Bacevich

Andrew J. Bacevich, a professor of history and international relations at Boston University,  is the author of "America’s War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History" (2017). He is also editor of the book, "The Short American Century" (2012), and author of several others, including:  "Breach of Trust: How Americans Failed Their Soldiers and Their Country" (2014, American Empire Project); "Washington Rules: America’s Path to Permanent War" (2011),  "The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced by War" (2013), "The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism" (2009, American Empire Project), and "The Long War: A New History of U.S. National Security Policy Since World War II" (2009).

This is the world we live in. This is the world we cover.

Because of people like you, another world is possible. There are many battles to be won, but we will battle them together—all of us. Common Dreams is not your normal news site. We don't survive on clicks. We don't want advertising dollars. We want the world to be a better place. But we can't do it alone. It doesn't work that way. We need you. If you can help today—because every gift of every size matters—please do. Without Your Support We Simply Don't Exist.

'Really Fantastic': Europe's Largest Pension Fund Announces Fossil Fuel Divestment

It's "a huge victory for the climate, human rights, and all life on Earth," said one activist.

Andrea Germanos ·


Senate Urged to Quickly Confirm Net Neutrality Advocates to FCC Posts

The White House was expected to announce the nominations of acting chair Jessica Rosenworcel and Gigi Sohn.

Julia Conley ·


'A Political Scam, Not a Serious Plan': Groups Blast Australia Climate Pledge

"If Morrison expects to front up to COP 26 with this sorry excuse for a net-zero emissions target and no increase in formal ambition on Australia's 2030 target, he'll be laughed out of the room."

Andrea Germanos ·


'Manchin Wasn't Done' Killing Climate Action: Coal Baron Objects to Methane Fee

"If Democrats want to avoid... midterm losses," said one critic, they can't "bow to Joe Manchin's burn-the-planet demands."

Kenny Stancil ·


Pelosi and Hoyer to Progressives: Just Pretend Democrats Are Winning (Even If Corporate Lobbyists Are)

"If we don't act like we are winning, the American people won't believe it either," advised House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.

Jon Queally ·

Support our work.

We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values.
Direct to your inbox.

Subscribe to our Newsletter.


Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit | Privacy Policy
Common Dreams Logo