Afghanistan has been with me much of my life. As with most other Americans, I have not travelled there, and yet hearing about the country over time has carved out a distinct place for it in my consciousness. I was barely a teenager when we toppled the Taliban regime and began the hunt for Osama bin Laden, the architect of the September 11 terrorist attacks. I went to college with veterans coming back from Afghanistan and Iraq; some I knew with injuries. Months turned into years and years into two decades. Still we remained engaged in a laborious process of establishing a stable government that wouldn’t harbor Al-Qaeda or ISIS. Sadly, that costly work of twenty years’ time vanished over less than 18 months, ending with the collapse of the internationally recognized Afghan government and establishment of the Taliban regime 2.0 in late August. Watching the snippets and seeing the pictures of the chaotic scenes taking place in Kabul in August has been disheartening. It didn’t have to be that way.
Let’s not discuss blame for the collapse of the Afghan government. As always happens in complex political situations, we probably won’t know the complete reasons for the collapse for some time. I have my own personal hunches at the moment but I’m not sure about the details. The truth will likely continue to seep out slowly.
On the other hand, the manner of the American departure was unconscionably wrong. That we can discuss.
The American ethos holds to the belief that honor is important and that soldiers are responsible for the decisions and assumptions that they make. When they fight, our warriors are to return home with honor. We like to tell ourselves that we live in a honorable country that can be trusted and will watch your back. Sadly, that has not been the case with the Afghan withdrawal. Tens of thousands of Afghans risked their lives to help us. America promised them safety and protection. Pulling troops out is one thing, but leaving people behind who risked their lives to support our mission is not acceptable. (The exact number is unclear but likely higher than the official State Department tally.) Those responsible for this breach of trust must be held accountable. The issue is clearly not with the rank and file cadre of military men and women who served and some of whom gave their lives in following our country’s lead. Nor is it with the field officers who saw the same sacrifices and served honorably often under frustrating conditions.
I believe the problem lies largely with the general officer ranks and those of our elected politicians who adhere to a rationalist / materialist sociopolitical worldview. By and large, our general officers tend to be a careerist-minded lot. We have had, and do have, excellent generals today, but they are in the minority. Unfortunately, the best and brightest field officers are often passed over for general because they don’t tow the line as closely as their superiors believe they should – they don’t fit the ideal “general officer” mold. One of the surest ways of making general these days is by not rocking the boat, how well you don’t ruffle your superiors, or do anything out of the established channels. This translates to a reluctance to take risks. Risk reluctance is epidemic to the military leadership at all levels, but is particularly prevalent in the higher ranks.
Lack of accountability and an irrational intolerance of even minor dissent is also contributing to the infectiveness of our general officers. The recent comments by Marine Lt. Col. Scheller were certainly out of tradition and probably a violation of UCMJ, but his identification of this issue in senior leadership is spot on. It is something that I have noticed personally over the years, as well. The Lt. Colonel’s treatment by his commanding officers and the Marine Corps for merely offering a long-overdue critique of senior leadership is a perfect example of a well-intended policy gone far awry. If the American military cares about its future, it should take the Lt. Colonel’s original critique of the senior military leadership seriously. Could it also perhaps consider establishing a peace-time, internal dissent channel for non-deployed junior and field-grade officers similar to those already being utilized by the State Department, USAID, NRC, DoE, and NASA? I think that’s a possible option that’s worth considering, but not without some challenges.
The other part of this Afghan debacle, I suspect, is related to our current political and social views and our elected officials who have imbibed those views. For some time now our schools have largely taught that politics is a matter of mere power and legality exercised in pursuit of justice, but often separate from any foundational morality or natural law. This presents an ethical issue in that it unmoors the act of governance from any sort of de-facto bed-rock standard. The result is a tendency towards laws based more on belief, feelings, or impressions rather than fact and reality alone.
Ultimately natural law is the foundation of legality and all written laws. From antiquity on to our present time, much of our modern understanding of rights and responsibilities has developed from, and is based largely on, natural law. Cicero, the influential Roman leader, wrote in The Laws (46 B.C.):
“For law is the just distinction between right and wrong, conformable to nature, the original and principal regulator of all things, by which the laws of men should be measured…For as we cannot call the recipes of ignorant empirics, who give poisons instead of medicines, the prescriptions of a physician, we cannot call that the true law of the people, whatever be its name, if it enjoins what is injurious…” (De Legibus, Book II)
A law is only just if it reflects or is in agreement with the “unwritten” laws of nature. True natural laws are not mere beliefs of what is right or wrong but things as they truly are – culturally transcendent moral sign posts. As a post-Christian nation, we have largely neglected to teach this truth. In fact, often taught and accepted as truth in our classrooms today is simplified version of situational ethics – teaching that morals that are right in some situations are not necessarily wrong in others.
Decades of this belief, among other causes, has helped produce a cadre of self-serving, equivocating politicians with no interest beyond advancing their own quest for power and ideological agendas. It is with this back drop that our political establishment failed to live up the demands of friendship between nations and people groups, turning promises, that should be inviolable considering our situation in the world, into something more akin to a college try. I offer this as a general critique of a systemic problem in the halls of power at multiple levels, rather than a direct criticism of any particular elected officials. It is a general rot and if the political establishment is serious about the health of the nation, they should take it upon themselves to rat it out on both sides of the aisle.
The good name of our country is a precious gift bestowed carefully by men who served her selflessly over generations. Overtime, their lives in service to their country merge together as it were into a seamless tapestry, collectively reflecting the national character of the nation. Their good character becomes her character. Their honor – her honor. Their lives – her life. A national reputation is something that takes decades or even a century to develop. To drag that reputation thru the dirt is no small thing. That is part of the tragedy of Kabul.
Development of a honorable national reputation takes blood and sweat – a combination of virtues and self-sacrifice much in need for those who work in the State Department or the Pentagon. It takes men and women who exercise courage to do the right thing, day in and day out in the small, unnoticed things. People who devote the time to develop true community within their spheres of influence. People who are stern and unyielding in resisting temptation. It also takes educated men and women. Those who understand human nature. More than anything though, it takes friendship. Not any kind of friendship will do. A friend who willfully does not keep his or her promises is obviously no friend.
To rebuild our friendships in the world with other nations, we need men and women of integrity and character. Those who will tell nations the truth, bind the wounds, and seek to let the oppressed go free. We need those who will act gentlemanly in a Jane Austin hero sort-of-way: friendly, helpful in time of need, can absolutely be trusted with their word, and have the competence to do their jobs well. It short, we need men and women who will serve our country and treat other nations according to the Golden Rule; who will look out for the safety and happiness of the American people without harming the legitimate interests of our friends. These things are not always easy to do, but they are honorable. Overtime persevering in these actions will help rebuild our national character.
–
*The Afghan Rescue Crew is one of a number of organizations continuing to work to extract remaining Americans and the many vulnerable Afghans. You can donate or learn more about their effort here: https://www.arcplanb.org/
**Please pray for Afghanistan and for the infant Afghan church. Pray that God would protect them and provide open opportunities for Afghan Christians to genuinely share the good news of Jesus Christ and true salvation. Pray that people would come to them asking as it will be difficult to share their faith openly. Pray that the Afghan Christians remain a shining light thru persecution in view of what Jesus has done for them and remain faithful to whatever He calls them to do. Rev. 12:11
Image credits: Title: Jim Huylebroek for the New York Times, Image 1 & 2: Wakil Kohsar/AFP/Getty, Image 3: Provided to ABC News by Capt. Zac Lois, Image 4(L): USMC Twitter, Image 4(R): Reuters. Copyrighted images re-used here under the Fair Use clause of Sec. 107 of the Copyright Act.
