Rory Stewart’s article on Afghanistan, published in yesterday’s Evening Standard, makes a succinct case for speeding up the west’s withdrawal from Helmand and the Hindu Kush. As he says, We are not obliged to stay till the last day.
The time for one more heave is long gone. Question for ministers and generals alike: what part of Stewart’s analysis is wrong or even merely unpersuasive?Did our mission go wrong because Nato had too few troops; or because it sent too many? Could a different strategy have fixed the situation; or was it always impossible? The reason no longer matters. Whatever the explanation, things will not improve: Nato will not “solve the relationship with Pakistan”; it will never create “an effective, credible, legitimate Afghan government”; and in most parts of the country it has already lost “the hearts and minds” of the Afghan people.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in