Withdrawal from Afghanistan: Biden's first major crisis

It was foreseeable and inevitable that the withdrawal of the United States from Afghanistan and its immediate aftermath would be twisted by the wolf of American domestic politics.

The images that are sent from the airport in Kabul to the world, including America, could not have been more dramatic for the opponents of President Biden and his government.

Because they provide material for their view that the president is weak and incompetent.

Predecessor Trump, who is known to have set the clock for the American withdrawal with his agreement with the Taliban, accuses Biden, not entirely surprising, of the country's greatest foreign policy humiliation.

Other Republicans, who do not use the very big superlative, speak at least of a big botch, which they also blame the president.

The approval decreases

The events in the Hindu Kush are beginning to have an effect on the Americans themselves, who in and for themselves approve of the withdrawal, which is actually a retreat, if not overdue Democrats are worried about next year's congressional elections. Will the alternate voters who helped them win last November turn their backs and help the Republicans, who can expect to win because of the overdue redistribution of constituencies, to a majority in Congress?

Historically, that would be perfectly normal. On the first election date after a change in power and personnel in the White House, voters are happy to make a correction and strengthen the opposition party in the Capitol. The pendulum swings back and the President's wings are clipped. That's what happened to Obama, what happened to Trump. The only question is whether Afghanistan will still dominate the headlines in a good 14 months or whether something else, for example the situation on the Corona front, will not be in the foreground. In any case, the Republicans cannot talk often enough about the disaster in Kabul at the moment, because it can be exploited by party politics whether that is unfair and hypocritical or not.

When the events of "9/11" are approaching, they will take every opportunity to remind them that the Taliban are again in power in Afghanistan, which at the time had provided refuge for the Al Qaeda terrorist network.

It will be a “nice” anniversary, with accusations, defamation, perversions and also with some contrite.

The foreign policy consensus that used to exist and of which American politics rightly boasted is largely a thing of the past.

The fallacy of the Americans

No doubt the withdrawal could have been better planned, coordinated and communicated.

Until recently, many voters had the impression that the withdrawal, tied to a fixed schedule, would not have a major negative impact.

The big return campaign is proof that the opposite is true.

Up and away, and then we have nothing more to do with it, that was a fallacy.

Estimates of when the Taliban would return to power in Kabul were grotesquely wrong.

But on one point they should be true, everyone agreed: the Taliban, already upgraded by Trump as a negotiating partner, would return to power.

The government, whose authority was damaged, would collapse.

It collapsed within a few days.

After Biden took office, the balance sheet was often drawn. How damaging are the division in American society and the hardening of the political camps on the country's foreign policy? How much have reputation, credibility and reliability suffered under Trump? The answers were unequivocal; they were usually negative. This is why the election of the multilateralist Biden was so much welcomed and his “America is back” received enthusiastically.

Now it turns out that his rhetoric and actions do not match.

That was often the case with Trump, too, but in the sense that his words to allies were more shrill and disparaging than the actual policies of his administration, for example with regard to NATO.

Biden speaks amiably and pretends to be an alliance loyalist;

However, he alone decides on the withdrawal date.

It can be assumed that the evacuation operation, in which numerous Western countries are involved, will end if Washington does not want to continue it.

But maybe he'll give in to the urging of the Europeans.

Foreign policy for the middle class

It would be advisable if America's partners in Europe, Asia and elsewhere would pay more attention to the so-called “Biden Doctrine”: that America’s foreign policy should take into account the interests of the “working families”, that a foreign policy for the middle class should focus on the economic Renewal is aimed at the interior. In other words: the aim of this foreign policy is not “nation building” in Afghanistan. So what will become of those who (must) rely on America?