defended his afghanistan, but as the taliban celebrates what it sees as a clear victory, the u.s. can see the defeat and could this put america's image -- hurt america's image of the world stage? this is inside story. ♪ >> hello and welcome to the program. an extraordinary success, that

is what u.s. president joe biden called the end of america's longest war. during an address to his nation, president biden defended his decision to pull troops out of afghanistan before all americans were elected. he has based criticism for the chaos of the past few weeks as afghanistan rapidly fell under taliban control. but biden archly gain -- blamed afghan -- largely blamed afghan forces who were defeated by the telegram. should america have predicted the calamity that came with the withdrawal and what could have been done rightly? we will put that to our guests but first this report from alan fisher at the white house. pres. biden: my fellow americans, the war in afghanistan is now over. >> joe biden brought an end to america's involvement in its longest war, 20 years which stole lives, cost money and damaged america's image in the world. a war to remove the taliban

which again sits in power and couple -- kabul. pres. biden: were left with a decision, either follow through with the thomases of the lesson ministration and made afghanistan, or say we were not going to leave and commit another tens of thousands of troops owing back to war. that was the real choice between leaving or escalating. >> he promised all americans who wanted to leave would be evacuated before the u.s. military left. somewhere between one and 200 still there stranded, but biden insists not forgotten. pres. biden: for those remaining americans, there is no deadline. we remain committed to getting that out of they want to come out. >> but president faces criticism from political opponents and those on his side. they say he felt, his leadership yelled, america failed. >> the lies of got to stop,

account ability has to be there and americans need to be able to be brought home. this cannot be our history. this cannot be where this ends. we will not allow it. >> bided and says he did the best job possible after the previous administration, never mentioning trump by name, signed a deal to pull troops out without political assurances. and to a new threat, the group behind the suicide attacks at the airport, there was this morning. pres. biden: to isis-k, we are not done with you yet. >> the airlift organized and carried out in a sort -- short time was a military, diplomatic and humanitarian success, but with americans left behind, it counts for little. america has questions to ask about its involvement in afghanistan, questions that are obvious and difficult. joe biden has been politically damaged by what has happened over the last few weeks. he did not start the war but what happened at the end will

hang over the remainder of his time in office. alan fisher, al jazeera, at the white house. ♪ >> let's bring in our guests. from print for is lieutenant general ben hodges from the center for european policy analysis. he is also a former director of operation at a regional command in afghanistan. also a security and defense analyst and from washington, a senior associate for the center of rhodesia -- strategic and international studies. he is also a former secretary of u.s. -- to afghanistan and pakistan. think you for speaking with us. i will start with you in washington. it is not a surprise president is trying to put a positive spin on this, but if you compare this town with the town -- tone of

many in the media, the one word being heard over and over is failure. what do you think the u.s. actually achieved over 20 years occupation of afghanistan? >> that is a great question and i think it is one we won't be able to answer for some time to come and in the midst of a crisis like this snap judgment by others is probably not worthwhile. but i know many people are. i think the focus now should be a as my focus is, getting as many of our afghan partners, people who have relied and depended upon is in the past, out of the country. there have been many mistakes made in the way we carried out the policies and mistakes made by president biden and policies he made, but that is all in the past now. what we can do in the present is get as many people out who want to leave, who believe they are in danger from the telegram.

-- taliban. >> we need to look at the past and what has happened in afghanistan and the u.s.'s role. the general who served as the commander of u.s. and nato forces in afghanistan from 2009 two 2010, is what he explained in the run-up to the 2009 surge of troops. he said the objective was that the government of afghanistan control its territory to prevent dust to support regional stability and prevent terrorism. was that achieved? >> there have been many objectives stated by many people over the past 20 years. you can see it recordings and they are all over the media now of our current presented of -- representative saying our objective and going into afghanistan was to eradicate the taliban and bring democracy. that is something he said in

2002. different people have said different things with different levels of authority. one thing i think is clear, we did not have a single, unified objective as we were in afghanistan. there are always multiple objectives stated by different people and that led to a lot of confusion about whether we succeed or not. this kind of blame game is irrelevant. more facts will come out, more opinions and it is not over. the united states has several hundred thousand people that believe, and i believe them, they want to leave afghanistan because of the threat from the taliban. we need to focus on getting them out now in order to fulfill our response ability to them. >> general hodges, to you. you have thought about this a long and hard because you have written an opinion piece in the new york post.

i'm looking at it, the title is how we as a nation and i as a military officer failed in afghanistan. what was the biggest mistake that was made in your opinion? >> first let me say it is nice to be participating in this with my old pentagon colleague david sidney. three mistakes, first was that we took our eye off the ball in the beginning, diverting toward iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. right at the point where we had almost accomplished the initial objective of eliminating al qaeda and the taliban in afghanistan. if we had left then without going to iraq, we would not be having this interview today. the second mistake, and i think there is responsibility for this, when i was working in the pentagon we were part of an effort to expand the strategy or implement a strategy that took into account pakistan.

i believe and many others believed that pakistan was an ally and they were not. i had eluded myself that they were, but it became clear they were not an ally, they were a safe haven to the taliban and of course when bin laden was killed in a home down the street from the military academy in pakistan, it was clear this part of our strategy had been incomplete. the third thing i would mention is i was part of the problem here, the afghan security forces, there are thousands of bridge -- brave, courageous afghan soldiers who know how to fight. i saw them fight. the model we designed was more akin to a western model which depends on overwhelming firepower, endlessly -- and the sludge of dips, intelligence capabilities and as long -- endless logistics, intelligence

give abilities as long as they were working with us, we could do that. when the previous administration made the decision, the agreement with the taliban and cut out the afghan government, it became a matter of time and the model we had designed could not sustain itself without the support from the allies. in 2010, it was very effective and i believed this was going to work. i was wrong. >> on the issue of the afghan army and the afghan forces, president biden said american troops cannot and should not be fighting in a war and dying in a force -- war that afghan forces are not willing to fight in for themselves. to what extent is that true, that the will to fight was not there? $89 billion has been pumped into the national army by u.s. taxpayers. is it a matter of will? >> it is a little more complex than that, but yes.

at the end of the day, afghan soldiers, police, i think they felt abandoned by their own leadership in many cases. they were aware of the corruption at the highest levels of the afghan government, and even in some parts of the afghan military, soldiers were not getting rations, ammunition, they were not going to get medically evacuated if they were wounded unless americans were there to do it. i think they lost confidence in their own leadership and frankly after the agreement was made last year that the united states was going to depart in 2021, then the taliban approached all of the different commanders throughout afghanistan and said the americans are going to be gone in a few months. if you don't surrender, when we show up, you and your family will all be killed. i think that is why there was this rapid collapse despite our

best efforts. as we know, so much of the fighting power comes from will and believing in what you are fighting for. >> in islamabad, estimates put the cost of this war at $2 trillion. more than 2000 u.s. troops were killed, 47,000 afghan civilians at least, over 66,000 afghan military and police were killed in this 20 year war. but the question remains, did the war achieve its objective of avenging the 9/11 attacks on the u.s.? note the former president bush order the u.s. invasion of afghanistan in the wake of those terror attacks. >> that is something that is difficult to say. if you feel like whatever happened in afghanistan with all the lives lost and text pair money, didn't avenge 9/11?

i don't think so. -- taxpayer money, did it avenge 911i don't think so. because now, a lot of humanitarian efforts were started. now that troops are leaving, the situation but exists, it was not democratically made strong enough, there is no strong root of government. with the taliban coming in power, we do see that if there is a military takeover on afghanistan in particular, who is to say that we are not anticipating another 9/11? >> how does pakistan stand to gain or lose? general hodges wrote we thought pakistan was an alley, dust ally, they were not. -- ally, they were not.

what has been their role? >> pakistan was one of the victims of this war. we saw with the taliban that people in afghanistan and other places, we saw lots of insurgency, a lot of support with ttp and the taliban in pakistan. i'm concerned because the rise of the taliban and pakistan now has given -- there are going to be consequences in terms of the newfound roles. we do know that a lot of support has gone to the gdp because recently we saw a lot of the commanders were released by the taliban. a lot that concerns me in islamabad is we are taking in

refugees, but we are not -- are we equipped as a country to deal with the possible insurgents and violet extremism disguised as -- violent extremism disguised as refugees? that is a concern. >> talking about the security in pakistan, it is also a concern for americans because latest polling went to the fact that most americans believe the situation in afghanistan now poses a security threat to the united states. what do you think about? is the u.s. in a better or worse position now security wise after the chaos in afghanistan? >> the united states is in a worse position now than we were six month ago when president took office because of decisions

he's made. it's in a much worse position than it was three years ago because of decisions president trump made. we have made decisions that have made it more likely that afghanistan will become an effective hub for terrorism against the united states. we have seen al qaeda leaders in their home in afghanistan excepting praise, villagers cheering and doing selfies with al qaeda leaders. the taliban have released many leaders who have gone back to pakistan where they will be attacking pakistan. this is a place that afghanistan is now a danger to the region and the world because of the mistakes the united states made. pakistan has played a dual row -- role as my former colleague and good friend ben hodges said. some people thought pakistan was an ally, they were wrong. there are parts of the pakistani leadership, civilians such as

your colleague, who understand the situation. but in the military and intelligence in pakistan have supported the tell about -- taliban, but they are dangerous to refugees. that is what pakistan deserves in a sense because -- are american safer than they were six month ago, three years ago? no. >> general hodges, would you like to respond or add? the taliban is saying, or what they said during the agreement is that they would not allow afghanistan to be used as a haven for other terrorist groups to launch their attacks from there. >> looked, the taliban had a real challenge of their own. there are thousands of other extremists as he just talked about that have come back in

their that are not interested in seeing afghanistan becoming a stable country. pakistan of course does not want to see a strong, stable afghanistan on its western border with india. there are a lot of challenges in the taliban do not yet have complete control. i am not confused or naive about who the taliban are. they are well-known. but i think even they know they are going to have to have some sort of international legitimacy so they can get the finances that they need if they are going to run afghanistan as a country in whatever means. i can envision a time in the not-too-distant future where we are going to work directly or indirectly, perhaps through intermediaries like qatar or turkey to figure out how do we

enable some sort of stabilization there so that afghanistan does not in fact become this training area and launching pad that it was 20 years ago. the fact is, it's military is only part of the solution to countering terrorism. we've got to understand the source. why do young women and men even in european and american cities join organizations that put people in orange jumpsuits and cut their head off? where does the money come from? i think we have got to dry up the finances that enable these extremist organizations as well. >> what impact, general hodges, since you are in branford, what impact is this going to have on the u.s. -- frankfurt, what impact will this have on the u.s.'s relationship with europe? some say that allies were blind sided by the u.s. pullout. >> that is exactly right. i live here in frankfurt and i

have spoken with friends and senior officials here, germany, and other countries. they were, in fact, caught by surprise by this. unfortunately, we have a tendency, and this is not recent, this happened even during the obama administration as well, to act and then inform allies, which is significantly different than consulting with allies. and i think this has got to be -- if the biden administration is serious as i believe they are about plumber see limp -- diplomacy leading our foreign policy, that we have got to work with our allies and i think we have a lot of work to do to regain the confidence of our allies. at the end of the day, people in europe and around the world know that the united states is reliable. it is just hard. we don't do a good job with consultation and we are going to have to do better.

>> what is your expectation of what is going to happen in the short term in afghanistan? >> in the short-term, i think there is going to be a lot of terrorism because the region, some are already fighting with the taliban. in terms of one thing that is for sure, my colleagues mentioned about the financing aspect of things and i would like to talk about the fact that we although the kind of life that the former president ashraf ghani was leaving. there needs to be a truck that needs to be kept on where that kind of finance can from as well. we know afghanistan, whether the short-term or long-term, is not one country -- it cannot be run

by one kind of government or one stakeholder in particular. there is always room for negotiation and renegotiation and so forth. even with the taliban in particular, i feel like in the short-term they need to -- if they wanted change, i see there's going to be turbulence in afghanistan. i think the security falters will not be equipped at this point to handle pakistan and eventually, let us hope for the bet -- best, but i think there is going to be -- it is a ticking time bomb. >> david, bidens critics, this is a stain on his presidency. they been saying it is a betrayal, a sign of weakness,

but some say this is the boldest foreign policy move made by a u.s. president. he did what three presidents were not able to do beforehand. which is it, do you think? >> well, a bold mistake is a stain. so just being bold is not good. being correct is good, being right is good, advancing u.s. national security interest is good. as i said before, in my view, the u.s. is more -- in a more dangerous position today than it was a month ago. the united states position with its allies is much degraded because of the lack of consultations. the united states also is seen by the rest of the world as having failed and afghanistan. president biden said it is good to leave because russia and china want to cs bob down. -- see us bogged down. that is a wrong assessment.

the chinese and russians are more happy to see them fetid and afghanistan, they are already using u.s. failure in afghanistan as part of their foreign policy, they betrayed their allies in afghanistan, you can't trust the united states, they are using that in the geopolitical struggle we are having with russia and china. unfortunately, i agree what he did could be described as bold, but that is not the issue. the issue is was it right, and in my view it was wrong. >> we will have to leave it there, thank you to my guests for joining us, retired lieutenant general david hodges, ben, thank you for joining us. you can visit our website al jazeera.com. for more discussion you can go to our facebook page and join the conversation on twitter, our handle is @ajinsidestory. thanks for watching, goodbye for now.

♪ ñglo)?■o■oó

- hey, i'm valerie june. coming uon "reel sth." - [verie] this sll town ins a surpsing cla to fa. - [valer] the clton high sool showhoir has won national chamonships ar afterear. i uld've kwn tt performingould be career - [verie] thr demandg - w peopleyou're not undetandin dirwhatt's goa take.m. we wildo it alnight lo ifhat's wh it tas. - [valer] but cathey n big onmore te? - - alof theseeople cong cofr differe backgrounfe.