the ah ah mm mm

mm. i don't well controls a party 20 years after declaring war on big taliban and launching operation enduring freedom. the united states has ordered the military to back up and go home . living to taliban more empowers and before have the americans finally accepted. that's what comes the cures being dirt to discuss it, i'm now joined by matthew polt, marine comment veteran and senior fellow with a center or international policy. matthew is great to talk to thank you very much for finding the time. thank you for having me on our honor. now, to start with, this is not the 1st year of ministration to promise to bring the american troops back home from a gas or bama and a trunk latch to do the same. but for various reasons weren't able to pull that off

. do you, the by the team has what it takes to need through. i think they do, i think there is a commitment by the, by an administration to at least remove the conventional or acknowledged us forces in afghanistan. however, there will be a large force remaining of special operations and ca personnel, as well as aircraft and drones in the region. with the question about what will happen with the 800000 private contractors that are currently under the american under the american government. they are, you know, so there are a lot of, of, of aspects to this withdraw that don't make it just as easy, straightforward as it would appear when you just hear that word withdraw. all right? so that's, that, that's a big question about what will look like in terms of the american presence after september. the, the will, it's clear is that there will be an american presence. it will just be an

acknowledged, which is very similar to how the united states is the fighting. these wars, if you look at the, from western coast of africa, all the way to pakistan. this is the way the united states fight these wars with with unacknowledged forces, with commandos, with ca, personnel, with drones and bombers, cruise missiles, from ships and then using local forces proxy forces to do the bulk of the fighting . matthew, i think we will have to read that the visual decision to pull out a garrison is still a major step for washington. when barack obama was considering that option back in 2009, he offered for a search for fighting on. what do you think have happened between 292-0214 his close associate, and like minded friend, joe biden, to choose the opposite option. i think it's the foolishness of it,

the purposelessness of it, the realization that military force is not going to achieve anything in afghanistan. simply not. i think there are was a mess, the political calculation behind this. i think that's probably the most important thing. the vast majority of american people want this war and want the troops to come home. you know, the polling ranges between 70 and 80 percent of americans who supported withdraw from afghanistan. so i think president by and just felt secure in doing this in a way that say president obama didn't. president obama, i think, was very concerned politically that if something were to happen in afghanistan, that he would be blamed for it after american troops withdraw. just as president obama was blamed for isis taking over mosul enlarge parts of iraq in 2014,

even though that, you know, i completely disagree with that hypothesis. but in the united states, that has become a truth. now again, it is the most expensive american war in history, and it's now and with washington, essentially, completely yielding the reins of power over to the taliban. the the same talent been that to take it to go. it was sad on eliminating whichever way you look at it . it's a strategic defeat, similar to the one that the so if union face in afghanistan in the mid 19 ages, but baghdad, the circumstances, historic circumstances born most good to accept and acknowledge that. do you think will be the same from washington, the public acknowledgement that the last 2 decades, where a major waste of time, money, and many, many, many human life. i would love to see that happen, but i just don't believe, you know, before we began,

we were talking about humorous, right? i don't believe the hubris that exists in the united states need. i ever mean, especially wash and b, c would allow for something like that. it's interesting with the soviet union's parallels because they really are parallels, you know, as early as 983 mikhail gorbachev is saying in the, among the, in the polar bureau that we have to get out of afghanistan. and, you know, he doesn't, he's not able then to get the soviet union gas in 989. but you're absolutely right . exxon. this is nothing but a strategic defeat for the united states. you can look at this in a whole bunch of different ways, but it has been an incredibly counterproductive venture when the united states went into afghanistan in 2000. and one or car had about 400 people worldwide. you know, and since then they've grown to have ranches and affiliates, right. all throughout the world and dozens of countries, tens of 1000 members, they've taken over entire cities and regions, you know, same thing to the united states. government said in 2001 they were for

international terror groups in afghanistan and pakistan. and now the united states government says there's about 20 international terror groups, napkins pakistan. so not only has it been as chief defeat, it's been incredibly counterproductive if you want to cling to the narrative that this was about the feeding terrorism. you know, it's just been an absolute it was been a continuing tragedy. of course, we ask people, but it's been a catastrophe for american policy in that sense. you know, one of the things that they saw in the russians learned from against them is the, is the limits of re power politics. they simply came face to face with the fact that one of the most powerful armies in the world wasn't able to do much of course. and i think the same lesson could be learned from the american engagement in afghanistan. it was, we don't get any public recognition all by mistakes made. do you think this

withdrawal will have any influence on america's thinking around wars and its ability to project power and its ability to achieve anything by military power? oh, it already has and you know, one of the things i think understanding what's happened about ghana, stan and joe by decision is he had, even though they were newspaper reports that he had to override the pentagon to pull out of afghanistan. there are a lot of people within the pentagon who are happy for this. what this does is this is really solidifying again the american way of warfare, again from, from western africa all the way a pakistan, the way the united states fight the small wars these, these war that the nicest of her to be uncovered, are not covered and unacknowledged. again, they use special operations and ca commandos. they use drones. it's done in secret . and what that does though, is that allows for the united states army to them focus on war with russia,

which of course would be on imaginable catastrophe, right? but that justifies having all the armored divisions in europe. right. the navy in the air force get to focus on china and claim china is the real enemy. and that justifies $13000000000.00 aircraft carriers. a $1000000000.00, submarines, $500000000.00 bomber planes. so one way to look at this withdraw from afghanistan is that everyone in the pentagon is actually getting what they want and it's solidifying the american way of war. throughout the muslim world. it's interesting, you've been talking about this or by being able to resist the pentagon and i guess if you, for the family wants to request more funding or sending up to russian china knowing that they will never have to go to war with those countries. because this is not an actual stability. yes, i'm sure for war planners,

but going back to biden's ability to resist dependent on one of the things i'm hearing here in moscow. is many people being surprised that joe biden, who is an establishment candidate part and parcel, have been able to resist that establishment view much better than any of the so called outsiders the for i for bama. donald trump, as i mentioned before, flash to withdraw to from garrison, but didn't find enough leverage and political will to do to do that. while joe biden has been again part and parcel about the washington consensus, who has helped you shape it for the last 5 days. it seems to have more space in the going it. yeah. is there something to be learned about how american politics operate? you have to look at job biden's, record job to understand joe biden. joe biden oppose the $1991991.00 war with iraq,

which turned out to be a very popular war in the united states and still remains to be a popular war in the united states and be. but he suffered politically because of our position in sin, then he has been incredibly hawkish. he has always supported armed intervention, conflict, us use of force, the pentagon, budget, etc, etc. so i think looking at the circumstances now again with the understanding about how this shift allows for the different parts of the pentagon to focus on parts of the world that they want. but also to understanding the, the stress on the u. s. economy right now, the stress on the u. s. population, because a coven, you know, all the other factors. i think that allowed by the opportunity to try and do something different with afghanistan, but they're,

by no means is joe biden turning into you know, he's a dub. exactly. does. there's still going to be, be this very interventionist, very involved american presence militarily throughout the world. why the fact that he was willing to disengage from afghanistan in this manner is a very welcome development. it's certainly much different, right, than what we've seen over the last thing. we are still to see if that's right. you know, assuming that the withdrawal will proceed. ganeth, son is a very big money whole according to the goes on, ask them at that war has caused the united states over $800000000000.00 and that's a very, very conservative after you met. and i'm sure you would agree with me that there are many baths that interest not only the united states,

but also among local and regional actors. so even if we expand that there is a genuine desire on the part of the administration to disentangle, supported as you sat by the overwhelming will of them. merican people, 2 thirds of them, one merican troops out. do you think those benefactors from the us military presence in ghana will they just did i believe and allow this to happen? well that that's the, that's the concern, right? ox on it is that you have people who want to spoil this process. i mean, immediately after joe biden announced the withdrawal withdrawal began of american forces from afghanistan in the early part of may. you had that terrible bombing of that girl school right. that killed 85 little girls. you're going to have people who want this process and there are people on all sides of this conflict. people, there are people i get even, even though as the independent guy gets what it wants out of this. there are people within the u. s. government who do not want to see this end because of it's making

them money. it's part of the legacy. they have career interests, etc, etc. people with the taliban who wants to see a final victory, they don't want to negotiate solution. they want victory. and then of course, you have people in the afghan government who are supported, who are propped up, who are empowered because of the american presence. they certainly don't want to see the united states leave. so you have barriers actors and then you have other groups like islam, state, other extremist groups, that for whatever reason, want to see the violence continuing their own, their own ideological or personal reasons. so you have a lot of people who are willing and wanting to spoil this, and that's going to be a very over the next several months. that's going to continue is probably going to pick up. and that's going to be a very real issue for joe biden. in his people is to stay firm. if american troops say, are killed in afghanistan, you're going to hear

a lot of calls from the american congress that you can't leave. you know, you're, you're banning your week. you know, you're free when you're forgetting the sacrifices of everyone before all the same scale entire thing got into that. they try it on a bama before i'm successful. that we have to take a very short break right now. but we're back in just a few moments which is on the me, the or i me oh,

the me the news . mm. ah, welcome back to the for matthew hall, marine combat veteran and senior fellow with a center for international policy. i met you before the break. we're talking about several parallels. it's been the soviet engagement and the american engagement in jennifer. and what i find interesting about your way of approaching this country is that you don't really separate depend based award. this is this, this is one big cold war rivalry which started back in the seventy's and which continued until the present day. is that the right way to frame it? oh, absolutely, absolutely. the, the rivalry in afghan is then extends back into the fifty's and sixty's actually in

and in the soviet union in the united states were competing for land fines. they were trying to build different projects there to gain influence, you know, on that of course the various intelligence services were involved and it was the continuation of the great game if you will, from the 1900 century. and that unfortunately in the 70s became violent. it begins in $73.00 with the overshoot throw the king. but you know, by the time the soviet union invades in december of 79, already 800000 people have been killed enough canister in the united states has already had already been funding the accident long before the i'm at the soviet troops turned up and going to be the american culpability, and this is really quite nefarious before the soviet union and age, the goal of the americans was the base, the soviet union into invading afghanistan to give the soviet union its own

vietnam. so it basically was a trap that was set by the americans, which was a successful trap. but of course here we are more than 40 years later. and just to show how insidious the american policy was, how much back of foresight just a couple months before the americans started spending a lot of money to the merger, dean in afghanistan to these is lemme, islamic fighters and f canister. the american ambassador was kidnapped by these very same groups and murdered, and we had the same thing repeated self and leave a few years back in history. but it runs absolutely, absolutely. but the blindness to this and the conviction of their, of our, of our own superiority, right? that no matter what happens, which we're going to prove ourselves right. it really is startling and how had

stunning right in how amazing this can be. right? i mean, you, your bass that or is killed you with this policy? as far as i remember my history, lessons of the soviet leadership wasn't really eager to get engaged, at least initially. because when the very things are that we have now materialize, that this is going to be a very costly and very ineffectual a very for a long conflict. would it be fair to say that what the united states have essentially gotten itself is what it's initially wish for. the soviet union isn't. there is some sort of a historical justice. there, there is, there is any, any idea just this is completely outweighed in undone by the gross tragedy that occurred to yeah, well, let's go. yeah, exactly. yeah, we got blow back the, the blow back of it. yeah, so i mean, you see this,

and this is not just confined to afghanistan this, this occurs literally everywhere else, the united states is engaged in this policy of trying to subjugate these countries . and there is a very real understanding that begin the 19 ninety's in american foreign policy about having to subjugate control what will be called these borderlands right. these, these land, the developing nations are poor nations need to be controlled. and you see that with the help incredibly counterproductive, these policies have been not just enough dentist in, but of course, in iraq and syria, you know, with syria. one of the things people need to recognize is that, you know, according to media reports in the u. s. at the time, the united states in 2007 was already beginning to do covert action in syria to try and cause a revolution. and we saw what happened with that right. a war teaches your anything

if they the limits of your own goodness and your own capability within the forces of evil. and yet, what i find amazing is that despite the series of defeat, the american point policy, now persist in this narrative of washington leading the forces of good against the forces of people. which is, i mean, this is inexplicable to me. i think, i mean, from the soviet experience, i know that garrison was russia's humble pie. and yet nothing of the stores ever happens to the united states regardless of how horrible are the consequences of their policies. why do i think, you know, i think a good comparison with russia in the united states as russia is historical experiences being invaded so many times, right? experiencing the consequences of war 1st hand. and that's in the living memory of people still in russia. right?

is the 2nd world war the united states has never experienced that, and the united states has these miss about it has these narratives of american exceptionalism. you know, that comes out of manifest destiny and the doctrine of discovery. all these rules are pretty much religious beliefs about the nation that continue to exist in sustain american policy. if you can see in our domestic policies and how we don't care for our people in this country, you might, it's right in other things in terms of how much we walk people up, you know, as well as our police issues. but overseas, you can really see in this notion that god has given a special purpose, seated i states. and there are many people who really believe that whether they literally believe it or it's just more of a metaphor. but they do believe that the united states exists to spread freedom in democracy in a dissonance is incredible. because, you know,

70 percent of the world's dictators in autocratic regimes and military regime, etc. monarchies, 70 percent of those countries that are not democracies, receive weapons from the united states. i mean, so there's a very clear dissonance between what the united states believes about itself and how it actually acts. now, you've been very critical of the american government. i'm sure you, you have a lot of grievances about the context and as well, but let's not keep the afghans that sounds because i think what's important to keep in mind is that they were well, it's these to literature gannon throughout the years has been old to happy to play the americans against the soviets, or again, you remember that the famous glowed by the prime minister. i think, you know, what are the, are those fine? who boasted about liking, he's american figure, is that the russian matches the are going to be fully goals of what happened to the

last the country can they know. and that would be american with the american involvement. it's been really, really quite awful because the united states has been complicit with warlords and drug lords. me the afghan government been involved with the soviet union where there is human rights violations. there is issues with that. however, with the united states, it's very clear that the united states has aligned itself with war lords and drug lords, war criminals based glee. while the afghan people suffer. so as the united states has spent about $150000000000.00 us dollars trying to rebuild afghanistan, there is almost nothing to be seen from that. when the united states government special inspector general has gone out to look for the schools and the health care centers. when journalists have gone to look out, look for these things that the united states supposedly built, they can't be found. it's estimated about 90 percent of what the united states

claims if bills just doesn't exist or has fallen apart, you know, or, you know, all that money went somewhere and a lot of it went into the united states asking partners now despite all these huge challenges, i know that you believe that the only option going forward for guys is, as you put it, a piece negotiated by the atkins for the outcomes is protected by an agreement by l plus powers to stop meddling into that century's affairs. how realistic is it to secure that latter part of that? it's not only the united states as the draws, but all the regional players, and i've got something the neighbors will leave that country to its own devices. it's, i'm not sure how realistic it is not because i'm not sure what the intentions of these various nations are, and that's what matters is what their intentions actually are. they have the intention is to bring about a c spar that leads to

a lasting peace instability and then progress. you know, you would see these nations not meddling. you would see the stop of weapons flowing into, you know, you see the stop of money going in, you know, in this comes, the money comes from a variety of sources. but a lot of them like to tell being comes from the united states on allies in the gulf . it's kind of like the, the insanity of american policy. you know, you look at what just happened with israel and the palestinians where the united states gives $4000000000.00 a year to really mill. very israeli military goes, destroys a 1000 homes in gaza with the weapons that the united states gave them. and now joe biden is saying that the united states is going to rebuild those homes. i mean the, the insanity of all this, of the just how do place it is all is how we try to the united tries to manipulate the thing. thing control, things just explodes, you deploy city and insanity,

you mention you just recently rode the not only you still have hope that prison biden's may have an opportunity to realize progressive change, but you also believe that he can begin a new era of us leadership that accept failure of american warfare and even leave the world call principally what that's called originally mean in the current, the american english. well, you know that that's the key. the key word in that sentence was, i was hope and, and i don't think we're seeing that unfortunately, i think my hope is going to be stumped on. but you know, if we don't have hope, right, what, what do we have? and there is, there is the, the reality that the united states is the wealthiest good nation in the world. a lot of people do believe in the american promise, in the american ideals, even though the united states daily shows that those ideals don't really exist.

but the idea of being cooperative would be in, say, the case of afghan, this dan would be that the united states would, would, would, would, would, through its power through it's, well, it's economics, right? it's the diplomatic force, forced nations to come together, agree not to meddle in afghanistan, to allow afghans to be neutral, to no nation would be involved militarily providing assistance to any side. any type of assistance in the future will be conditioned on human rights in democracy. progress in afghanistan, so you know, you have this opportunity where you could as international community help the afghans, which is what they desperately need. i mean, ultimately this has to be done by the afghans for the afghans. but there is a lot that could be done with the united states leading to be in, to address a lot of the damage that the united states has created. but unfortunately,

you know, as much as, as i, as i wrote that a couple of months ago and i was hopeful, i'm not sure if that's gonna, that's going to come forward. but we could need help. i guess we will have to wait in the matthew for the time being. thank you very much for being with us for sharing your thoughts. thank you. excellent. i thank you for watching hope you're again next week on the world's apart. ah, the the me, the me ah, the

ah, the ah, the ah israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu is a 12 year rain could be coming to an end as right wing opposition leader natalie bennett, throws his weight behind a unity government a new twist to the end of a spies scandal, immediate investigation revealed that denmark intelligence service helped us to spy on top. european leaders, including german chancellor, uncle merkel. also, china dismisses a political have as political high president by this probe. the origins of cove in the lab leak periods now gaining traction in the media which had rejected it when the trump administration made the same claim in the u. s. backtrack on there to see

.