These days mark the anniversary of President Biden's order to implement the decision to withdraw from Afghanistan, and the subsequent collapse of the Afghan president's rule and the rise of the Taliban.
The American exit was initially accompanied by a sense of chaos and conveyed the impression of an escape. A suicide attack by the Islamic State-Khorasan Province, in which 183 people were killed, including 13 American soldiers, overshadowed the move, which mainly reflected a change in US priorities and n practice implemented the policy led by former Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump.
The harsh signs of retreat accompany the administration even today, and it is possible that they contribute in part to the unpopularity of the President. However, in a long term view, the decision to withdraw was correct and did not harm the powerful position of the United States. Furthermore, it allows the administration to devote its attention and resources to the primary challenges it faces – the competition with China and the confrontation with Russia following the war in Ukraine.
The departure led to a renewed takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban, which means the imposition of extreme Islamic law and a significant deterioration in women's rights. The country is also experiencing an economic and humanitarian crisis. The developments are problematic, but from the point of view of the US administration, the blame lies not with on it but with the Taliban, which could have received international aid had it pursued different conduct.
The targeted killing that led to the assassination of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri reflected the Taliban's disregard of its commitment to the United States in the Doha Agreement to prevent the organization's presence in the country. At the same time, for the Biden administration, it was the proof that fundamentalist terrorism can be dealt with even from afar if there are accurate intelligence and capabilities. Furthermore, the US administration’s willingness to help Ukraine even without sending troops is proof that even after the withdrawal from Afghanistan, it is willing to help its allies if they need it.
As far as Israel is concerned, the withdrawal did not constitute a significant operational turn, because the Sunni Salafist jihad organizations do not focus its activities against it. Rather, for Israel, the main significance was in the cognitive moral sphere; likewise, for the Shiite axis, it highlighted the weakness of the US as an unreliable source of support for its allies. Furthermore, Iran, Israel’s main rival, must pay more attention to this sector, but it is clear that this does not harm its activity in the region.
The damage to the American image did not significantly change the conduct of the regional actors, as was also reflected during Biden's visit to the region. On the one hand, they are interested in and need the proximity of the United States, but on the other hand, they understand that its policy toward the region is certainly much more cautious with regard to the use of military resources, so it is important to act and create strategic alternatives.
ByGSpeech
These days mark the anniversary of President Biden's order to implement the decision to withdraw from Afghanistan, and the subsequent collapse of the Afghan president's rule and the rise of the Taliban.
The American exit was initially accompanied by a sense of chaos and conveyed the impression of an escape. A suicide attack by the Islamic State-Khorasan Province, in which 183 people were killed, including 13 American soldiers, overshadowed the move, which mainly reflected a change in US priorities and n practice implemented the policy led by former Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump.
The harsh signs of retreat accompany the administration even today, and it is possible that they contribute in part to the unpopularity of the President. However, in a long term view, the decision to withdraw was correct and did not harm the powerful position of the United States. Furthermore, it allows the administration to devote its attention and resources to the primary challenges it faces – the competition with China and the confrontation with Russia following the war in Ukraine.
The departure led to a renewed takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban, which means the imposition of extreme Islamic law and a significant deterioration in women's rights. The country is also experiencing an economic and humanitarian crisis. The developments are problematic, but from the point of view of the US administration, the blame lies not with on it but with the Taliban, which could have received international aid had it pursued different conduct.
The targeted killing that led to the assassination of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri reflected the Taliban's disregard of its commitment to the United States in the Doha Agreement to prevent the organization's presence in the country. At the same time, for the Biden administration, it was the proof that fundamentalist terrorism can be dealt with even from afar if there are accurate intelligence and capabilities. Furthermore, the US administration’s willingness to help Ukraine even without sending troops is proof that even after the withdrawal from Afghanistan, it is willing to help its allies if they need it.
As far as Israel is concerned, the withdrawal did not constitute a significant operational turn, because the Sunni Salafist jihad organizations do not focus its activities against it. Rather, for Israel, the main significance was in the cognitive moral sphere; likewise, for the Shiite axis, it highlighted the weakness of the US as an unreliable source of support for its allies. Furthermore, Iran, Israel’s main rival, must pay more attention to this sector, but it is clear that this does not harm its activity in the region.
The damage to the American image did not significantly change the conduct of the regional actors, as was also reflected during Biden's visit to the region. On the one hand, they are interested in and need the proximity of the United States, but on the other hand, they understand that its policy toward the region is certainly much more cautious with regard to the use of military resources, so it is important to act and create strategic alternatives.