President Biden inherited a peace agreement requiring a complete withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. Now he faces two unattractive alternatives: Leave by May 1, as the deal with the Taliban requires, and risk governmental collapse and civil war. Stay, with or without a negotiated extension, and face the outrage of a U.S. public exhausted by two decades of conflict. The domestic politics might seem straightforward, but as evidenced by the president’s announcement Thursday that it will “be hard to meet the May 1 deadline,” the situation is actually complicated.
Conventional wisdom holds that withdrawing from Afghanistan is popular. Polls show a majority of Americans, including veterans, favor bringing the troops home. Leaving Afghanistan is a priority for key Democratic constituencies and was backed explicitly by President Trump and his 2020 Democratic challengers. Mr. Biden himself promised during his campaign to end the “forever wars,” Afghanistan most prominent among them.
While the notion of ending the American role in Afghanistan resonates, and can even shift policy, it’s unlikely to move votes or affect candidates’ chances, presidential or otherwise.
Look closer, however, and domestic demand for an American withdrawal may not be strong as it seems. America’s cities aren’t roiled by protests against the war in Afghanistan the way they were during the Vietnam era. At the height of the war in Iraq, congressional majorities in both houses passed measures requiring an end to the American presence there. This time is different. In December, Congress passed a defense funding bill that blocked Mr. Trump’s order to pull 2,000 troops out of Afghanistan. A new Pew poll about Americans’ foreign-policy priorities finds that protecting against terrorist attacks, the central reason for staying in Afghanistan, remains near the top of the list. Reducing U.S. military commitments overseas came in 17th.
While the notion of ending the American role in Afghanistan resonates, and can even shift policy, it’s unlikely to move votes or affect candidates’ chances, presidential or otherwise. There have been moments in U.S. history when a candidate’s position on war determined his political fortunes. There have also been moments when presidents had to spend great political capital to maintain a war effort, as with Lyndon B. Johnson in Vietnam or George W. Bush in Iraq. This isn’t one of those moments.
Read the full article from The Wall Street Journal.
More from CNAS
VideoLisa Curtis discusses the latest developments in Afghanistan on CNN
Lisa Curtis appeared on CNN to discuss the latest challenges facing the United States in Afghanistan....
By Lisa Curtis
TranscriptTranscript from The Hardest Place: The American Military Adrift in Afghanistan's Pech Valley
On March 11, 2021, the CNAS Technology and National Security Program hosted a virtual book discussion with author Wesley Morgan about his new book, The Hardest Place: The Amer...
By Paul Scharre & Wesley Morgan
PodcastAfghanistan: Hard choices for Biden
Adjunct Senior Fellow Christopher D. Kolenda discusses why the future of US troops in Afghanistan could be Joe Biden's first major foreign policy decision. Listen to the full...
By Christopher D. Kolenda
CommentaryWhat Afghanistan Can Teach Us About Fighting Coronavirus
As worried Americans look for answers in the midst of a global pandemic, it is no surprise that many have turned to the symbols and language of war. Public officials from Gove...
By Pat A. Basu & Dr. Jason Dempsey