A decent interval in Afghanistan
There is movement towards peace in Afghanistan – or at least towards an end to the American military ordeal there, which has lasted for almost 18 years. United States officials and representatives of the Taliban insurgents have held seven rounds of direct talks in the tiny Gulf state of Qatar since last October and are close to a deal. During a visit to Afghanistan last month, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the Trump administration hoped for ‘‘a peace deal before September 1’’.
The real question is: How long after that will it be before the Taliban are back in power?
When a great power loses a war with a much weaker enemy in a much poorer country, it can’t actually admit defeat. That’s too humiliating. So the local victors often have to let the great power loser save face by giving it a ‘‘decent interval’’, in Henry Kissinger’s deathless phrase, after the great power’s troops pull out before they collect their winnings.
How long is a ‘‘decent interval’’? Generally, about three years. That’s how long North Vietnam waited after US troops left South Vietnam (1972) before overrunning the South (1975). It’s how long it took after Russian troops left Afghanistan (1989) before their puppet government in Kabul was destroyed (1992) – although a civil war between rival Islamist groups prevented the Taliban from occupying the capital until four years later.
And it’s probably about how long the Taliban will have to wait after US troops leave Afghanistan this time – say late 2020 – before they are formally back in power in Kabul (2023?).
Even with huge US air support, the more-or-less elected government the US created in Kabul has lost control of one-third of Afghanistan since American and other Western troops pulled out of ground combat roles in 2014. Another third of the country is government-controlled by day, Taliban-run at night.
If the remaining 14,000 US troops and their associated air power leave, it’s game over for President Ashraf Ghani’s ‘‘puppet’’ government, as the Taliban call it. The US implicitly recognises this reality, because it’s only American diplomats, not official Afghan government representatives, negotiating with the Taliban in Qatar.
And how will the White House justify selling out its Afghan allies and dependants to itself? Without any great difficulty, if the ‘‘Nixon Tapes’’ are any guide.
The key conversation between President Richard Nixon and his National Security Adviser, Kissinger, in August 1972, when they were deciding to rat on South Vietnam, was recorded on the White House system and subsequently made public during the Watergate scandal. Nixon: ‘‘Can we have a viable foreign policy if a year from now or two years from now, North Vietnam gobbles up South Vietnam? That’s the real question.’’
Kissinger: ‘‘If it looks as if it’s the result of South Vietnamese incompetence. If we now sell out in such a way that, say, within a three-to-four-month period, we have pushed [them] over the brink... It won’t help us all that much.
‘‘So we’ve got to find some formula that holds the thing together a year or two... after which – after a year, Mr. President, Vietnam will be a backwater. If we settle it, say, this October, by January 74 no-one will give a damn.’’
It worked for Nixon and Kissinger, and it can work for Trump and Pompeo too. The pull-out won’t come back to bite them politically because the Taliban were never interested in attacking the US – that was al-qaeda.
The only losers in the deal will be the Afghans, who have to live under Taliban rule again. That was always going to happen in the end.
Their children so often pay the price for the parent’s dream as well.
There are few words left to say about the Black Caps’ World Cup final game against England. It was an amazing spectacle to watch and all cricket fans can accept that they are unlikely to see another game like it anytime soon.
As a massive cricket fan, of course I wish the result was different, but the overwhelming response from Kiwis has been one of pride at what has become a very special team indeed.
Much has been written and said about the vibe of this Black Caps side – lots of talk about integrity, guts, level-headedness, calm and perspective.
And there are plenty of possible reasons for these attributions, of course.
It seems the team really do get on and have an incredible bond, they’re talented at what they do, and they have trained together to be this amazing unit we have seen on display.
But there’s something new the Black Caps management made a conscious decision to do for the first time and I can’t help but think this is what might have made all the difference.
For the first time, the wives, partners and children of the Black Caps joined them on tour.
Historically, this of course has been a huge no-no.
They’re normally labelled a ‘‘distraction’’, the guys need to ‘‘focus’’ and ‘‘bond’’ as a team without the needs of their other halves and small humans to add to the stress.
So because of this new tactic, to include rather than exclude families, the Black Caps team have had unprecedented coverage this World Cup.
At first I thought it was a sign of the times – media were scratching around for stories and photos to widen their in-depth, very clickable coverage of the Black Caps.
Who doesn’t love to have a squizz at someone’s other half? It seems perverse, but you know you love it.
But it appears that from this tournament, gone are the days also of children of sports people being neither seen nor heard, unless it was some kind of profit-making glossy Woman’s Day coverage. And what a refreshing change it makes.
The mixture of emotions after a game like that! My ovaries swooned at the sight of Ross Taylor posting a picture online of him with his two children after the game, one beaming with pride and the other struggling with their difficult emotions. Bless.
Isn’t this all what it’s about? How on earth could it ever be perceived that sports people would perform at the best level without the support of their loved ones close by?
According to unofficial team WAG leader Laura Mcgoldrick, who is married to Black Cap Martin Guptill, almost every single player over there had a partner present in England.
England, well, they were already home so had their loved ones close by, too.
These partners, mainly women, are all too often in the shadows – holding the fort at home to allow for the person they love to do what they love.
Their children so often pay the price for the parent’s dream as well. There are missed birthdays, first steps, bedtime tuck ins.
It all adds up and it all comes at a really extreme cost in some cases.
So this new holistic approach to support the team, including all the wider elements in each family, is endearing and pleasing to see.
It goes to show that the saying around things going on tour, and staying on tour, and all that other bull, might just be a bit outdated now.
And you know what, when all’s said and done, when the careers of these players come to an end and their bodies are broken, their heads need to be recalibrated for a life without cricket as a focus, then it will be these families that pick these guy up and dust them off.
It is their relationships that will pay the price, it is their bonds with their children that may suffer, so thank goodness the families are now – at least it seems to be – included in the plan of how to cope with high-level pressures of top sport.