The Dossier: The case to skip the Taliban ‘peace deal’ and withdraw from Afghanistan ASAP

· February 1, 2019  
    Font Size A A A
Afghanistan troops
DVIDSHUB | Flickr

POTUS should skip Taliban ‘peace deal’ and just withdraw from Afghanistan

President Trump took to Twitter this morning to highlight the long wars in Afghanistan in Syria, stressing the need to bring American troops back home.

“I inherited a total mess in Syria and Afghanistan, the ‘Endless Wars’ of unlimited spending and death. During my campaign I said, very strongly, that these wars must finally end. We spend $50 Billion a year in Afghanistan and have hit them so hard that we are now talking peace…” the president tweeted.

“….after 18 long years. Syria was loaded with ISIS until I came along. We will soon have destroyed 100% of the Caliphate, but will be watching them closely. It is now time to start coming home and, after many years, spending our money wisely. Certain people must get smart!” he added.

It’s refreshing to see that President Trump is ready to draw down troops from places where there are few to no U.S. interests and where U.S. cash is being burnt away to the tune of tens of billions of dollars per year.

When he mentions “talking peace,” the president is referring to the ongoing negotiations with the Taliban and the central government in Kabul. The misguided idea of peace negotiations with a terrorist group has mostly been pushed by senior bureaucrats in the State Department and Pentagon and the Taliban’s hosts in Qatar. It’s a fool’s errand to negotiate peace with the Taliban, given that it is a full-fledged jihadi group with one goal in mind: to take over Afghanistan by any means necessary. They are not to be trusted. The president should skip negotiating a peace deal that is sure to fail. The Taliban has all the momentum. This reality is unfortunate for the people of Afghanistan, but in order to counter this momentum, the United States would need to deploy countless soldiers in harm’s way, sacrificing American troops for the interests of Afghans. These “peace talks” are not worth being held responsible for the aftermath of a U.S. withdrawal. Instead of negotiating our withdrawal, President Trump should simply prioritize the safety and security of American troops and depart Afghanistan as soon as possible. As I have written about at length at Conservative Review, there is no longer an American interest in deploying troops to Afghanistan. U.S. soldier casualty counts continue to escalate, leaving America’s bravest in harm’s way for no good reason.

Several European supposed allies of the United States announced Thursday that they had set up a separate trade channel with the terrorist regime in Iran in order to bypass U.S. sanctions against the country.

The UK, Germany, and France have established INSTEX — short for Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges — to facilitate trade with Iran.

“INSTEX will support legitimate European trade with Iran, focusing initially on the sectors most essential to the Iranian population,” the foreign ministers of Britain, Germany, and France said in a joint statement rationalizing their dealings with the mullahs.

The lifeline to Iran will undoubtedly help prop up a regime that has been desperate for cash as a result of President Trump leaving the Iran deal and imposing new sanctions on Tehran. The new business for Iran will surely help the country prop up its terrorist proxies throughout the Middle East and elsewhere.

Another collusion narrative busted: Trump departs from Russia nuke treaty

The Trump administration announced Friday that the United States is pulling out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty with Russia, citing Moscow’s continuous violations of the treaty.

In a statement, President Trump accused Russia of a developing a “prohibited missile system that poses a direct threat to our allies and troops abroad,” adding, “We cannot be the only country in the world unilaterally bound by this treaty, or any other.”

NATO backed the U.S. position on Russia’s treaty violations, warning that if the Kremlin does not abide by the agreement, then “Russia will bear sole responsibility for the end of the treaty.” 

US & China target March 1 for trade deal

The United States and China both appear to be optimistic that they can strike a deal to bolster trade between the two nations.

President Trump touted the “tremendous progress” made in negotiations this week, adding that he hoped to meet his counterpart, Chinese President Xi Jinping, to finalize an accord.

If the U.S. and China reach terms by the target date, the two nations can avoid a potential trade war and the imposition of competing punitive tariffs.

Author’s note: This post originally appeared in Blaze Media’s The Dossier newsletter. For foreign policy news and views delivered to your inbox twice a week, subscribe here or use the form below!


Find out what’s really going on in the national security world.

Sign up to get The Dossier in your inbox twice a week.




 

Author: Jordan Schachtel

Jordan Schachtel is the national security correspondent for Conservative Review and editor of The Dossier for Blaze Media. Follow him on Twitter @JordanSchachtel.