On Monday afternoon, while audiences around the world watched the unfolding of the evacuation of Kabul, President Biden offered the American people the rationale behind his decision to order the end of America’s commitment to its longest war. The story isn’t over, of course; six thousand U.S. military personnel have been ordered to Afghanistan to facilitate the evacuation of U.S and allied citizens as well as Afghan nationals whose service to the United States is likely to put their and their families’ lives in danger.

Reporters and media analysts have already begun to ask some uncomfortable questions concerning the timing and planning of the operation and the underlying intelligence assessments.  While the President could not get away from the press quickly enough after offering his remarks, these sorts of questions are going to follow him, especially if the situation on the ground deteriorates or requires an even greater military commitment.

President Biden’s decision to withdraw from Afghanistan, the evacuation from Kabul, even the entire 20-year U.S. war effort will be subject to debate and analysis for a long time to come.

One striking, and perhaps little noted, aspect of the President’s speech was his apparent vision for the future of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan.  President Biden stressed that “human rights must be the center of our foreign policy” and that in Afghanistan “we’re focused on what is possible.”

“We will continue to support the Afghan people.  We will lead with our diplomacy, our international influence, and our humanitarian aid. We’ll continue to push for regional diplomacy and engagement to prevent violence and instability.  We’ll continue to speak out for the basic rights of the Afghan people — of women and girls — just as we speak out all over the world.”

While these things may be possible, none of them are likely to matter much. Just who does the President expect to be listening when he continues to “support” and “speak out” for the Afghan people?  Certainly not the Taliban, a group of fanatical religious obscurantists with a philosophy better suited for the Middle Ages and dedicated to governance through barbarism. They obviously are not impressed by U.S. diplomacy and are not likely to be swayed by U.S. influence (about which they do not care), offers of humanitarian aid (which they would only seek to manipulate), or appeals to their better nature (which they do not have).  And do not expect other regional actors like Russia, China, Iran, and Pakistan, all of which have continuing interests in Afghanistan and none of which have an interest in human rights, to provide much of an audience either.

Given that the President has already publicly “washed his hands of Afghanistan”  his stated intent to “speak out all over the world” for the Afghan people is either hopelessly naïve or a deeply cynical attempt to retain some measure of crumbling moral authority, a disingenuous means of putting a better face on a bad situation.  Maybe it was just a pro forma throw-away line engineered by his speechwriters who hoped nobody would pay much attention.  Whatever the case, it begs the question: When, if ever, you speak out for the Afghan people Mr. President, who do you really think will be listening?

*****

The author is a retired U.S. Army officer and a retired senior civilian employee of the U.S. Department of Defense. He is a regular contributor to The Prickly Pear on national security issues.