FEBRUARY 2020 saw what was widely touted by the Trump administration as a landmark agreement for peace in Afghanistan between the US and the Taliban.
This month sees the conflict escalating even further towards a new civil war as the Taliban continues its brutal offensive against the Afghan government.
As I write, Afghans are fighting and dying in cities such as Kandahar and Lashkar Gar. Hundreds of former interpreters are scared for their lives and those of their families. Afghan women and girls are dreading a return to the terror of Taliban rule, which would eradicate the progress made in securing their rights as equal citizens.
There is no guarantee that the Taliban will return to power. There’s also no guarantee that the current Afghan government will be able to stop them doing so. It is a brutal situation and it is ordinary people suffering the most. In their mid-year report published last month, the UN Assistance Mission to Afghanistan noted that civilian casualties in the first six months of 2021 have skyrocketed to record levels last seen in 2014 and 2018.
READ MORE: David Pratt: Why the West will soon rue the day it abandoned Afghanistan
Writing in this paper last Thursday, David Pratt spelled out in detail what the Taliban advance looks like. The fear, the destruction of life, the loss of women’s rights – the Taliban claim to have changed, but their actions paint a different, more barbaric story.
According to the UK Government though, it is all mission accomplished. There has been no major international terrorist attack launched from Afghanistan since 2001 – so, job done?
Make no mistake, the war in Afghanistan has been horrific for all involved – 457 members of the UK’s Armed Forces have been killed. Hundreds have been injured and scarred mentally and physically by the conflict. The UK has spent at least £22.2 billion on the war.
Yet it is the people of Afghanistan that have suffered the most. Since the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan began systematically recording civilian deaths in 2009, at least 111,000 civilians have been killed or injured. We don’t know for sure how many Afghan military and police personnel have been killed; Afghanistan’s President Ghani estimated in 2019 that 45,000 had been killed in the previous five years. Hundreds of thousands have been displaced and people on both sides are living with trauma.
As the Taliban has relentlessly advanced over the past few months, it has been targeting those who assisted Nato and British forces, especially interpreters. Several have already been killed this year whilst their families are also targeted by association.
Many are in hiding with their families, but the noose is quickly tightening as the final withdrawal date of August 31 marches ever closer.
The Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) was set up to help Afghans come to the UK as Nato forces withdrew from the country. Yet last week, dozens of former military commanders wrote to the Prime Minister expressing their concern that the scheme is not fit for purpose. They noted that many have been rejected because “they did not work in an ‘exposed role’ or were contracted through third parties.” As they chillingly wrote, the issue is that “the Taliban make no such distinction”.
Even Tory MPs have criticised their own government’s response. Tom Tugendhat, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee and who served in Afghanistan, said last week: “Those brave Afghans ... are being kept in mortal danger by the labyrinthine red tape of the UK’s system”.
If this is how the UK treats its allies, no wonder Global Britain is rapidly becoming Isolated Britain.
The case of Afghan interpreters and their families encapsulates the problem of withdrawal. The UK and its allies are leaving Afghanistan with the house of democracy only half-built and just as fragile. It is also leaving the door open for geopolitical rivals such as China and Russia to establish a stronger foothold in the region, a scenario which does nothing to help our security.
We can debate about whether the West should have got involved in 2001. The reality though is that having intervened, we should have seen it through. When interventions to save lives need to take place, it is important that we empower the people to set up the institutions they need not only to survive but thrive.
Democracy in the West was not built in a day; indeed, it took centuries. It is ridiculous to assume it could be done in Afghanistan in only 20 years.
READ MORE: Alyn Smith: Has the Arab Spring been a wasted opportunity for democracy?
In abandoning Afghanistan, the West is washing its hands of all responsibility, leaving behind corruption, instability and death. But the deal is done. If we refuse to stay, we should at least help others to escape. Scotland needs people and, as our experiences with Syrian refugees have shown, we have the means, space and willingness to help.
When others help us at the risk of their own lives and families, we should do what we can to save them when they are faced with imminent death. When opportunities come to secure the human rights of others, we should not retreat but stand with them. Time is of the essence – Scotland is willing and able to help if the UK will allow it to do so.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel