LONDON-BRUSSELS – “It’s a mistake, we have to stay. At least a little longer.” It was the first week of June. NATO defense ministers met in Brussels. Under the presidency of the Secretary General of the Atlantic Pact, Jens Stoltenberg. The meeting was set to finalize the final aspects of the next summit on June 14th. The one that saw all the heads of state and government of the Alliance meet. The first appointment of the American president Joe Biden with all military partners of the alliance. The holders of Defense and Foreign Affairs also had to approve the final version of the “NATO 2030” document, the strategic reflection for the next ten years. What the Western Front will do in the decade ahead.
That meeting, however, suddenly changed direction. Afghanistan broke into the agenda. Or rather the differences between the adhering countries. The American decision to leave Kabul, in fact, did not convince everyone. And the most opposed were Italy and Great Britain. Defense ministers Lorenzo Guerini e Ben Wallace and the holder of the Farnesina, Luigi Di Maio.
The last days of Kabul
by Francesca Mannocchi
The representatives of our country insisted on the risks deriving from the choice to leave Afghanistan to its fate. The return of the Taliban, in fact, was considered at least very probable. The control of an increasingly large part of that country by “Islamic students” would have meant not only the certainty of giving up many of the democratization efforts made in the last twenty years, but above all the opening of a new corridor for illegal immigration to Europe.
The fear, in fact, focused on the hypothesis that the Afghan extremists would have used the trafficking of human beings to the Old Continent as a weapon of pressure even more effective than the terrorist attacks of the last twenty years. I suspect it is actually materializing very quickly.
Afghanistan, all there is to know about the new conflict
by Gabriella Colarusso
Afghanistan, if the sanctuary of Jihad is reborn
by Maurizio Molinari
Wallace also considered it a mistake from a geostrategic point of view. The British, moreover, have a bad experience in that area of the world. They were the first over a hundred years ago to try to colonize and control Afghanistan. Without success. And now they fear repercussions at home. In particular from the terrorist point of view. “We are extremely worried – said the minister of Boris Johnson – In this way, Al Qaeda could strike again. “London is also thinking the worst with regard to the agreements signed by the US – then still guided by Donald Trump – in Doha with the Taliban. All observations that Wallace also illustrated at the NATO summit.
Faced with those positions, the US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, was adamant. The Washington administration, in fact, continued and continues to consider it impossible to reverse the farewell to Kabul. For Biden it is a promise made during the election campaign even though the first decision was taken by his predecessor.
Afghanistan, US irritation: “The Kabul army has the means to win”
by our correspondent Anna Lombardi
American firmness, therefore, just in June had reached the point of saying to the allies: we are going away, if you want to stay, do so. A challenge. Hypothesis, however, immediately considered impracticable by Italy. Without US military and logistical support, staying would be unsustainable. The military presence of our country would also become a political cost. Inexplicable to public opinion.
The same goes for Great Britain, which has also tried to convince France and Germany, in addition to Italy, of the idea of remaining without the US. A sort of alliance in a reduced format. Yet another British attempt to reassign itself an international role after leaving the European Union. Receiving, however, a clear refusal. In the end, therefore, even London has adapted. And maybe defeat will be played to reclaim the post of NATO Secretary General next year. A reward that sees Theresa May in pole position.
Afghanistan, Taliban supporters celebrate the takeover of the city in the square in Kandahar
At the moment everyone is hiding behind the agreements with the Kabul government which provides for a civilian presence in support. The intention is not to convey the impression that the withdrawal is an abandonment. “First of all – Stoltenberg explained last June – we will maintain our presence in Afghanistan to provide advice and capacity building to local security institutions. We will finance the security forces by making sure we allocate significant sums of money. We are also planning to provide training. abroad for the security forces and we are working on how to support critical infrastructure. “
The point is, however, that this seems to have evaporated in two months. The Taliban advance is posing problems and needs that are very different from those of mere external support. America has no intention of changing its mind: everything is set to withdraw the last soldier on the symbolic date of 11 September. Its strategic objectives have changed in recent years. The focus is on China. Although many are beginning to fear that Beijing could use the Afghan gateway to create another destabilizing element for the West.
Diary from Kabul by Alberto Cairo: “31 under one roof, fearing the arrival of the Taliban”
by Alberto Cairo
.