The Wisdom of Solomon

Solomon, son of David, king of Israel. Even he of the legendary wisdom will find it hard to deal with what is currently happening in the ancient land of his people. Indeed, there are many who would even contest that the land of Israel can properly be called theirs.

On October 7th of this year, soldiers of Hamas struck Israel and killed a thousand and more of its people, and took hostage hundreds of others. It was quite a surprise because one would have thought that the lessons of the Yom Kippur War would have never been lost to Israel’s defense forces and yet there it was. Naturally, condemnation from all over the world came swiftly and thickly soon after but there were also those that appeared to justify the attack saying that one cannot discount the years that the Palestinian people suffered under modern-day Israel. So, it seems people are blaming everything on, first, Israel, and, second, the British (and the UN) who proposed the establishment of the nation of Israel. The sentiment it seems that after the horrors visited upon them by Nazi Germany, they deserved a place to call their home. The problem of course was that there were non-Israelites in the place they chose. There were Jews too although they didn’t call themselves Israelites then. The land was then called Palestine but it was not always so, and there have been many who once ruled over the lands. One can go back beyond the British to the Ottomans, the Greeks, even the old Israelites. Back to the land of Canaanites. Tell me, can anyone really say whose land it is? Recent DNA studies even appear to show that modern Israelites and Arabs share the same DNA: Canaanite DNA. They are all of that land.

I don’t think it is smart to argue that the state of Israel only existed in the 1940s when Britain and the UN decided to allow the creation of the Israeli state in then Palestine. I mean, I don’t think it is possible for one to argue for example that the city of Stalingrad or Leningrad in Russia did not exist at one time just because they are now called something else. Said in another way, you can’t say St. Petersburg didn’t exist until the 1990s when Leningrad (previously, Petrograd) was renamed St. Petersburg. The fact is that it used to be known as St. Petersburg when Tsar Peter the Great established it in 1703 (in honor of St. Peter the Apostle). The fact that it was renamed Leningrad for a period of time does not mean that St. Petersburg did not exist before it got its name back; and thanks to the Israel stelae (a.k.a. the Merneptah Stele), it appears that there was in fact a kingdom called Israel that was besieged and defeated by a pharaoh in that same place. However, his boast that “its seed is no more” may have been, as in a lot of pharaonic boasts, an exaggeration.

Not long after the attack by Hamas, Israel began its assault in Gaza from land, air and sea. Thousands died, many of them women and children. Much more than the thousand killed or taken by Hamas. Now, there are those who condemn this excess. They speak of proportionality and humanitarian considerations but when it comes to retribution, should Israel limit itself to killing the same number of people Hamas killed? Or is it a 1:10, or some other ratio? Basically, the rules of war seek to minimize civilian casualties. Israel claims that Hamas is using civilians (including the hostages) as human shields and using facilities such as schools and hospitals as staging posts for launching rockets into Israel but it also claims that it goes further than what the rules of war require to insure that they minimize civilian casualties to the point that if there is a danger that civilians may be harmed if they strike a target, it will withhold the strike. Somehow, the rules of engagement got rewritten after the Hamas strike even if Israel is still making the same claim. So, if it is not proper to claim that the Hamas strike was understandable because of the oppression the Palestinian people has allegedly endured, then it is equally improper to say that Israel is justified in the alleged indiscriminate killings. In fact, it appears that it was not only Hamas that entered Israel and took hostages but ordinary Palestinians as well. This came out when Hamas was trying to negotiate the release of Palestinian prisoners in Israel in exchange for the hostages taken during the October 7 attack. Some hostages were kept by civilians and Hamas could not account for them fast enough. So, that situation also opens a new can of worms: if ordinary Palestinians were involved in the taking of hostages (maybe even some of the killings?), then can we safely say that Israel may be justified in its general assault on just about anybody in Gaza? But then, what about the children who absolutely had nothing to do with any of these activities?

Now, King Solomon (yes, we’re back to him) was famous for suggesting that a baby that two women were fighting over be split in two so that they could stop fighting. In the case of Israel and the Palestinian state, the Solomonic solution was a two-state deal that Israel accepted but rejected by the Arabs. Over time, the commitment of Israel to that solution has become hazy. Meanwhile, groups of Arabs have vowed to destroy Israel. Of course, there was that Israel-Palestinian Agreement in 1993 or thereabouts but undoubtedly there is little or no progress from that. Israeli settlements in Palestinian lands, and Palestinian groups are still committed to the destruction of Israel. The two signatories of the Agreement have died without seeing anything from it, and the US, who brokered the deal, have damaged their disinterested negotiator status especially during the Trump Administration.

Unlike in King Solomon’s story, it is not likely that the “true mother” will give up her rights if only to keep the child alive. Perhaps we should then take the advise of a certain comedian when he said we should send the “Good Dad” who intervenes when his children are fighting each other: “What’s going on here?” “He started it!” “I don’t care who started it, KNOCK IT OFF!” We could all hope it was that easy.

In the end though, Hamas is a terrorist organization while Israel is a state. The rules are not the same. They are never the same. Not for a country that proclaims that it is a democracy. This is why it was wrong for the US to go in and kill Osama Bin Laden. One can see the reason why the US would be inclined to but as a country that believes in the Rule of Law, imagine if the US actually captured him and brought him to justice. Killing him is revenge, not justice.

Israel too. It could be forgiven for making a strike in Gaza right after the Hamas assault but even if you don’t go through the math of what is a proportional response, one can still go by what is reasonable. Their main objective is to destroy Hamas. Think about that for a second. The declared objective of Hamas is the destruction of Israel. How is that working for them? Is this something that is achievable? Were the US and all its allies able to destroy the Taliban? Guess who is in charge of Afghanistan now. ISIS lost its caliphate, the land, but it still exists in a different form. Many have said it before: you cannot kill an idea, not by war anyway. Need we say more? Look around, Nazism is still around years after Hitler and his Reich have been defeated, and Germany went through a de-Nazification process.

Donald Trump may have been wrong about bringing the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem but he did right with the so-called Abraham Accords that normalized relations between Israel and some Arab states. If this teaches us anything, then it must be that some differences can be overcome. Perhaps this is why Hamas did what it did: to scuttle the chances of the Accords expanding into many other Arab states that could lead to the weakening of support for the Palestinian cause. It is perhaps a fear that if relations were normalized with Israel, then they would be completely ignored. However, it is also possible that they may have found a new forum to bring up this cause and work for an acceptable resolution. The Arab states have tried war against Israel before and it did not end well for them. The Abraham Accords could be a way to discuss the Palestinian cause in a more productive manner.

The greatest fear should be that you become that which you hate. We can all sympathize with Israel for what happened during World War II but people are starting to think that they are turning into the oppressors and, again, how do you kill an idea? Israel has this aura around it: invincible and the chosen people of God but they have to recall that even God chastised its people even to the point where many of them were enslaved in far-off lands. We all have to be careful about how we view ourselves. Israel has shown that it is a mighty nation. No one can doubt that but it now has to show that it is not only a militarily mighty nation. It must show that it is honorable. Yes, it claims that even in the midst of war, it is observing its obligations under international law. It has to go beyond mere words. We understand that it is in war in Gaza and there will be civilian casualties. However, it cannot and must not merely shrug its shoulders and present it is a natural consequence of war because it shouldn’t, even if it is. It must now be a philosopher-king much like the legendary Solomon, son of David, King of Israel.

Standard

Like Moths to a Flame

Like Icarus, flying too high will be the death of us.

When Taylor Swift launched her Eras tour, demand for tickets to her concert have been incredible to the point that Ticketmaster’s website crashed, or they had to suspend sales due to the “unexpected” demand. To get one, people are even considering flying to other countries because either she didn’t schedule shows in a particular country, or it provides the best chance to see her concert. This is the first time I’ve heard not one but two Prime Ministers — yes, the PMs of sovereign nations — reach out to her and plead for shows to be performed in their respective countries.

Meanwhile, Ticketmaster is becoming its own scalper with their surge pricing that increases ticket prices with demand. Simple economics yes but is all these still within reason? Oh, and, yes, independent scalpers are still doing business.

Fandom is a crazy thing, and there are fans who feel the need to prove that they are a celebrity’s number one fan bar none. For that, they are willing to shell out whatever they need to just score tickets to their idol’s concert. That doesn’t even take into consideration any free promotions they give their idols through their social media posts and other activities. All this is creating a huge demand that world peace itself is in danger when Australian Swifties threatened American Swifties to honor geographical jurisdictions or face their wrath. For these people, it is not enough to buy the latest albums. They have to have that face to face encounter.

Again, how much of this is still reasonable? Fans get drawn in but the feeling of flying so high can send them crashing. That or burned to death like moths to a flame…

Standard

Holiday Madness

Foreign bankers in the Philippines must be losing their minds just about now. This is because the Philippine Government has just declared tomorrow, 24 February 2023, a non-working holiday, and, by definition, a non-banking day. This means they have to recalculate periods for payments, interest, and similar matters. If there were loan payments due tomorrow, then the borrowers get until Monday to pay instead.

This is maddening for foreign bankers. I remember several documentation meetings where they were practically requiring that banking days be determined on banking days in New York or London, where things are more fixed or predictable rather than in the Philippines precisely because of these surprise announcements.

At some point I expect them to require an extra provision in loan documents that state that when defining what are banking days, the exception for holidays shall only be based on the holidays declared by the Philippine Government prior to the start of any new year. This is to peg what are holidays, and prevent something like this late announcement from wrecking havoc on their schedules.

Actually, I haven’t been part of a loan documentation meeting for some time, and they may already be requiring such a provision but I’m sure borrowers will object because it is obviously advantageous for them. I guess it’s just one of those things foreign bankers have to get used to, if they haven’t already, and shake their heads in disbelief.

For Filipinos, of course, it will be very much welcome. Happy weekend!

Standard

The Case for Mr. Gervais

Ricky Gervais is at it again. His latest Netflix special, Supernature, is being blasted by critics for perceived attacks against the LGBTQ+ community.

The attacks I think are expected. The problem with the community is that it operates on a zero-sum basis: anything and everything they don’t like is deemed an assault against the community and its members. I’m sure they will not like what I am about to say but in that regard, they are like the Islamic Fundamentalists who cannot tolerate any criticism of the group, or their prophet. However, if they listen, I mean really listen, then there is more to Mr. Gervais’ jokes than a simple, lazy joke against the community. Mr. Gervais has no problems with members of the community believing what they want but he takes issue when the rest of humanity is forced to accept their reality. He’s satirizing attitudes. He said so in the show and yet they all missed it. That, or they weren’t really interested in listening to begin with.

I mean if you want to believe that the world is flat, then go for it. It’s a free world but if you start forcing us to accept your flat Earth belief, then that is something we cannot do regardless of how your feelings may be affected by such rejection, especially since there is evidence to the contrary.

In his earlier show, Humanity, Mr. Gervais actually puts this in context: he saw a man named Bruce Jenner compete in the Olympics. I too watched him on TV competing in the 1976 Montreal Olympics and win gold in the Decathlon. I remember it because I was amazed that a single athlete was competing in ten track and field events! I think it was the first time that I have heard of such an event. I thought the athletes must be supermen to compete in so many events in a single Olympics; and then he decides to transition and be called Caitlyn. Well, good for him. What do we care, right? But what happens to our experience where we watched this man compete and win in the Olympics?

Mr. Gervais then takes it further: what if he starts identifying as a chimpanzee? Will it work? His point is that, at some point, his true nature comes out, or becomes an issue. In the case of Bruce/Caitlyn, Mr. Gervais identifies it as his/her cock.

There’s another comedian who made the same case in another Netflix show, and he, being African American, said what if he identifies as white? Would that he wondered help if he was stopped by the police? I don’t think he received as much grief though, not as much as Dave Chapelle and Mr. Gervais.

Mind you, Mr. Gervais moved on to “questioning” the supernatural joking about how praying for someone with cancer is nice but don’t cancel the chemotherapy. He’s an atheist; and as a Catholic, I wasn’t really offended. He said it: we can believe what we want; he doesn’t care. He just doesn’t subscribe to the same beliefs, and if you push it too far, then that’s ridiculous and he’ll take you to task. Fair game.

So, for me, some may find Mr. Gervais’ comedy offensive but if you make the effort, then you may realize it actually wasn’t and you might enjoy a laugh. And that’s all there is to it.

The old adage goes: you can’t control events but you can control how you react to it. You are capable of responding to it but I hope you think about it too.

Case closed.

Standard

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

I have never believed that any human being was just good or bad. He has and always will be, to me, both. At times, he can be good. Others, bad. He drifts from one to the other based on how he reacts to certain situations. Take Will Smith, for example. Everyone saw him as a “good guy” but then he goes up on stage during the Oscars and slaps Chris Rock. Now, people think the worst of him, and that “good guy” persona was just fiction for the masses. Hollywood glimmer.

Is he good or bad then? I say both. We don’t have to psycho-analyze him to get to that conclusion. Everyone is both good and evil. Even the worst of us can do good. I am sure that for all the horrors that someone like Hitler, Stalin and even Marcos have done, there are those that can, and will say that he was helped by that man, or that the man had been good to him. We are both at the same time. Always.

This is why we struggle through life making decisions every day. We generally just don’t give up and say “well, I’m bad anyway, so I might as well go crazy!” At the same time, imagine yourself eternally trying to be good all the time. It’s exhausting, and the consequences of getting caught doing bad is terrible. Take Ellen DeGeneris for example. She had that “good image” going until the horror stories about how she treated guests and, worse, staff got out. People came out with varying stories: she was good to me; she treated me terribly. Same person. She even made a joke about it how she couldn’t even have a car horn because if someone rudely cuts her in traffic and blasts her horn; people will look and say “Ellen?”

In the end, of course, we know we have to do good and avoid evil. That’s the Catholic thing to do, and I am Catholic: born and raised. But the struggle is real. This is the reason why we invoke the Holy Spirit to come into our lives and lead us because doing good constantly every single day and night is exhausting and we cannot do it without help. Sure, even with constant prayer, we slip and fall but we also get up and carry on. Seeking forgiveness, confessing our shortcomings, and doing penance to keep doing good. That’s it really: don’t be good, do good. Every single day.

My Easter reflection this year.

Standard

It’s a Con

I tried watching Inventing Anna on Netflix but I didn’t get farther than a few minutes of the first episode. I think it already said all that we need to know about Anna. Given that, I don’t suppose this will really be a spoiler for anyone who haven’t seen it and is still thinking of seeing it.

Her story is, I suppose, well known. Girl invents Anna and defrauds people in the process. She is a conman (conperson), like Bernie Madoff. She has a scheme and tries to let it fly. Bernie was more successful there because he actually made it run until the global financial crisis in the late 2000s. Anna was no different. Just less successful.

The series appears to imply that there is more to her. Really? I don’t think so. She is a criminal that got caught. Plain and simple. Could it have been anyone else? Of course but it wasn’t. Like Bernie, she had a plan and tried to make a go of it. Are we suppose to think that she actually thought this was a good idea and feel sorry for her and tell her “the end does not justify the means?” Don’t get me wrong, as a human being, Anna and Bernie should be seen as having that thing we call human dignity. Everyone has it, even the worst of us. Will that change how we judge what they did? Personally, I think not.

I suppose we should also ask how she got away with it and the short answer is because they (the early victims) let her. Her patron whom she milked for around US$400,000, if I remember correctly, did nothing because she says (according to the episode) she was ashamed of having been scammed but she also admitted that she was able to recover her money. With that, she goes silent. Well, there is the alleged gift-threat but she is who she is: someone with connections. Connections that Anna later used. Did the patron warn these connections about Anna? No.

She was also smart. Not Bernie-level smart but capable enough to scam others to a point. She managed to get a financier to listen by accusing him of prejudging her because of her credentials, or lack thereof. How he suddenly disregarded all his concerns, which were in fact valid, just because he was “shamed” was just, sad to say, white privilege in action. She made it look like she had the name and connections and what-not, and all caution just suddenly — whoosh! — out the window. Does that make sense to you? I guess I just don’t know how business is done in the US. She got away with it because they let her. At least Bernie got away with it for as long as he did because people were making money from his scheme…until they didn’t. Anna was all take.

Should I see the other episodes? What for? To see how she tricked other people? Again, what for? Trying to give her a backstory just doesn’t help. It’s all a scam. In fact, the journalist’s manner of getting her story, at least, from the little I saw, was in itself like a scam. Putting pressure on the people she wanted to interview. Going for pain points to get them to talk. Just like a conman.

So, the series may just be a scam to get us to watch it, and in the end, shout “damn, I’ve been scammed!” Maybe I just saved myself from falling for it.

Standard

Pax Americana Redux

That American global leadership has faded is clear. When Donald Trump took over, the United States began to view its allies as mere freeloaders and began to withdraw from various fields, even in the United Nations. It wanted to “charge” Japan and South Korea higher rates for keeping its troops in their countries. The US presence was no longer there to keep the Pax Americana, it was now a business deal.

I have always said that whoever was to take the Presidency of the US after Trump will have a hard time. Indeed, it became much worse because of the Covid-19 pandemic but just on leadership alone, trying to bring back the US into some leadership position has proven difficult to say the least. Joe Biden is proving to be a bit of a Trump that caused one of the biggest failures in international cooperation: Afghanistan. The speed in which the country collapsed could not just be blamed on Biden. I believe it started the day the US under Bush Junior stepped into Afghanistan chasing Osama Bin Laden, and with no other objective but to serve “justice.” Having failed to do so within a year, the US had to justify its continued presence in country and changed its mission objectives but since they weren’t into it, they never got the whole nation building thing going. A clear recipe for disaster. Something they never got to fix until Trump then Biden led the troops, and everyone else including dogs and cats, out. There was no stopping the collapse of the Afghan government.

When the US retreated into itself, the EU, in a way, stepped up. With Angela Merkel of Germany as informal leader, it weathered the worst but Brexit happened and Merkel is now retired. The original triad of the United Kingdom, Germany and France is lost, and without Merkel, France appears feeling a bit more independent.

Now, China is getting aggressive in the South China Sea, and Russia in Ukraine. Will Biden be up to the challenge? Is the US up to it? China has certainly taken huge technological steps (thanks to some stolen secrets from the slumbering US) upgrading its weapons including a hypersonic missile. It knows what it needs and it is building its capabilities. The leadership may not be up there yet if the scrimmage with India is anything to go by but give it a few years and things will definitely change. Xi Jinping is all about power and may be painting himself into a corner with it with nationalist youth who cannot bear the idea of China losing more face not after their Hundred Years of Humiliation. There will be no stepping back for him.

Vladimir Putin of Russia too is all about power. He has no plans of relinquishing it and is making himself a modern Tsar. He already annexed the Crimea, and aligning himself with autocrats the world over. Two centuries back, one might think they were the old monarchs lording it over their serfs. The idea is outdated but the idea is addictive. It may be too addictive that some would not mind spilling blood to preserve it.

Which brings us back to the old US of A. Pax Americana was never perfect. Nothing ever is. Certainly the US used it to its advantage most of the time at the expense of another state but it was what we had, and for a time, it worked. Weakened and isolated by Trump, the road back for Biden has not been easy. In fact, Biden may not be the man to do it. For all his talk, we have not seen the resolve necessary to meet the current situation. Is the pandemic too much of a distraction? Is his age a factor? Whatever it is, Pax Americana, peace under the protection of the US, is no longer viable. We all need to find our own way in this world. Being friends with the US alone is no longer an assurance. The world must now rely on collective action rather than the overwatch of some other nation.

Today, I am in Rome, Italy, and seeing its monuments, reading about its history, and experiencing its culture, I am reminded that it was once the most powerful empire in the world but even Rome fell. In fact, none of the former empires from Akkadia to the British have survived but we have, and we shall all carry on. The challenge has always been how to do it together.

Standard

On Awards

Recently, things got interesting. Maria Ressa, CEO of Rappler, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize together with a Russian, Dmitry Muratov, for their efforts to safeguard freedom of expression. The award was a first for a Filipino and, normally, would be a big thing, and yet F. Sionil Jose, a writer who has been nominated for consideration of the Nobel committee but always passed over, believes she doesn’t deserve the award because he doesn’t believe that the press in the Philippines is not free, or is being censored, and it does not appear to be a personal attack against Ms. Ressa (unlike some of the attacks now made against him after the publication of his views).

To be honest, I don’t recall reading any of the works of Mr. Jose or Ms. Ressa, and, for some reason, I can’t stand listening to Ms. Ressa. Sorry, I never get to finish any news item on TV or cable with her speaking in it. I can read news articles about her but that’s about it. Let me just put that out there.

So, is this just sourgraping by Mr. Jose? Maybe. Maybe not. At least Mr. Jose was aware people might say he is, and explained that, to his mind, freedom of expression, and of the press, is not under attack in the Philippines unlike in the martial law years of Ferdinand Marcos. However, it may be recalled that Rappler has, time and again, been blacklisted by the Philippine government, and Ms. Ressa and Rappler charged and convicted of cyber libel. That conviction is now on appeal.

TV and radio broadcaster ABS-CBN was forced to close when its franchise was not renewed by Congress then peopled by friends and allies of the administration, and the National Telecommunications Commission refused to issue a provisional franchise despite having done so in other cases. It now lives and survives in cable and the Internet. So what? Well, it appears that the assault against Rappler and ABS-CBN began right after the publication of news items critical of the President and his administration. Some say the Philippines is under martial law lite: less brutish maybe but same effect.

It appears that it is in that context that the Nobel committee awarded Ms. Ressa the Peace Prize. In their estimation, Ms. Ressa has checked all the boxes to make one worthy of the Prize. Anyone can dispute this, of course. I myself disagreed with their decision to award one to Barack Obama when he had just began his presidency of the US in 2009 but, in the end, it is for them to give out regardless of how we may feel about it. Mr. Jose can argue against awarding the prize to Ms. Ressa until he turns blue but he cannot substitute his own wisdom for theirs. Unfortunately for him, it doesn’t work that way.

I mean, if it were so, then the Philippines would have won all the titles of Ms. Universe from all the protestations Filipinos raise whenever it loses. No, my friends, it just doesn’t work that way…

Standard

Trumped

When the US was under Trump, Donald J., I always said that whoever was going to be the President after him would have his, or her work cut out for him/her. The Trump era was so self-centered (in more ways than one) that the reputation of the nation as a credible world leader fell to its lowest. His attitude towards his allies was strained at best, and he was all googly-eyed for authoritarians Putin, Xi and Kim, traditionally seen as the “enemy” with whom he always boasted that he had a great relationship. Well, except maybe Xi what with the trade war and all…

Then Joe Biden comes along, beats Trump (regardless of whatever else Trump and his ilk may say), and takes over. Biden proudly declares that the US is back. People seem to be looking around and saying, “explain.” People thought this would mean that the US would be less of an ass, and more a good neighbor. So far, it’s not happening. Case in point: Afghanistan.

To be fair, Biden did not lose Afghanistan. The US never had it to begin with. Bush Jr. sent troops there to find and kill Osama bin Laden, head of the terror group Al Qaeda who was then residing in Afghanistan. He warned the Taliban who were then lording it over the land not to interfere, or else. Well, the Taliban just kicked the Russians, or the then USSR out of Afghanistan, and was not in the mood for another invasion.

Worse, the US couldn’t take out Osama early in the campaign; so, they had to change tack and think of a new justification for their stay. Be that as it may, they did not seem to be motivated by any love for the Afghan people; so, whatever they did was always half-hearted. How can it be any different when the US just generally saw them as the enemy. It was Vietnam all over again. They seem to have that “shoot them all, let God sort them out” mindset.

Then came Obama whose main weakness seems to be foreign affairs. Maybe he couldn’t be blamed for this since he was trying to get the US out of the sub-prime mortgage crisis, and the global financial crisis that we were all in at the time. Note that it was also during his term when the Philippines confronted China in the South China Sea that the US tried to resolve by getting into an agreement with China for a mutual de-escalation, and when the Philippines pulled out, China did not, and fortified itself.

Back in Afghanistan, nothing really happened, and Biden, who was then Vice President, was advocating for an end to the campaign and pull the troops out. Instead, the Surge happened. This was intended to protect the Afghans from militants, and already far from the original program.

Then Trump came along and one of the most bizarre things happened: a US Administration negotiated with the Taliban for the US pullout. What made it more unbelievable was the fact that the then Afghan government was completely left out of the negotiations. Negotiations that had terms like the release of prisoners held by the Afghan government. That’s how “self-centered” the US was at the time of Trump. Everything was transactional. “America First” simply meant whatever was advantageous to the US and everyone else be damned.

Parenthetically, it appears that the Afghan Taliban was not in the list of terrorist organizations of the State Department. However, it appears to be listed with the National Counterterrorism Center. Perhaps the State list is the main basis because, well, the US has a policy of not negotiating with terrorists and if Trump did it, then the Taliban must not be on the list.

Now that Biden was President, he simply implemented what he was advocating before, which, in a way, was now made more certain with Trump’s agreement with the Taliban. What was probably surprising was the speed by which the government collapsed before the pullout was even completed.

Honestly, I think the Afghan government would have folded one way or another. The fact that it was engaging the Taliban in talks in Qatar, if I remember correctly, already showed that it wasn’t on solid footing. The Taliban has been busy improving its position via targeted assassinations, and PR tours over the years that local governments just gave up without a fight in most cases. The US and its allies supposedly trained the Afghan soldiers but without their presence, the Afghans did not have the resolve to stand up against the Taliban.

And this is not the failure of the Biden Administration. It is the failure of the US and its allies from the beginning. Biden was just the guy who had the unenviable task of writing finis to the misadventure that was the longest war they ever fought.

Standard