Edris Tajik
U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class Ricky Bryant is last in line to board a C-130H2 Hercules aircraft at Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan, for a flight to Forward Operations Base Salearno, Afghanistan, on March 8, 2006.
In early July 2021, Afghanistan’s national forces entered Bagram air base only to find it abandoned. Their American counterparts had left in the middle of the night without a word, walking away from what had been their largest installation in Afghanistan during the war on terror, complete with runways, barracks, and even American chains like Burger King and Pizza Hut. Built by the Soviets during the Cold War, Bagram had grown into a sprawling symbol of U.S. power in the country and in the region.
A month later, the Taliban seized it, along with the rest of Afghanistan.
In the past few weeks, U.S. President Donald Trump has called for retaking the base, citing its strategic location and insisting that “we should have never given it up.” His remarks have prompted many in Washington to voice support for the idea.
A return to Bagram appears attractive, at least on paper. From there, the United States could monitor China, track Russian activity in Central Asia, watch Pakistan’s nuclear threshold, and launch operations against extremists, particularly the Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP). This combination makes Bagram look like an indispensable asset. It is hardly surprising, then, that Trump warned the Taliban that “bad things” could happen if they refused to give back Bagram, and equally unsurprising that many have argued in favor of the idea.
However, while the opportunities appear tempting, the risks for the U.S. are far greater. Despite the common perception that reclaiming Bagram would bolster U.S. interests and security, in reality a U.S. takeover would do the opposite. Retaking the base by force is nearly impossible, and securing it through a deal with the Taliban would not make the United States safer or protect its interests in the region but would instead fuel terrorism and escalate tensions with regional powers. A negotiated return could serve to legitimize the rule of an oppressive regime and the purported benefits rely on hollow promises of access to Afghanistan’s rare earth wealth.
No comments:
Post a Comment