Alerts

The U.S. Withdrawal from Afghanistan: Will International Terrorism Now Be Empowered or Defeated?

Al-Qaeda will probably come back
Share this
U.S. Air Force plane leaving Afghanistan
(Screenshot: Twitter/@sudhirchaudhary)

Table of Contents

Vol. 21, No. 15

  • Defending his withdrawal decision, President Joe Biden claimed that al-Qaeda was “gone” from Afghanistan. Yet at the same time, the American and British security establishments spoke of al-Qaeda’s continued presence in the country.
  • A UN report to the Security Council, submitted in June 2021, stated that “despite expectations for a reduction in violence, 2020 (the year of the U.S.-Taliban agreement on withdrawal) emerged as the most violent year ever recorded by the United Nations in Afghanistan.
  • A common Western assumption is the hope that withdrawal would reduce the hostility of the Taliban and their allies. But this is a misinterpretation of what motivated jihadist groups. In the Middle East, withdrawals strengthen their motivation.
  • The Israeli experience was identical: when Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza, Hamas won the Palestinian elections and took over Gaza from Fatah. Rocket attacks on Israel, after the Gaza withdrawal, increased by 500%.
  • To defeat the jihadist forces it was necessary to accompany withdrawal with actions that left no doubt that what happened was a defeat for them.
  • But it does not seem that President Biden will pursue such a strategy, leaving the West with an empowered al-Qaeda to fight against in the years ahead.

In a stunning statement last Friday in which he defended his withdrawal decision, President Joe Biden claimed that al-Qaeda was “gone” from Afghanistan. In other words, since the U.S. had set the goal of preventing Afghanistan from again becoming a platform for al-Qaeda to strike at the U.S. and this goal had been reached, it was reasoned, then, that all American forces could be safely withdrawn. The glaring problem was that Biden did not have the backing of the American security establishment.

An hour after Biden spoke, the Defense Department Press Secretary, John Kirby, stated, “We know al-Qaeda is a presence in Afghanistan.” A Defense Department report to Congress issued on August 17 plainly stated, “The Taliban continued to maintain its relationship with al-Qaeda, providing safe haven for the terrorist group in Afghanistan.” Roughly, at the same time, the Taliban released 5,000 prisoners from Bagram air base, which included al-Qaeda and ISIS operatives. In short, the Taliban and al-Qaeda were tightly linked.

There was no global consensus on this question either within what had been the Western alliance. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson warned that Western states needed to unite in order to prevent Afghanistan from lapsing back and becoming again a sanctuary for international terrorist organizations. There were regular reports from the UN Security Council that looked at this question as well. In the twelfth report of its monitoring team, it is established that “a significant part of the leadership of al-Qaeda resides in the Afghanistan and Pakistan border region.”

The al-Qaeda presence was not confined to the borders alone. The report continues: “Large numbers of al-Qaeda fighters and other foreign extremist elements aligned with the Taliban are located in various parts of Afghanistan.” It also makes clear that these were not peripheral elements of al-Qaeda but rather al-Qaeda’s “core leadership.”

Britain’s defense minister, Ben Wallace, sounded very different from President Biden as well. He asserts that “al-Qaeda will probably come back.” He makes reference to a UN report that states al-Qaeda is present in 15 of Afghanistan’s provinces. He also is aware of the fact that many in the West see Afghanistan as a “failed state,” and that failed states have a propensity to become headquarters for terrorist groups.

The director of Britain’s domestic intelligence agency, MI5, warned in July that al-Qaeda would seek to re-establish its training facilities in Afghanistan if the opportunity opened up. Allies of German Chancellor Angela Merkel in the Bundestag condemned Biden’s decision to rapidly withdraw from Afghanistan.

So what was motivating the new U.S. position to accelerate the American military withdrawal? Many in Washington made reference to the agreement between the Taliban and the Trump administration from February 2020 on the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Afghanistan.

Part Two of that agreement contained a commitment by the Taliban “to prevent any group or individual, including al-Qaeda, from using the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States or its allies.” However, the agreement made the withdrawal dependent upon the implementation by the Taliban of its commitment to not allow al-Qaeda to use Afghan territory against American forces.

There also was an underlying assumption that was common in the West. Withdrawal, it was hoped, would reduce the hostility of the Taliban and their allies. But this was a misinterpretation of what motivated jihadist groups. Al-Qaeda formally came into existence after the Soviet Union pulled out from Afghanistan and they felt vindicated. Withdrawals across the Middle East strengthened the motivation of these groups. Indeed, the UN report to the Security Council, submitted in June 2021, plainly stated that “despite expectations for reduction in violence, 2020 (the year of the U.S.-Taliban agreement on withdrawal) emerged as the most violent year ever recorded by the United Nations in Afghanistan.

The Israeli experience was identical: when the IDF unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip, in accordance with the Disengagement plan of the Israeli government, Hamas won the Palestinian elections and took over the Gaza Strip from Fatah. Rocket attacks on Israel, after the Gaza withdrawal, increased by 500%. To defeat the jihadist forces it was necessary to accompany withdrawal with actions that left no doubt that what happened was a defeat for them. But it does not seem that President Biden will pursue such a strategy, leaving the West with an empowered al-Qaeda to fight against in the years ahead.

Amb. Dore Gold

Ambassador Dore Gold served as President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs from 2000 to 2022. From June 2015 until October 2016 he served as Director-General of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Previously he served as Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s Ambassador to the UN (1997-1999), and as an advisor to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
Share this

Invest in JCFA

Subscribe to Daily Alert

The Daily Alert – Israel news digest appears every Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday.

Related Items

Stay Informed, Always

Get the latest news, insights, and updates directly in your inbox—be the first to know!

Subscribe to Jerusalem Issue Briefs
The Daily Alert – Israel news digest appears every Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday.

Notifications

The Jerusalem Center
The Failures of French Diplomacy in Lebanon

Does Macron have such a short memory that he can forget the presence of Yasser Arafat and his terrorists in Beirut? Khomeini’s hateful propaganda in Neauphle-le-Château, near Paris?

12:07pm
The Jerusalem Center
This is How Hamas Opened a Front in Europe

Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood identified Europe’s weak point. In a naivety mixed with stupidity, the continent’s leaders do not understand the principles of fundamentalist Islam – and we are paying the price for it. 

12:06pm
The Jerusalem Center
The Digital Panopticon: How Iran’s Central Bank Aims for Financial Legitimacy and Absolute State Control

The Digital Rial transitions the financial landscape from one where transactions can occasionally be tracked to one where they are always monitored, always recorded, and always subject to state intervention.

12:05pm
The Jerusalem Center
Why Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Is “Slow-Walking” Normalization With Israel

Trump seeks a historic achievement, but Riyadh is not willing to pay the price without a genuine settlement ensuring the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

12:05pm
The Jerusalem Center
Between Hitler and Hamas: The Dangers of Appeasement and Genocidal Aggression
The past is never far away. The study of Hitler’s “whole method of political and military undermining” and today’s methods of Hamas raises an open question.
10:32am
The Jerusalem Center
Mamdani’s Triumph Is Likely to Embolden Leftists in the West
For European observers, in particular, the success of the Red-Green alliance in the New York City mayoral race should be a wake-up call.
 
10:31am
The Jerusalem Center
Christian Zionists: Civilization’s Defense Force in an Era of Existential Threat

The 700 million Christian Zionists worldwide constitute a force multiplier for Israel’s international security and diplomatic standing, and a powerful counterweight to delegitimization and defamation campaigns targeting the Jewish state.

10:30am
The Jerusalem Center
Tehran Under Pressure: Nuclear Escalation, Economic Strain, and a Deepening Crisis of Confidence

The Iranian leadership is struggling to stabilize its grip both internally and externally.

10:28am
The Jerusalem Center
The Black-Market Drain: How Illegal Crypto Mining Cripples Iran’s Electricity and Economy

The illegal crypto mining phenomenon in Iran is not merely a few isolated cases of law-breaking; it is an organized, large-scale black market enabled by highly subsidized energy prices.

10:26am
The Jerusalem Center
The Gaza Flotilla Is a Fraud

Far from a humanitarian mission, the latest 70-vessel spectacle on its way to Gaza from Italy is a costly act of political theater @FiammaNirenste1 @JNS_org

11:28am
The Jerusalem Center
The Assassination of Abu Obeida – Why Is Hamas Remaining Silent?

Senior Israeli security officials note that such silence is not new; Hamas often delays its statements following targeted Israeli assassinations, raising questions whether this stems from attempts to verify the information or from a deliberate strategy of ambiguity https://x.com/jerusalemcenter

11:25am
The Jerusalem Center
The Impact of Radical Legal Ideology: From the Classroom to the International Forum

Massive funding of Critical Legal Studies-style academic and extracurricular programs promotes anti-Western ideas and undermines international community institutions and legal conventions https://x.com/jerusalemcenter

11:23am

Close