The argument that a delay in the US
entering a potential Iran war is due to a loss of confidence post-withdrawal
from Afghanistan is a compelling one. There are strong arguments supporting
this link.
The final days of the US withdrawal
from Afghanistan, including the chaotic evacuation from Kabul airport were
widely criticized. This chaotic imagery, including scenes of desperation and
the Abbey Gate attack, led many to question the planning and execution
capabilities of the US. The swift Taliban takeover and the perceived
abandonment of Afghan allies were seen as a blow to American prestige and
credibility on the world stage. Adversaries like Russia, China and Iran viewed
this as a sign of US weakness and an emboldening factor for their own actions.
There was also an impact of US
withdrawal from Afghanistan on allies. Some allies expressed concerns about the
manner of the withdrawal, questioning the reliability of US commitments. This
could complicate future coalition operations and affect the willingness of
partners to cooperate.
All of this can change if US
navigates Iran war successfully.
US entering Israel-Iran conflict, if
it were to occur, would likely differ significantly from the Afghanistan
experience in terms of its potential duration and nature. There are key
differences from Afghanistan that could limit its duration in Iran.
In Afghanistan, the US fought an
insurgency (the Taliban) that was deeply embedded in the population, had strong
ideological roots, and could melt away and reappear. It was a non-state actor
with a diffuse structure. Nation-building was a core, long-term objective. But
Iran is a nation with a conventional military. A conflict with Iran would
involve conventional military engagements, air superiority, naval operations
and targeted strikes. While Iran has proxies, the primary adversary is a state
with defined borders and infrastructure.
In Iran, American focus would more
likely be on specific objectives like dismantling its nuclear program,
deterring regional aggression, or degrading its military capabilities. This
limited objective would inherently reduce the scope for a long-term occupation.
Afghanistan's rugged, landlocked
mountains aided insurgency, prolonging conventional ops. Iran's diverse terrain
- deserts, coasts, and cities - offers varied tactical options allowing for
more decisive conventional engagements, unlike Afghanistan.
Post-9/11 mission in Afghanistan
evolved from dismantling Al-Qaeda/Taliban to
nation-building/counter-insurgency, leading to a two-decade presence. Iran
objectives would be narrower: preventing nukes, deterring attacks, ensuring
navigation, or responding to provocations.
Bottom line:
A direct, decades-long occupation
like Afghanistan is unlikely in an Iran conflict due to fundamental structural
and strategic differences. A successful US campaign in the Israel-Iran war
could significantly rebuild confidence in American global leadership. Such an
outcome could help dispel negative perceptions from the Afghanistan withdrawal
and reassure allies of the USA's reliability. Ultimately, the potential
benefits of a decisive intervention could outweigh the risks.
- Rahul
