Once again, we wake up to the horrors of an event perpetrated from the nemesis of governments’ negligence. Whatever the reality of the conflicts in error of the war in Afghanistan, the tragedy of public panic need not have occurred. Even if the intelligence on the ground was incomprehensibly inadequate, the plan ultimately implemented by U.S. policy should have been the contingent plan. In other words, why not leave 3,000 troops in security of the exit process with the last troop leaving taking the U.S. flag with them.
The debate, criticism, and analysis of the fall of Kabul will reverberate for a decade.
The question of how the catastrophe happened from a U.S. viewpoint is not as important as the question of why it happened from an Afghanistan viewpoint. Why would a nation of 38 million people allow an unelected militia of 75,000 insurgents dictate rules of existence to their society? The U.S. military had trained and equipped an army of 300,000 Afghan soldiers. They were armed with modern technological weapons including weaponized drones. The fact that the Taliban literally swept the country in less than a week is a greater testimony to an Afghan identity crisis rather than a will to fight.
Afghanistan never took ownership of American values.
Kingdoms and nations have a long history of imposing their societal structure on other nations. In ancient times, conquest was the prevalent method. The defeated nation’s citizens were taken into slavery, serfdom, or marriage. Their art was defaced and their culture erased. Conquered civilizations were lost to time only to be rediscovered by archaeologists centuries later.
Relatively in more recent history, colonialization was the protocol of expansion. Colonial powers incorporated their system of structure and order on subservient colonies. Raw resources were extracted from the colonies with added value applied by industrial manufacturing in the mother country. Systems and controls put in place in some instances lasted hundreds of years. Most colonies ultimately became independent. Yet, the systems of government and rule of law was now integral to the colony’s way of life. India today operates under an English magistrate system.
The United States, by virtue of advocating freedom, rejects both of the aforementioned historical regimens. America’s experience in culture transformation is limited. U.S. foreign policy begins with the establishment of a constitution and rule of law. The apparent belief is that the constitution will not only control government abuse, but guide societal morality. This was the case result with Japan after World War II.
The soul of a nation drives the true heartbeat of determinative national purpose. The United States was founded on its Declaration of Independence. The Constitution was not written for another eleven years. The soul of America is the declaration ‘that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’ The Constitution is the implementing document that provides for the government function in protection of that national purpose.
Afghanistan was given structure, resources, and guidelines for rule of law. Yet, this new order did not emanate from the heart of their natural soul.
What then can America do to promote freedom, provide security, and advance cooperative civilization in an unsettled world in historical systemic conflict?
Perhaps America should examine the principles of its identity reflective of its own national soul. As a people, the United States has wandered inexplicably from its core compendium of inalienable rights. Somehow, through the governing theories of “separation of church and state,” America has abandoned the term ‘inalienable’ to eliminate God and to default in the resident vacuum to recognizing government as the benefactor of rights. If America wants to influence a country for the greater good of the world, it should start with the essence of its own soul, not the work of elitist scholars.
Giving guidance to a client state on matters of morality should include the implementation of principles as guidelines. It is not that Afghanistan was destined to be Christian, even though Christianity should have been tolerated by the doctrine of “separation of church and state.” Freedom and inalienable rights granted by God to all should be the operative mandate. Such rights should be extended to women and children. Turkey is a country of Islamic culture. However, it exemplifies an open society with universal rights basically acceptable to the West. They are a member of NATO. They have assimilated into the order of world governments.
A nation without principles based upon inalienable rights is a nation without a soul incapable of heartfelt compassion. A constitution written without the imprimatur of a national soul is nothing but words on paper. The former Soviet Union had, in fact, a constitution that declared all citizens were equal, regardless of race, creed, color or sex. No Soviet lawyer had confidence in that provision for a client’s defense. No Soviet judge was committed to enforcing individual rights. Their constitution was hollow based on an impersonal national soul.
The United States must now reexamine its policies and efforts for nation-state building. This may possibly require exporting spiritual moral principles that have a more lasting impact than legalistic principles designed to force cultural realignment without connection to a spiritual national soul.
Without a vision, the people will perish. Without a vision based on a spiritual national soul, the people are doomed to dysfunction. Without moral leadership pursuant to a vision, the people will live in fear. Without a spiritual national soul based on freedom and leaders committed to the call, the people will become slaves of the system.
The United States has the standing to lead another country in search of a national soul. America must first be certain that it is honoring the heart and call of its own soul. My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe. What do you believe?