U.S.-Backed Militias' Role in Afghanistan's Downfall: A Deeper Look

In the years leading up to the Taliban's takeover of Afghanistan, U.S. military policies inadvertently supported the rise of local militias, complicating the fight against the Taliban and challenging conventional narratives about blame among U.S. leaders.

In a recent investigation, it was unveiled that the U.S. military's decision to establish private militias in Afghanistan might have set the stage for the Taliban's eventual victory. As the Taliban advanced, an American officer appealed to local Afghan leaders for support, only to face hesitation from them regarding the effectiveness of training private militias.

Back in the summer of 2009, faced with slow recruitment of police officers, U.S. forces considered an untraditional strategy: mobilizing local militias. Although the locals expressed skepticism about this approach, fearing that these groups could become a greater menace than the Taliban, the desperation of the situation drove some to act. A warlord named Mohammad Omar emerged from the crowd, rallying for a fight against the Taliban.

This gathering, taking place in Kunduz Province, though not documented in official accounts, marked a significant turning point in the conflict. Many residents suggest that the U.S. underappreciated how this decision would breed instability and contribute to the chaos that followed.

While former President Trump pointed fingers at President Biden for the chaotic withdrawal, and Biden, in turn, blamed the Afghan military for its collapse, this investigation brings attention to an often-overlooked factor in the downfall of the Afghan government and the resurgence of the Taliban: the hasty creation of militias under U.S. auspices which ultimately backfired.

As Afghanistan navigated its complex civil war landscape, the American-led military efforts inadvertently contributed to empowering local forces that lacked proper oversight and accountability. The path that led to the Taliban's takeover thus reflects a tangled narrative of foreign intervention and local realities, raising critical questions about the lessons to be learned from such geopolitical endeavors.