You got me going with your "Start from the end" Kissinger approach. You have to. Many years ago I came up with a definition of a U.S. victory in Iraq. It would mean having in Iraq a relatively secular, anti-extremist, anti-terrorist regime which would be - if not “pro” - then, at least, not too strongly anti-American.
Did this happen? No. The introduction of “democracy” - one person, one vote - was used by the Shia majority as an opportunity to take power from the Sunni minority - and to displace them, and make them an even smaller minority. What followed was a civil war - and later ISIS.
Afghanistan was more complicated. I was unable even to imagine what would constitute victory. It was a war that should not have happened. The purpose was to throw out al Qaeda out of the country. That was accomplished very fast. After that, the mission drifted towards nation building - and ultimately, defeat - and a virtual capitulation.
What was the definition of victory in Libya and Syria? — WTF knows…. Both campaigns ended up being a mess.
How could we define victory in Ukraine? Imo, a realistic definition would be - 1) avoiding a unclear war 2) peace breaking out in the region, based on direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, and 3) Ukraine remaining independent - and NATO agreeing to accept limits on its expansion (to the displeasure of the One Worlders and Brzezinski ideologues) 4) better relations with Russia, with trust rebuilding over the following years. Hopefully, a nuke limitation agreement between the US, Russia and China. Re-confirmation of nuclear non-proliferation principles. |
