
‘Once again, the west turns away': a new book recounts the fall and rise of the Taliban
'I always want to go back,' said the New Yorker staff writer. 'It gets into your skin. Afghanistan is an incredible place, an incredible society. It's always like time travel to me, and I knew people there that are larger than life. They stay with you … I may return shortly.'
Now 68, Anderson reported from Afghanistan in the 1980s, as Soviet forces lost a 10-year war, and returned in the 2000s, after 9/11 prompted the US to invade. In 2002, Anderson published The Lion's Grave, a well-received book on al-Qaida's assassination of the mujahideen leader Ahmad Shah Massoud two days before the attacks on New York and Washington, and how the US ousted the Taliban.
In the foreword to his new book, Anderson writes of that time: 'The mission of the US and its coalition allies appeared to have been a qualified success. The Taliban had vanished into the hills, as had al-Qaida, and a pliant new pro-western regime had been installed.'
The new book contains reporting on the 20-year US occupation, its chaotic end, and the Taliban's return. So its title is telling: To Lose a War.
One standout chapter comes from 2010. US control had deteriorated. Given no choice, Anderson embedded with a cavalry squadron in Maiwand, in the south. The resulting report, The Day of the Superwadi, is bookended by the deaths of young Americans in IED explosions – an unsparing portrait of military might mired in lethal futility. At the time, Anderson refused to let it be published.
He was 'severely disappointed to see that what had happened in Iraq, which I had witnessed firsthand [the subject of his 2004 book, The Fall of Baghdad] had happened in Afghanistan: the suicide blast walls were up, Kabul itself was behind this strange geometry of walls, westerners were cut off from the Afghans'.
Anderson 'really disliked' embedding. He felt 'incredibly alienated, displaced. It was exactly in the same area I'd reported from back in the late 80s, and yet I was even displaced from that. I left Afghanistan feeling really nonplussed and telling my editor I didn't think I had a story. And he said: 'No, come on. You can write it.' And I did, and I still had this just, dead feeling. I don't know if it's the only story in the New Yorker's history, or one of very few, where an author has asked the editors to kill it, but I did and they honored that. And I said: 'I feel I have to go back, because this story doesn't feel right.' And I did go back.'
In 2011, Anderson embedded again but with Afghan soldiers, too, on the Pakistan border. The result was another powerful essay, Force and Futility.
'I was able to define better what I was seeing,' Anderson said. 'Clearly, I was always a foreigner, an outsider, but I had that experience of being with Afghans.'
More than a decade later, putting together To Lose a War, Anderson finally saw the value of the piece he had killed. He 'realized it had an integrity. It helps fill in the blanks. Ultimately, if I have a critical observation, it's that the United States … I mean all of the west, but really it was always US-led … they never really engaged with Afghanistan. That was what I was feeling. I knew it to be just a terrible thing. [The US effort] was doomed because of that.'
Anderson provides compelling portraits of American soldiers in extremis. Prey to the shifting realities of Afghanistan, Lt Cols Bryan Denny and Stephen Lusky are driven, idealistic and lost.
'They were honorable men,' Anderson said. 'At the point I was seeing them in the war, the chance to win had passed. They never came out and said, 'This is doomed.' They couldn't: they had young, young boys they were trying to keep alive, and they were doing the best they could. But I had this really strong sense that they knew.
'This was their job. It was an honorable thing. And what was interesting, and I guess among some soldiers you do find this, was this sense of idealism. We tend to objectify them: guns and uniforms and so on. But actually the US military includes a hell of a lot of idealists, many more than you tend to meet in your life. They try to believe in what they're doing, because they're dealing with life and death every day. So I try to acknowledge that but also get to the human story.'
Maiwand, where Lt Col Denny served, was home to a physical reminder of Afghanistan's bloody history. About 10 miles (17km) from the US base stood 'a very large, oddly shaped dirt mound … ris[ing] inexplicably up from the flatland'. In 2011, it housed the Afghan national police. It was built thousands of years before, by Alexander the Great.
The Americans stayed for 20. Combat operations ended in 2014, under Barack Obama, but the last troops left in 2021, Joe Biden overseeing a withdrawal initiated by Donald Trump. The result was bloody chaos: 13 Americans and at least 170 Afghans killed by a suicide bomber, the Taliban surging back to power, civilians scrambling to get out.
Anderson helped Afghans escape. He also went back to report, 'with the central question that we all had, which was: 'Is this the old Taliban or the new Taliban?' We didn't really know.
'In the first missives out of there, we saw our colleagues interviewing guys dressed in the usual Kandahar shalwar kameez [traditional tunic and trousers], and also another group of Taliban dressed up in American special forces uniforms,' he continued. 'And we saw that they no longer were prohibited to deal with the graven image, because they had smartphones. So there was this kind of hope that they were different.
'And so most of my foray involved trying to get in front of Taliban officials, whoever I could, and guys in the field, and ascertain where their heads were at and whether they were, in fact, the new warm and fuzzy or the old astringent and cruel Taliban.
'I came away, especially from the leadership, with apprehension. I didn't feel that they dealt with me honestly … whether it was the guy in Bamiyan or the foreign minister designate or the information minister in Kabul. And so that remains unresolved.'
Anderson seems more certain about the fate of Afghan women.
'Pretty much every woman I met who was able to talk with me on their own asked me for help to get out of the country,' Anderson said. 'Not just women. Pretty much everyone I met who was not with the Taliban asked me, whether it was a civil servant, an assistant in the ministries, stewardesses on an airplane.
'I met this group of women I talked to at length, and I followed up with some of them, and they knew what was coming. I don't say it in the book, but I remained in touch with one. She managed to get her family out. First in Mexico, now in the States. I don't know if they're deportable [by Trump] or not.
'One woman said: 'I know what's coming. I know what they're going to do.' And she was right. It's even worse than what one would have expected four years ago. Women have been formally prevented from speaking outside their homes, which are like fortresses. They can't travel without a male companion from their family. I don't even know what they're doing about maternity wards in hospitals now.'
Anderson sees few signs for optimism.
'There are factions within the Taliban,' he said of the perennial struggle for power. 'It's not over. Will this come to blows? It could.'
Among warring parties is an Islamic State offshoot Anderson called 'Frankenstein's Isis, Isis Khorasan, which is just a more extreme version of the Taliban.
'Afghanistan has never gone to a new stage without spilling blood,' he continued. 'There's a few countries like that. This conceit we have in the west, that you can only get to the next threshold of history through peace negotiations or some kind of civic compact … it doesn't happen in the old world. It doesn't happen in this place. The new stages are always reached through bloodshed.
'And I don't know how you break that dynamic, but this group in power now has not broken it, nor will they break it. They're seeking it with new injustices that will need to be redeemed or avenged. And that's just the way it is.
'And once again, the west turns away, because Afghanistan is a place of shame and failure. But it's still there. Just like it was for the Soviets, just like it was for us, and so on back through time.'
To Lose a War is out on Penguin Press on 12 August

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BreakingNews.ie
18 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Trump conveyed Putin's demand for more Ukrainian territory to Zelenskiy, source says
US president Donald Trump said on Saturday Ukraine should make a deal to end the war with Russia because "Russia is a very big power, and they're not", after hosting a summit where Vladimir Putin was reported to have demanded more Ukrainian land. In a subsequent briefing with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, a source familiar with the discussion cited Trump as saying the Russian leader had offered to freeze most front lines if Kyiv's forces ceded all of Donetsk, the industrial region that is one of Moscow's main targets. Advertisement Zelenskiy rejected the demand, the source said. Russia already controls a fifth of Ukraine, including about three-quarters of Donetsk province, which it first entered in 2014. Trump also said he had agreed with Putin that a peace deal should be sought without the prior ceasefire that Ukraine and its European allies, until now with US support, have demanded. Zelenskiy said he would meet Trump in Washington on Monday, while Kyiv's European allies welcomed Trump's efforts but vowed to back Ukraine and tighten sanctions on Russia. The source said European leaders had also been invited to attend Monday's talks. Trump's meeting with Putin in Alaska on Friday, the first US-Russia summit since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, lasted just three hours. Advertisement "It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up," Trump posted on Truth Social. His various comments on the meeting will be welcomed in Moscow, which says it wants a full settlement - not a pause - but that this will be complex because positions are "diametrically opposed". Russia's forces have been gradually advancing for months. The war - the deadliest in Europe for 80 years - has killed or wounded well over a million people from both sides, including thousands of mostly Ukrainian civilians, according to analysts. Before the summit, Trump had said he would not be happy unless a ceasefire was agreed on. But afterwards he said that, after Monday's talks with Zelenskiy, "if all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin". Advertisement Monday's talks will evoke memories of a meeting in the White House Oval Office in February, where Trump and Vice President JD Vance gave Zelenskiy a brutal public dressing-down. Zelenskiy said he was willing to meet Putin. But Putin signalled no movement in Russia's long-held positions on the war, and made no mention in public of meeting Zelenskiy. His aide Yuri Ushakov told the Russian state news agency TASS a three-way summit had not been discussed. In an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity, Trump signalled that he and Putin had discussed land transfers and security guarantees for Ukraine, and had "largely agreed". Advertisement "I think we're pretty close to a deal," he said, adding: "Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they'll say 'no'." Asked what he would advise Zelenskiy to do, Trump said: "Gotta make a deal." "Look, Russia is a very big power, and they're not," he said. Zelenskiy has consistently said he cannot concede territory without changes to Ukraine's constitution, and Kyiv sees Donetsk's "fortress cities" such as Sloviansk and Kramatorsk as a bulwark against Russian advances into even more regions. Advertisement Zelenskiy has also insisted on security guarantees for Kyiv, to deter Russia from invading again in the future. He said he and Trump had discussed "positive signals from the American side" on taking part, and that Ukraine needed a lasting peace, not "just another pause" between Russian invasions. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said the most interesting developments of the summit concerned security guarantees - inspired by the transatlantic NATO alliance's Article 5. "The starting point of the proposal is the definition of a collective security clause that would allow Ukraine to benefit from the support of all its partners, including the USA, ready to take action in case it is attacked again," she said. Putin, who has hitherto opposed involving foreign ground forces, said he agreed with Trump that Ukraine's security must be "ensured". "I would like to hope that the understanding we have reached will allow us to get closer to that goal and open the way to peace in Ukraine," Putin told a briefing where neither leader took questions. "We expect that Kyiv and the European capitals ... will not attempt to disrupt the emerging progress..." For Putin, the very fact of sitting down with Trump represented a victory. He had been ostracised by Western leaders since the start of the war, and just a week earlier had faced a threat of new sanctions from Trump. Trump also spoke to European leaders after returning to Washington. Several stressed the need to keep pressure on Russia. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said an end to the war was closer than ever, thanks to Trump, but added: "... until (Putin) stops his barbaric assault, we will keep tightening the screws on his war machine with even more sanctions." A statement from European leaders said "Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees" and that no limits should be placed on its armed forces or right to seek NATO membership - key Russian demands. Some European politicians and commentators were scathing. "Putin got his red carpet treatment with Trump, while Trump got nothing. As feared: no ceasefire, no peace," Wolfgang Ischinger, former German ambassador to Washington, posted on X. "No real progress – a clear 1-0 for Putin – no new sanctions. For the Ukrainians: nothing. For Europe: deeply disappointing." Both Russia and Ukraine carried out overnight air attacks, a daily occurrence, while fighting raged on the front line. Trump told Fox he would postpone imposing tariffs on China for buying Russian oil, but that he might have to "think about it" in two or three weeks. He ended his remarks after the summit by telling Putin: "We'll speak to you very soon and probably see you again very soon." "Next time in Moscow," a smiling Putin responded in English. Trump said he might "get a little heat on that one" but that he could "possibly see it happening".


Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Trump conveyed Putin's demand for more Ukrainian territory to Zelenskiy, source says
WASHINGTON/MOSCOW/KYIV, Aug 16 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday Ukraine should make a deal to end the war with Russia because "Russia is a very big power, and they're not", after hosting a summit where Vladimir Putin was reported to have demanded more Ukrainian land. In a subsequent briefing with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, a source familiar with the discussion cited Trump as saying the Russian leader had offered to freeze most front lines if Kyiv's forces ceded all of Donetsk, the industrial region that is one of Moscow's main targets. Zelenskiy rejected the demand, the source said. Russia already controls a fifth of Ukraine, including about three-quarters of Donetsk province, which it first entered in 2014. Trump also said he had agreed with Putin that a peace deal should be sought without the prior ceasefire that Ukraine and its European allies, until now with U.S. support, have demanded. Zelenskiy said he would meet Trump in Washington on Monday, while Kyiv's European allies welcomed Trump's efforts but vowed to back Ukraine and tighten sanctions on Russia. The source said European leaders had also been invited to attend Monday's talks. Trump's meeting with Putin in Alaska on Friday, the first U.S.-Russia summit since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, lasted just three hours. "It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up," Trump posted on Truth Social. His various comments on the meeting will be welcomed in Moscow, which says it wants a full settlement - not a pause - but that this will be complex because positions are "diametrically opposed". Russia's forces have been gradually advancing for months. The war - the deadliest in Europe for 80 years - has killed or wounded well over a million people from both sides, including thousands of mostly Ukrainian civilians, according to analysts. Before the summit, Trump had said he would not be happy unless a ceasefire was agreed on. But afterwards he said that, after Monday's talks with Zelenskiy, "if all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin". Monday's talks will evoke memories of a meeting in the White House Oval Office in February, where Trump and Vice President JD Vance gave Zelenskiy a brutal public dressing-down. Zelenskiy said he was willing to meet Putin. But Putin signalled no movement in Russia's long-held positions on the war, and made no mention in public of meeting Zelenskiy. His aide Yuri Ushakov told the Russian state news agency TASS a three-way summit had not been discussed. In an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity, Trump signalled that he and Putin had discussed land transfers and security guarantees for Ukraine, and had "largely agreed". "I think we're pretty close to a deal," he said, adding: "Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they'll say 'no'." Asked what he would advise Zelenskiy to do, Trump said: "Gotta make a deal." "Look, Russia is a very big power, and they're not," he added. Zelenskiy has consistently said he cannot concede territory without changes to Ukraine's constitution, and Kyiv sees Donetsk's "fortress cities" such as Sloviansk and Kramatorsk as a bulwark against Russian advances into even more regions. Zelenskiy has also insisted on security guarantees for Kyiv, to deter Russia from invading again in the future. He said he and Trump had discussed "positive signals from the American side" on taking part, and that Ukraine needed a lasting peace, not "just another pause" between Russian invasions. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said the most interesting developments of the summit concerned security guarantees - inspired by the transatlantic NATO alliance's Article 5. "The starting point of the proposal is the definition of a collective security clause that would allow Ukraine to benefit from the support of all its partners, including the USA, ready to take action in case it is attacked again," she said. Putin, who has hitherto opposed involving foreign ground forces, said he agreed with Trump that Ukraine's security must be "ensured". "I would like to hope that the understanding we have reached will allow us to get closer to that goal and open the way to peace in Ukraine," Putin told a briefing where neither leader took questions. "We expect that Kyiv and the European capitals ... will not attempt to disrupt the emerging progress..." For Putin, the very fact of sitting down with Trump represented a victory. He had been ostracised by Western leaders since the start of the war, and just a week earlier had faced a threat of new sanctions from Trump. Trump also spoke to European leaders after returning to Washington. Several stressed the need to keep pressure on Russia. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said an end to the war was closer than ever, thanks to Trump, but added: "... until (Putin) stops his barbaric assault, we will keep tightening the screws on his war machine with even more sanctions." A statement from European leaders said "Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees" and that no limits should be placed on its armed forces or right to seek NATO membership - key Russian demands. Some European politicians and commentators were scathing. "Putin got his red carpet treatment with Trump, while Trump got nothing. As feared: no ceasefire, no peace," Wolfgang Ischinger, former German ambassador to Washington, posted on X. "No real progress – a clear 1-0 for Putin – no new sanctions. For the Ukrainians: nothing. For Europe: deeply disappointing." Both Russia and Ukraine carried out overnight air attacks, a daily occurrence, while fighting raged on the front line. Trump told Fox he would postpone imposing tariffs on China for buying Russian oil, but that he might have to "think about it" in two or three weeks. He ended his remarks after the summit by telling Putin: "We'll speak to you very soon and probably see you again very soon." "Next time in Moscow," a smiling Putin responded in English. Trump said he might "get a little heat on that one" but that he could "possibly see it happening".


BreakingNews.ie
an hour ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Baby girl killed with her parents in Gaza airstrike
An Israeli airstrike in Gaza killed a baby girl and her parents on Saturday, hospital officials and witnesses said, while families of hostages called for a 'nationwide day of stoppage' in Israel to express growing frustration over 22 months of war. The baby's body, wrapped in blue, was placed on those of her parents as Palestinians prayed over them. Motasem al-Batta, his wife and the child were believed to have been killed in their tent in the crowded Muwasi area. Advertisement 'Two and a half months, what has she done?' neighbour Fathi Shubeir said. 'They are civilians in an area designated safe.' Israel's military said it is dismantling Hamas's military capabilities and takes precautions not to harm civilians. It said it could not comment on the strike without more details. A Palestinian man carries the body of his seven-year-old nephew who, according to the family, was killed in an Israeli army airstrike on Friday night (Jehad Alshrafi/AP) Muwasi is one of the heavily populated areas in Gaza where Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said Israel plans to widen its coming military offensive. The mobilisation of forces is expected to take weeks, and Israel may be using the threat to pressure Hamas into releasing more hostages taken in its October 7 2023 attack that sparked the war. Advertisement Families of hostages fear the coming offensive further endangers the 50 hostages remaining in Gaza, just 20 of them thought to be alive. They and other Israelis were horrified by the recent release of videos showing emaciated hostages, speaking under duress, pleading for help and food. A group representing the families has urged Israelis onto the streets on Sunday. 'Across the country, hundreds of citizen-led initiatives will pause daily life and join the most just and moral struggle: the struggle to bring all 50 hostages home,' it said in a statement. Advertisement Palestinian and Israeli activists took part in a protest against the killing of journalists in Gaza as they gathered in the West Bank town of Beit Jala on Friday (Mahmoud Illean/AP) The United Nations is warning that levels of starvation and malnutrition in Gaza are at their highest since the war began. Palestinians are drinking contaminated water as diseases spread, while some Israeli leaders continue to talk openly about the mass relocation of people from Gaza. Another 11 malnutrition-related deaths occurred in Gaza over the past 24 hours, the territory's health ministry said on Saturday, with one child among them. That brings malnutrition-related deaths during the war to 251. The UN and partners say getting aid into the territory of more than two million people, and then on to distribution points, remains highly challenging with Israeli restrictions and pressure from crowds of hungry Palestinians. The UN human rights office says at least 1,760 people were killed while seeking aid between May 27 and Wednesday. Advertisement It says 766 were killed along routes of supply convoys and 994 in the vicinity of 'non-UN militarised sites', a reference to the Israeli-backed and US-supported Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which since May has been the primary distributor of aid in Gaza. The Hamas-led attack in 2023 killed around 1,200 people in Israel. Israel's retaliatory offensive has killed 61,897 people in Gaza, according to the health ministry, which does not specify how many were fighters or civilians but says around half were women and children. The ministry is part of the Hamas-run government and staffed by medical professionals. The UN and independent experts consider it the most reliable source on casualties. Israel disputes its figures but has not provided its own.