Letters: Afghan exit is worse than the US departure from Saigon

He blames everyone but himself and claims he had no option because of the agreement that President Trump signed with the Taliban. But the Taliban violated that agreement, so he did not need to follow it.

Biden has reversed almost all his predecessor’s treaties but apparently Afghanistan was the one place where he had no choice but to follow “Trumpian” policies.

In fact, Trump promised a withdrawal based on conditions on the ground, but Biden explicitly rejected a conditions-based withdrawal.

By announcing he was getting out no matter what they did, he gave the Taliban a green light. He insists his hasty exit is not comparable to the US departure from Saigon. That’s absolutely true – it’s very much worse.

Rev Dr John Cameron, St Andrews.

DON’T BLAME THE AFGHAN ARMY

WHAT a disgraceful letter today from Alexander McKay (“Afghan army’s lack of will to fight”, August 18), upholding the statement, by the embarrassment that is the current US President, when he blames everyone but the true culprit for the mess that is Afghanistan.

The USA cut and ran, just like they did in Saigon, and then had the temerity to blame the Afghan army, whom they had told 18 months ago that they were leaving.

And, by the way, best of luck in defeating the Taliban and their like, who have seen off all-comers, including the French and the Russians for over 200 years.

In the past year, the Afghan army has lost more men than the Americans have in the past 10 years.

I think that highlights the true story of just who was putting up a fight on the ground while the US air force flew their nice, shiny, state-of-the-art fighter planes at the safety of 20,000 feet.

Alas, the UK does not come out of this well either, but at least we are not blaming the Afghans – nor did we have any say in the disastrous withdrawal shambles.

James Martin, Glasgow.

WHY NO TARGETING OF HEROIN CROPS?

RON McKay stated (August 15) that 95 per cent of the heroin coming into Europe comes from Afghanistan. It is liable to become more easily transported, and cheaper to buy here, now that the Taliban have control of checkpoints etc.

Never mind who was in control of that country when the UK decided to step into the fray in support of the USA. Why, when their locations must have been identified by satellite images and other intelligence, were the poppy fields not targeted and destroyed?

BRIAN JOHNSTON, TORRANCE.

A MUDDLE THAT CAN BE TRACED BACK TO 2003

COMMENTING on Afghanistan last week, General Lord Dannatt, former Chief of the General Staff, said: “I don’t think anyone would disagree with the UK aiding the US in sweeping away the Taliban who were harbouring al-Qaeda in 2001, and this was done satisfactorily by mid-2002.”

He also said: “A strategic error of near-biblical proportions was made to go into Iraq in 2003.

“There wasn’t a clear plan for what happened next so we really had no option but to muddle through. And of course the muddling through is largely responsible for the ongoing vicious unrest in that part of the Middle East.”

There was no mention of this in what I heard in Wednesday’s Commons debate on the current Afghan debacle, nor in the letter of Doug Maughan (Letters, August 17).

Instead, Mr Maughan treats us to a Cook’s tour of US foreign policy blunders in Iran, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, but ignores Iraq.

I concur with his praise of Harold Wilson’s refusal of President Johnson’ s request to involve Britain in the Vietnam conflict.

Mr Maughan might have added that LBJ was a far more formidable president than George W Bush. What does that tell us about Tony Blair’s all-too-ready acquiescence in dragging us into the Iraq imbroglio?

Its downsides, if Lord Dannatt is heeded, now include the chaotic fall of Kabul to the Taliban.

Thomas McLaughlin, Glasgow.

DELUDED VOICES AT WESTMINSTER

LIKE many, I am distressed at the pictures from Afghanistan, but I am also distressed at pictures from Syria and Yemen at war and further upset seeing countries experiencing floods and fires.

This is capped by a failure back home to deal appropriately with drug deaths, homelessness and poverty.

Wednesday’s Parliamentary debate added to my distress as our MPs seem to be overly interested in demonstrating a delusion as to our role in the world (we are not Empire builders any more); an apparent commitment to the sound of their own voice; and a powerful “anything else” that does not require action on their part.

James Watson, Dunbar.

INDY CAUSE SUNK BY HUGE DEFICIT

IT should not surprise us that Finance Minister Kate Forbes thinks that record deficits “strengthen” the case for independence (“Sturgeon defiant over £36bn black hole in public finances”, August 19).

But any sane person looking at what has happened over the last 18 months will know that it has sunk the case for the rest of this decade at least.

In the 1970s, when Scotland’s economy was relatively poor within the UK, the SNP said this was a case for independence. We could do better ourselves.

In the 1980s, when our economy was better than the UK, the SNP said this was a case for independence. We more than paid our way.

In the 1990s and through to 2014, when we were close to the UK average, this, too, was a case for independence. We could hold our own.

Now that we are well below UK average again, this is a case for independence again. We could do better.

The truth is, for Ms Forbes and her colleagues, everything is a case for independence, even if it changes completely. There are no economic circumstances in which she would not think this.

She says she could do better if she had the levers, but then they don’t want the currency option – an independent currency – that would give them those levers. No other option does.

Economic resilience is the strength of the union, and that is the long and short of it, and the reason why independence support is falling back.

Most Scots are still capable of rational thought, even if our out-of-touch politicians are not.

Victor Clements, Aberfeldy, Perthshire.

DEFICITS CAN LEAD TO FASTER GROWTH

THE Government Expenditure and Revenue Scots (GERS) report is our annual reminder of how badly Scotland fares as part of the UK compared to other similarly-sized independent countries in northern Europe.

Thanks to Boris Johnson’s disastrous handling of Covid, the UK has the highest deficit in Europe, and Scotland faces a double whammy when the full impact of Brexit comes home to roost.

However, those who say that Scotland’s deficit would mean years of austerity should read Stephanie Kelton’s book, The Deficit Myth, which argues that deficits can strengthen economies and lead to faster growth.

Seventy-two per cent of Scotland’s revenue is reserved and 40% of spending is reserved to the UK Government and their political priorities.

If an independent Scotland would bring about the necessary structural changes to the economy and society, then figures in GERS say little about the long-term finances of an independent Scotland.

Oil prices were as low as $18 a barrel in 2020 compared to $70 now but the Norwegian government’s direct income from the petroleum industry was £8.7 billion in 2020 and is estimated to produce £12.5bn in 2021.

As 97% of the electricity Scotland uses comes from renewables, which is way ahead of the UK’s 35%, there is more justification for an independent Scotland to develop the Cambo oil field while transitioning to a carbon-neutral economy.

Mary Thomas, Edinburgh.

PERMANENT INFANTILISM

SIR Tom Devine tells us that independence is an especially continuing threat because it is favoured by many of the young.

At the same time, he and your readers should appreciate two other factors.

The first is that most young people have some barmy ideas, but most of them grow out of it. The second is that as you grow older you realise that although you might want something, you cannot have it unless you can afford it.

Unless a large number of Scots are stuck in a permanent state of infantilism, both of these factors apply to Scottish Nationalism, which is both stupid and unaffordable, as the current GERS figures demonstrate.

Peter A Russell, Glasgow.