US-Afghanistan connection

Los Angeles Times: After 13 years of war, more than 2,300 dead U.S. troops and the replacement of the Taliban regime with an elected government, the United States has declared a formal end to its combat mission in Afghanistan. That’s an important symbolic marker, but no one should interpret the declaration as the end of anything.

Some 10,800 U.S. troops remain behind to train and support the still-young Afghan military. Surviving Taliban forces have been mounting fresh attacks, making it clear that the fighting will continue. The best that can be hoped for is that the Afghans take over the job of defending themselves and their government, allowing the U.S. presence to diminish.

Unfortunately, we saw in Iraq what can happen when a new government - and its new military - isn’t quite ready to stand on its own legs. Pro-Shiite policies by then-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki exacerbated sectarian tensions with the nation’s Sunni population, fanning mistrust and weakening the central government’s authority. The Iraqi military then collapsed - in some cases, turned tail - as the Islamic State insurgency expanded from the Syrian civil war into Sunni-heavy northwestern Iraq.

Lesson learned, we hope. The U.S. is right to take precautions, including leaving behind a small force, to avoid a similar failure in Afghanistan, where, if anything, the history and regional divisions pose an even bigger challenge than in Iraq.