I recently listened to an excellent podcast by Ezra Klein on the withdrawal from Afghanistan. He discusses with Robert Wright, the author of Nonzero – a newsletter that examines the assumptions that drive America’s foreign policy – our policy failures in Afghanistan over the past 20 years after an investment of 2 trillion dollars and deaths of over 200,000 people. Their discussion delves into the deep history of American involvement in Afghanistan, reveals the unacknowledged limits of our knowledge, and exposes the hollowness of our justifications. They conclude that the real tragedy in this ill-fated war is the profound misjudgments about our power, our limits, and the effectiveness of occupations. They implore their listeners to remain ever alert to the harms of being present where we don’t belong, where we believe we have moral authority, and when we think a military solution will work.
To me, the three fatal flaws in this latest military failure are the lack of humility, the lack of inquiry, and the lack of empathy. Afghanistan is not an isolated incident. Most marches of folly have those flaws in common. In this post, I will discuss the universal dangers of all three of these traits.
Humility: When you believe you are uniquely capable of bending the arc of history to your will, you have already set yourself up to fail. Thomas Merton suggests that “Pride makes us artificial and humility makes us real.” Rick Warren adds that “Humility is not thinking less of yourself, it’s thinking of yourself less.”
When I coach leaders, the first thing I look and listen for are signs of arrogance and hubris. The most effective leaders I know are self-effacing and can laugh at themselves. They don’t pretend that they have all the answers or that they have the best strategies for every situation.
Humility means being humble. It is the quality of having a modest opinion of your own importance, rank, or pedigree. Humility is a great antidote to over-confidence, self-aggrandizement, and mission creep.
The question we need to ask is, “What would have happened if we had more modest ambitions and a more humble attitude about our ability to impose our will?”
Inquiry: Inquiring minds are curious and seek to get to the root causes of problems. In the Art of War, Sun Tzu that “war is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected.” Will Durant adds that “Inquiry is fatal to certainty.” That seems like a good thing to me. When we are too certain about a particular belief or action, we don’t question assumptions or challenge points of view or raise doubts about fantasy-based outcomes.
To inquire means requesting information from multiple sources, investigating all the pros and cons of a particular decision, examining facts, asking questions, and seeking rigorous analysis. It requires an open mind and the willingness to learn. A thorough inquiry welcomes conflicting points of view and encourages provocative questions.
The questions we need to ask are, “What are the historical and cultural norms of the country with which we are engaging? How have the people responded to previous occupations? What are the social, political, religious, environmental and economic factors that could contribute to our success or failure?
Empathy: Empathic people demonstrate understanding about how the person or country with whom they are dealing thinks and feels. According to Samantha Power, “All advocacy is, at its core, an exercise in empathy.” Sue Monk Kidd adds, “Empathy is the most mysterious transaction that the human soul can have, and it’s accessible to all of us, but we have to give ourselves the opportunity to identify, to plunge ourselves in a story where we see the world from the bottom up or through another’s eyes or heart.”
I learned about the lack of empathy in Vietnam and, as a result of that experience, have studied the skill for the past 50 years. What I have noticed is that the practice is in short supply. If you don’t believe me, think about the last time someone accurately demonstrated understanding of how you feel and what’s most important to you – not just once, but twice or three times in succession. My hunch, and my experience, is that you will be surprised. Hopefully, the observation won’t diminish your relationships.
Empathy is the ability to understand what another person is experiencing from their frame of reference. It is the capacity and capability to place oneself in another’s position. An empathic person is not only able to identify specifically the category of feeling (Up, Down, Anger, Fear, or Confusion) but also the level of intensity (High, Medium or Low). Most people have a limited repertoire of responses to respond to the specific experience of the people with whom they interact. The response repertoire does not usually extend beyond: frustrated, concerned, worried, pleased, disappointed, scared, or torn. To assess your own repertoire, ask yourself: What are five high intensity fear feelings? What are five low intensity down feelings?
I’m personalizing this point because it manifests on organizational and national levels. If we can’t understand why Afghanistan people are furious to be occupied by foreign forces and disgusted by the corruption of governmental officials, how are we going to be able to make wise decisions on how to help.
The questions we need to ask are: How are people going to feel about an invasion and civilian casualties? What do the people from this country value dearly – what’s most important to them? How strongly do people feel about self-determination?
It seems to me that in all the wars we have fought in, or contributed to, over the past seven decades: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, etc., there has been a dreadful absence of humility, inquiry, and empathy. In many of these cases our money, military, and mostly men (our presence) have not only resulted in an absence of victory but also left our “beneficiaries” worse off than before we started. Will we ever learn?
To focus on the mistakes or shortcomings of the Afghanistan withdrawal is to draw attention away from the root causes of this 20 year (or should I say 70 year) failure in foreign policy. Clearly, there are legitimate questions that need to be raised about whether or not it was the best decision to withdraw all troops. After all, we still have over 24,000 military personnel in South Korea after more than 60 years of involvement. And, it seems to me, the visa process could definitely have been improved. I have no idea what the factors were that went into the decision to withdraw by the end of August. After 20 years, I’m not sure how you extricate hundreds of thousands of people without experiencing chaos and avoiding casualties.
What I do know is that, as a country, we could benefit from genuine humility, deep inquiry, and compassionate empathy. Clearly, we are not asking the right questions. I’m hoping we have finally learned the limits of our knowledge, moral authority, and power. May it be so.
Also published on Medium.
Humility is the cornerstone of the AA program, and certainly something I need to work on continuously. I am quite pessimistic as to “we “ ever learning “our” limits, but I appreciate your imploring that our “leaders” do so. May it be so indeed!