The Taliban’s triumphant march into Kabul seven days ago was the result of long-term planning and rank opportunism.
For weeks, Western leaders had insisted it just wouldn’t happen; in one heated briefing with journalists, the Chief of the Defence Staff, General Sir Nicholas Carter, even attacked the media for being unpatriotic and claimed that NATO forces had scored a strategic victory.
But for 72 hours over an August weekend, and with many senior officials away on their summer holidays, the world watched wide-eyed as the Taliban made their way into the central squares of city after city and finally through the gates of Kabul itself.
So how did this happen? How did 20 years of hard fighting, close mentoring, and vast financial investment unravel in only 11 days?
How did the “greatest military force ever assembled”, as George W Bush called it, not manage to defeat a group of mere “country boys”, as Gen Carter described them?
For this article, Sky News has spoken to a series of serving and retired military commanders, intelligence officials, and politicians. Between them they have decades of experience in Afghanistan. They tell a story of abandonment that has “left a stain on the West”, political short-sightedness that “demonstrates an ignorance of history and culture” and a future that is “uncertain, unpredictable, and will almost certainly come back to bite”.
From The White House briefing room in Washington DC, president Donald Trump described American forces as “the greatest fighters in the world”, but said “it’s time, after all these years, to bring our people home”.
Around the same time in Kabul, his defense secretary Mark Esper admitted “the road ahead won’t be easy”, while Afghanistan’s then-president Ashraf Ghani, standing next to the American but not a part of the talks, said his government was “ready to negotiate with the Taliban”.
From NATO to the UN, Berlin to London, the deal was welcomed with caution. Although many failed to share the American optimism, most knew the day had been long coming and accepted it.
“We went in together and we will leave together,” the alliance’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said at the time.
Britain’s defence secretary, initially a cautious supporter of the deal, has since described it as “rotten”, but too late. At the time Britain and other allies kept on message, afraid of angering Washington. On reflection, perhaps they should have spoken out sooner.
After the deaths of 2,400 US troops, 457 British troops and more than 60,000 Afghans, this was the beginning of the end – just not how anyone expected it.
Image: British troops departed upon the end of operations in Helmand in October 2014, although a small number remained
It isn’t possible to point to a precise moment when everything started to unravel. Instead a series of events culminated over a relatively short period that, in the words of a military commander with knowledge of the situation, “sapped the confidence of the Afghan forces and passed the initiative to the enemy”.
The departure of civilian contractors, many of them ex-military, removed the network of logistical and engineering support so vital to any war effort.
But it was perhaps the loss of allied air support that crippled the fighting power of the Afghan forces and left them so exposed on the battlefield.
“For years they had gone into the fight with ground knowledge from our ISR assets (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance), knowing they could then call-in air power if needed,” one former RAF pilot told us.
“We trained them to fight like that.
“You suddenly remove this safety blanket and they’re on their own; they knew that, and even worse, so did the Taliban.
“The truth is, most NATO forces wouldn’t fight without this backup, and yet we were expecting the Afghans to.”
Although the US continued limited airstrikes against Taliban positions, they weren’t enough to halt the advance, and besides, the Pentagon had made clear that support would come to an end by September.
“(US President Joe) Biden and others can say what they like about the failings of the Afghan Security Forces in recent weeks, but they merely expose their lack of understanding of warfare – it is not about numbers, or even training or equipment. It is about morale, will and confidence,” is the blunt assessment of one former head of British forces in Helmand Province.
“The US and NATO’s abandonment left them floundering, devoid of belief and fighting spirit. By contrast it buoyed the Taliban, giving them an unwarranted sense of legitimacy. The result, while swifter than most informed people expected, was pretty much inevitable.”
Through July, as the Taliban advance grew momentum, Afghan forces withdrew from some of the rural areas to concentrate on major routes, border crossings and key cities. It was a deliberate strategy to protect the bits that mattered, but the strategy of an army already on the run.
In late July, I met the Afghan National Security Advisor Hamdullah Mohib on a visit to London. He tried to put a brave spin on events: “Losing districts means we can focus on other areas. It’s not as bad as the Taliban would have you believe – they are winning the media war but not the military one.”
But Mr Mohib, who has since fled Afghanistan, knew by then that things weren’t looking good.
“The Americans probably didn’t realise how dependent the ANSF [Afghan National Security Forces]were on our NATO partners. The withdrawal has had a devastating impact. The Taliban are like zombies: kill or be killed.”
Despite this downbeat assessment, Mr Mohib was still devising his national security strategy for the coming six months; if he had any inkling of what was coming, he never let on.
For years they had gone into the fight with ground knowledge from our ISR assets (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance), knowing they could then call-in air power if needed…
The truth is, most NATO forces wouldn’t fight without this backup, and yet we were expecting the Afghans to.
Through my many trips to Afghanistan perhaps one message was more consistent than any other, no more so than when I stood in the hills outside Kabul and watched new officer recruits tackling an assault course.
This “Sandhurst in the Sand” academy was supposed to be Britain’s legacy to Afghanistan, and I was repeatedly told how it was a “generational commitment” to train, mentor and nurture the commanding officers who would ensure stability and peace long after NATO left.
“We need to be here for years, possibly decades,” a British soldier told me at the time. “When an entire generation has passed through these gates and the head of the Afghan Armed Forces has been trained by us, here at this academy, then it will be ok to leave.”
That was only three years ago. The commitment will never be fulfilled.
On my last visit to Kabul, the city felt different to previous trips. Afghans oversaw security, manned checkpoints, and guarded major buildings. NATO forces sped across the capital in armoured vehicles but stayed largely behind the scenes. It was very clear there had been a deliberate shift in responsibilities.
The Taliban still launched attacks from rural strongholds, and although the attrition rate among Afghan soldiers was high – too high – they were just about holding the peace. As far as NATO commanders were concerned, it was a workable situation.
“The more we stepped back, the more they stood up, but international assistance in the background was vital,” one former commander of Task Force Helmand reflected.
“They have the capacity for great courage and resilience, but the development of real institutional resilience was work in progress – it takes decades, not years, to grow institutions, particularly against the backdrop of Afghanistan’s wider challenges.”
The US withdrawal cut this short.
President Biden inherited the Trump peace plan but didn’t change it. In fact he expediated it by a few months, eager to make good on a campaign promise to bring America’s longest war to an end.
In recent days Mr Biden has sought to justify his decision by arguing that remaining in the country for another “ten, fifteen years” would have made little difference. Maybe he’s right, we’ll never know, but few outside of government share that view.
The Afghan soldiers have the capacity for great courage and resilience, but the development of real institutional resilience was work in progress – it takes decades, not years, to grow institutions, particularly against the backdrop of Afghanistan’s wider challenges.
For one recently retired British general, with long operational experience in the Middle East, the politicians are to blame for what the country is going through now.
“As an Afghan, who do you trust more: the countryman who says he will kill you, or the foreigner who says he will protect you? When we lead, or fight alongside ‘native troops’, they will perform wonders, but their own commanders and political masters routinely betray them by corruption or refusal to accept responsibility.
“The US withdrawal and the inevitable collapse of the Afghan security forces means that every other aspect of our 20-year engagement (political, institutional, educational, social, health etc) has also collapsed.
“What was an ‘economy of force’ operation (very little blood, and relatively small amounts of treasure, given our overall investment in Afghanistan, rightly or wrongly) was needlessly and avoidably halted, with all the predictable consequences, so Joe Biden could meet a totally artificial deadline.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
President Biden’s criticism of Afghan forces for failing to stand up to the Taliban has been widely criticised
He is not alone in pointing the finger at Washington.
“Yes, exit was Trump’s policy,” tweeted the former British ambassador Tom Fletcher. “Yes, he would have communicated and executed it in an even clumsier, more crass way. But we expect empathy, strategy and wisdom from Biden. His messaging targeted Trump’s base, not the rest of world and not allies past or future.”
Others are angry at their own party.
One British Conservative MP texted to say: “I don’t really see the point of being in the Tory party anymore”, while another simply messaged three words: “Tragic. Unnecessary. Shameful.”
A few days before the collapse of Kabul, Britain’s Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, himself a former soldier, broke diplomatic cover to reveal that he had tried to persuade some fellow NATO allies to stay in Afghanistan once the US had left. He failed, and by then it was too late.
The appetite to operate without American backup just wasn’t there – this chaotic episode has exposed NATO’s weaknesses and shone a harsh light on years of defence cuts that have left the British Armed Forces either unable or unwilling to go it alone.
President Biden’s criticism of Afghan forces for failing to stand up to the Taliban has been widely criticised. As a nation Afghans have paid a far, far higher toll than any other, but as the inevitable became clear, they deserted their posts and in some cases the country altogether.
On Saturday 14 August, the day before Kabul fell, 24 Afghan helicopters carrying almost 600 servicemen flew in secret to Uzbekistan.
Hundreds more crossed the Amu Darya river on Afghanistan’s northern border, but were detained by Uzbek border troops.
Image: The rusting Soviet tanks in the Panjshir Valley are relics of a long history of resistance. Pic: AP
Others made for the Panjshir Valley, north of Kabul in the Hindu Kush. The lush, mountainous region is still dotted with rusting tanks, destroyed during the Soviet occupation in the 1980s, relics of a long history of resistance. If an uprising against the Taliban is going to come from anywhere, it will be the Panjshir, the one corner of Afghanistan the Taliban doesn’t control.
By Sunday lunchtime it was all but over. By now the Taliban was inside the capital, and en route to the Presidential Palace.
Knowing the game was up, soldiers changed out of their combat fatigues and melted into the crowds, fearful of Taliban retribution.
Western capitals watched aghast. The few official statements that did come out were largely out of touch and outpaced by the fast-moving events on the ground.
Remarkably some still called for a “political solution”, but there was nothing left to negotiate. The Taliban had won.
NATO might have abandoned Afghanistan first, but the country’s president and senior leadership followed swiftly afterwards.
Ashraf Ghani fled with his family and close aides. Reports said he was denied entry to Turkmenistan; he eventually surfaced in the United Arab Emirates, vowing to return and fight but Mr Ghani, not hugely popular when in power, is even less so after deserting his country.
Echoing the thoughts of so many who deployed in service of their country, one officer, still serving at the top of the chain, wrote to say: “The abandonment of our Afghan partners is a stain on the West. It leaves those who sweated, fought, suffered (and continue to suffer) and grieved feeling horrified and betrayed.”
One intelligence source defended accusations they didn’t see it coming, saying: “We did.
“Ok, maybe the speed of the Taliban advance took us a bit by surprise, but a swift Taliban overthrow was one of the scenarios we put to politicians. The problem is, they either didn’t want to hear it, or didn’t know what to do with it.”
MI6 and the CIA could do nothing but stand back and watch as the Taliban ripped through.
“I felt like crying,” another British intelligence officer confided. “We’ve spent decades trying to understand the country, building networks and relationships to ultimately keep Britain safe. Within days it was all undone. We go back to the drawing board. Many of the assets, who risked their lives to help us, are now in grave danger.”
In 20 years of conflict and reconstruction, however, Afghanistan has been undeniably transformed.
Education attendance is up, especially among girls; women have been able to work and represent their country in government, sport and music; roads have been tarmacked, improving transport links; and access to medical services, especially maternity care is vastly better. When widows and injured veterans reasonably ask: “Was it all worth it?”, these are the improvements they can be rightly proud of.
Image: Some Afghans were so desperate to escape the Taliban that they clung to a plane as it tried to take off from Kabul
But for all that, the enduring images that publishers will put on the front covers, when the historians write the final accounts of yet another failed intervention in this graveyard of empires, will be two moments in the dying days of this mission. One is the heartbreaking sight of babies being passed over barbed wire to helpless soldiers by mothers so desperate, that they can see no other way.
The other is a photograph of Afghan men, clinging to the side of a giant US C17 transport aircraft as it gathers pace down the runway of Kabul airport leaving Afghanistan behind, in the hands of the Taliban.
For 20 years, as the fighting raged and death toll increased, the Taliban waited, believing NATO would eventually run out of patience. It turns out, they were right.
“Liberation day” was due to be on 1 April. But Donald Trump decided to shift it by a day because he didn’t want anyone to think it was an April fool.
It is no joke for him and it is no joke for governments globally as they brace for his tariff announcements.
It is stunning how little we know about the plans to be announced in the Rose Garden of the White House later today.
It was telling that we didn’t see the President at all on Tuesday. He and all his advisers were huddled in the West Wing, away from the cameras, finalising the tariff plans.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is the so-called ‘measured voice’. A former hedge fund manager, he has argued for targeted not blanket tariffs.
Peter Navarro is Trump’s senior counsellor for trade and manufacturing. A long-time aide and confidante of the president, he is a true loyalist and a firm believer in the merits of tariffs.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
His economic views are well beyond mainstream economic thought – precisely why he appeals to Trump.
The third key character is Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary and the biggest proponent of the full-throttle liberation day tariff juggernaut.
The businessman, philanthropist, Trump fundraiser and billionaire (net worth ranging between $1bn and $2bn) has been among the closest to Trump over the past 73 days of this presidency – frequently in and out of the West Wing.
If anything goes wrong, observers here in Washington suspect Trump will make Lutnick the fall guy.
And what if it does all go wrong? What if Trump is actually the April fool?
“It’s going to work…” his press secretary said when asked if it could all be a disaster, driving up the cost of living for Americans and creating global economic chaos.
“The president has a brilliant team who have been studying these issues for decades and we are focussed on restoring the global age of America…” Karoline Leavitt said.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:52
‘Days of US being ripped off are over’
Dancing to the president’s tune
My sense is that we should see “liberation day” not as the moment it’s all over in terms of negotiations for countries globally as they try to carve out deals with the White House. Rather it should be seen as the start.
Trump, as always, wants to be seen as the one calling the shots, taking control, seizing the limelight. He wants the world to dance to his tune. Today is his moment.
But beyond today, alongside the inevitable tit-for-tat retaliation, expect to see efforts by nations to seek carve-outs and to throw bones to Trump; to identify areas where trade policies can be tweaked to placate the president.
Even small offerings which change little in a material sense could give Trump the chance to spin and present himself as the winning deal maker he craves to be.
One significant challenge for foreign governments and their diplomats in Washington has been engaging the president himself with proposals he might like.
Negotiations take place with a White House team who are themselves unsure where the president will ultimately land. It’s resulted in unsatisfactory speculative negotiations.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:03
Treasury minister: ‘We’ll do everything to secure a deal’
Too much faith placed in the ‘special relationship’?
The UK believes it’s in a better position than most other countries globally. It sits outside the EU giving it autonomy in its trade policy, its deficit with the US is small, and Trump loves Britain.
It’s true too that the UK government has managed to accelerate trade conversations with the White House on a tariff-free trade partnership. Trump’s threats have forced conversations that would normally sit in the long grass for months.
Yet, for now, the conversations have yielded nothing firm. That’s a worry for sure. Did Keir Starmer have too much faith in the ‘special relationship’?
Downing Street will have identified areas where they can tweak trade policy to placate Trump. Cars maybe? Currently US cars into the UK carry a 10% tariff. Digital services perhaps?
US food? Unlikely – there are non-tariff barriers on US food because the consensus seems to be that chlorinated chicken and the like isn’t something UK consumers want.
Easier access to UK financial services maybe? More visas for Americans?
For now though, everyone is waiting to see what Trump does before they either retaliate or relent and lower their own market barriers.
A man inside Mandalay has told Sky News bodies remain under “collapsed and inclining” buildings after the Myanmar earthquake – as a woman was freed from rubble after 91 hours.
The local inside Myanmarsaid many of the structures in the city were wrecked or badly damaged after the 7.7 magnitude quake on Friday, adding: “There are some bodies, some dead bodies, that still remain and other destruction”.
Meanwhile, in a televised address, Myanmar’s military leader Min Aung Hlaing said the number of dead had risen to 2,719 and is expected to exceed 3,000.
Some 4,521 people have been injured, while a further 441 are missing.
More than 10,000 buildings are known to have collapsed or been severely damaged in central and northwest Myanmar, the World Health Organisation said.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:41
Before and after: Myanmar earthquake
Smell of dead bodies near destroyed buildings
In Mandalay, Myanmar’s second-largest city, which was close to the quake’s epicentre, 50 children and two teachers were killed when their preschool collapsed, the United Nations said.
The local in the city told Sky News that “a lot of local assistance associations like charity groups are still struggling with digging out the corpses, the dead bodies, from the destruction”.
He said that “when we pass near the destructions, the collapsed building or very damaged building, we can smell” dead bodies.
“The smell of the dead bodies after four days… it still remains,” he said, before adding: “For the social assistance association… they need permission [to give aid] especially from the government.
“If they don’t have permission, then they cannot do anything.”
Image: People sheltering in a makeshift tent camp in Mandalay. Pic: Reuters
He also said others in Mandalay are struggling after the earthquake, which followed the city being affected by cyclones, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the civil war in Myanmar – where a junta seized power in a coup in 2021.
“Some people, they say they have nothing at all,” the local added. “They have no more home, they have no more belongings, because its already damaged.”
Woman freed after 91 hours under rubble
It comes after the fire department in Myanmar’s capital freed a woman trapped under rubble 91 hours after the building collapsed.
The 63-year-old woman was freed early on Tuesday in Naypyidaw.
Datawrapper
This content is provided by Datawrapper, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Datawrapper cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Datawrapper cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Datawrapper cookies for this session only.
As the country continues to recover, a worker from the International Rescue Committee said people fear aftershocks and are sleeping outside on roads or in open fields.
Communities are struggling to meet basic needs such as access to clean water and sanitation, and emergency teams are working “tirelessly” to locate survivors and provide aid, the UN said in a report.
Rescue efforts have been complicated by the civil war, as rebel groups say the junta has conducted airstrikes, even after the quake, while NGOs fear that certain areas could be denied vital supplies.
“Myanmar’s military has a longstanding practice of denying aid to areas where groups who resist it are active,” said Joe Freeman, a researcher with Amnesty Myanmar.
“It must immediately allow unimpeded access to all humanitarian organisations and remove administrative barriers delaying needs assessments.”
The father of a paramedic killed by Israel in Gaza has told Sky News he would have been on the mission to rescue wounded colleagues, but was ill that day and so his son went instead.
“It was supposed to be me, you know. I was on duty that night but fell ill and sent him in my place.”
Speaking at his son’s funeral, Hassan Abu Hileh said Israel is to blame for the death of Mohammed and the other 14 men.
Image: Hassan Abu Hileh’s son Mohammed was killed when Israeli forces said they ‘opened fire on suspicious vehicles’
“We need protection from the international community. We need protection for medical teams. We are medics-soldiers of duty, not armed fighters. We carry out humanitarian work. If I see someone who needs medical attention, I’m obligated to serve them,” he said.
The bodies of the Red Crescent and United Nations workers went missing around eight days ago. Despite repeated requests to search for them, all denied by the Israel Defence Forces (IDF), the UN eventually found 14 bodies buried under sand in a mass grave. One is still missing.
They were still wearing their uniforms.
Image: Funerals took place on Monday for medics killed in Gaza. Pic: Reuters
The director of the Palestinian Red Crescent in Gaza has accused Israel of murdering the emergency workers. “We arrived at the scene of the crime to retrieve the bodies and found that all of them had been shot directly in the upper part of their bodies and buried,” said Dr Bashir Murad.
More on Gaza
Related Topics:
“The ambulances were also destroyed and buried.”
Image: Dr Bashir Murad, director of the Palestinian Red Crescent in Gaza, said the workers had been shot
The bodies were found in sand in the south of the Gaza Strip in what Jonathan Whittall, Gaza head of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, called a “mass grave”, marked with the emergency light from a crushed ambulance.
Mr Whittall posted pictures and video of Red Crescent teams digging in the sand for the bodies and workers laying them out on the ground, covered in plastic sheets.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:22
Bodies of aid workers found in Gaza
The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) has denied killing innocent medical workers and said Israeli forces opened fire on suspicious vehicles that were travelling without coordination and in an active combat zone.
“The IDF did not randomly attack an ambulance on March 23,” claimed a spokesman.
“Last Sunday, several uncoordinated vehicles were identified advancing suspiciously toward IDF troops without headlights or emergency signals. IDF troops then opened fire at the suspected vehicles.
“Earlier that day, cars that did not belong to terrorists were coordinated and passed safely on the same route.”
We have asked the IDF why the bodies were found in a mass grave but have received no comment.
More than 400 aid workers have been killed in Gaza since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, according to the UN.
According to the UN, at least 1,060 healthcare workers have been killed in the 18 months since Israel launched its offensive in Gaza after Hamas fighters stormed southern Israel on 7 October 2023.
The UN is reducing its international staff in Gaza by a third because of safety concerns.