Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Decades of scholarship have warned against using historical analogies for policymaking. But the Taliban insurgency appears, on the surface, to confirm the usefulness of historical analogies to the British and Soviet wars in Afghanistan. I review the use of analogies for the war in Afghanistan and argue the analogies were historically unsound and strategically unhelpful. In fact, their effect on policy helped create the conditions for the very insurgency policymakers most hoped to avoid. The Taliban insurgency did not occur because of the presence of too many foreign troops and aid workers, but because there were too few.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paul D. Miller (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: