When foreigners think of American society and politics, they most admire our technology, military, entertainment, and universities [1]. When thinking of American people, others might describe us as proud, independent, hard-working, and diverse. Americans, to my surprise, rank highly in one highly-desired trait: patience. In fact, ScienceFocus ranked us as the third most patient country in the world behind Sweden and the Netherlands. That ranking was based on our willingness to put off more consumerist desires [2]. Patience is a virtue, and it even seems to characterize our foreign policy from the past. We’ve been willing to engage in wars without immediate results based on core values such as freedom and democracy. Around 2015, President Obama embraced “strategic patience.” [9] As of late, we’ve strayed from such patience, wanting quicker results from our military investments abroad. Unfortunately, the past two administrations hastily ended engagements in the Middle East, hurting our country’s image and ushering in disorder. Against the backdrop of worse alternatives, the United States should choose to be patient with our involvement in foreign conflicts.
President Trump’s abandonment of the Kurds constitutes an example of both impatience and betrayal. The Kurds are 35 to 40 million stateless people that live in Northern Syria. They stand between four different countries: Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. They have supported American aims in the Middle East as early as 1971, when the United States armed them to fight against Sadam Hussein [10]. Starting in 2014, the United States supported the Kurds based on common ground in defeating ISIS [11]. In October 2019, President Donald Trump tweeted “The Endless Wars Must End,” claiming that his position on ending such wars contributed to his election. Just prior, President Trump had withdrawn support for the Kurds in Syria, supporting his decision by saying, “they didn’t help us in Normandy.” [7] While Trump’s statement may carry an ounce of truth, the history of US-Kurdish relations is a story of American abandonment over and over again. Even Republican politicians spoke out against the move, calling it a “betrayal” and its consequences “sickening and predictable” [8]. Trump then gave Turkish president Recep Erdogan the go-ahead to invade northern Syria. The Kurdish People were not asking for much; they wanted a US military presence to fend off a Turkish invasion [10]. Turkey did invade, and today, the US has reestablished support for the Kurds, raising the question of why we left in the first place [13].
Our country’s leaders aren’t the only ones showing impatience; the public’s commitment to long wars seems to be low. When the US first invaded Afghanistan, the move was overwhelmingly popular, reaching 90% in the early days after 9/11 [3]. In 2021, 61% of Americans claimed the war wasn’t worth fighting [4]. Right before withdrawing from Afghanistan, 54% of Americans said the decision to withdraw from Afghanistan was the right one [4]. Near the end of Trump’s administration, the US reduced the American troop presence down to 2,500 and committed the United States to withdraw all troops by May 2021 [5]. President Biden ultimately decided to withdraw, and the consequences were both predictable and disastrous. The Afghani president fled the country and the government quickly yielded to Taliban control. Afghani men embraced departing aircraft, fearing the consequences of Taliban rule [6]. The media were quick to blame President Biden, yet part of the blame lies with the American people. We’ve been calling for withdrawal from the Middle East for years, yet we act surprised when we see the calamity that ensues.
Some may argue that impatience is the best among limited options, especially when using American resources to bring about foreign motives. We had been fighting in Afghanistan since 2001, and in 2021, 69% of Americans believed we had failed in our intervention [12][4]. Understandably, it was difficult to see success with our efforts in Afghanistan, especially when we failed to build a successful government. But, against the backdrop of brutal Taliban rule, our presence in the Middle East looks like a success. With that alternative in mind, the US should be willing to engage in the Middle East, even if such a commitment seems endless.
If our foreign policy is based on values, results will require patience. Recent mistakes should redirect us to a more measured, forbearing approach in world conflict. In particular, we face a continuing decision regarding our support for Ukraine in a surprisingly prolonged war. We could completely abandon Ukraine, simultaneously casting aside our principles as a country and letting an autocrat have his way. We could be more aggressive, taking a strong stand against Putin by expanding our military support for Ukraine. Such a move risks violent retaliation. Or, we could be patient, continuing to send aid. Situations change, and Putin’s administration has already proven to be vulnerable from within. Any sort of action is tempting given our dissatisfaction with the current situation, yet patience is the best choice among poor alternatives. Let us learn from past mistakes and refuse to exacerbate current problems—patience is still a virtue, even in foreign policy.
