Join War on the Rocks and gain access to content trusted by policymakers, military leaders, and strategic thinkers worldwide.
On the first night of the evacuation of Kabul, Aug. 15, 2021, a young mother found me in the crowd at Hamid Karzai International Airport. She had marked me, correctly, as someone who spoke her language. By the end of the night, she was pressing the body of her dead child into my chest and telling me, “You did this.” I have spent five years with that sentence.
In a way, she was wrong about me. I had done nothing to her son. But the decisions that delivered her to that night were made an ocean away, and their consequences needed a human face. Mine was the nearest one wearing the flag. But she was not entirely wrong. I understood her anger. As a boy, before I was an American citizen, a U.S. consular officer stamped a rejection into my family’s passports while my teenage sister was still mid-sentence. I could never have guessed that years later, I would become the man on the deciding side of the glass.
Last month marked five years since the fall of Kabul, when a generation that had nothing to do with starting the war in Afghanistan was charged with absorbing its collapse. The troops at the airport executed the largest noncombatant evacuation in American history, Operation Allies Refuge, under conditions imposed by two administrations.
My argument is simple: A democracy cannot outsource the moral consequences of its failed policies to the young people it orders to execute them. That is what the United States did in Kabul and has done in every year since. The policy belonged to Washington. The execution fell to 19-year-olds at the gates. The moral burden, which should have traveled back up the chain, stayed where the bodies were. It left two debts the country keeps confusing: one to the allies it promised not to abandon, one to the Americans ordered to do the abandoning. The reckoning a democracy owes the people it sends to harm’s way never came. In its place, the country privatized the grief — offloading the moral debt of a national failure onto the individuals standing there when the bill came due and moving on. The marines of Beirut have lived that ending for 43 years. Unless something changes, the Kabul generation will live it too.
How the Burden Arrived
The force at the airport was young. At 30, I was one of the old men, a captain who had enlisted first and served an earlier tour in Helmand Province, Afghanistan as a lance corporal. When Kabul fell, I was aide-de-camp to the commanding general of the joint task force overseeing the evacuation planning. That night, he reassigned me to lead a provisional rifle platoon. His orders made sense given the situation we were in: “I need you to be an infantry officer more than I need an aide right now.” I asked one of the rifle platoons in Kabul how many of them were born after Sept. 11, 2001 — 15 hands went up. The war was older than they were, and its last act had just been assigned to them.
On the morning of Aug. 15, I sat in an intelligence brief in which our planners projected six more days before Kabul fell. By the time I finished a workout and changed my shirt, the embassy was collapsing. Six days had become six hours.
The ending was broken before we arrived, and both parties broke it. In Feb. 2020, the Trump administration signed an agreement with the Taliban in Doha, negotiated over the head of the Afghan government, pushing Kabul to release 5,000 Taliban prisoners, among them men held at Parwan, the prison at Bagram. In early July 2021, we handed Bagram to the Afghan National Army, and on Aug. 15, it fell without a fight. The men we had released did not all go home to their villages. Of course, many went to the hills, angrier for their years in our custody.
The Biden administration inherited that agreement and managed it even worse. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, and the commander of U.S. Central Command, Gen. Frank McKenzie, later testified that they had recommended keeping 2,500 troops. The president withdrew them all anyway. Both administrations treated warnings of collapsing capitals and a dissolving military as mere distractions. The State Department’s own after-action review substantiated the collapse in foresight, citing “insufficient senior-level consideration of worst-case scenarios” and internal confusion over who held the lead. Yet the real indictment is not about which administration failed most. Rather, it is about distance. The architects of the withdrawal were thoroughly insulated from its fallout by geography, institution, and rank. That is how the war ended: scripted in air-conditioned rooms in Doha and Washington by officials who would never face a mob at an airfield gate, left to be carried out by troops who had nowhere else to stand.
Americans who have not served sometimes imagine that military virtues are ceremonial, a decoration laid over the dangerous work underneath. They have it backwards. Honor, loyalty, restraint — these traits are ingrained in the ethos of a warrior. That ethos is how you get a 19-year-old with a rifle to stand in front of a surging crowd of thousands and not fire into the masses. The Marine Corps has mnemonics for machine-gun rates of fire, but none for when a terrified civilian is three inches from your face demanding answers you lack. What fills that gap is character, built over years so it holds when nothing else does.
At the airport, it held. Some of my marines used their rifle stocks to press the crowd back. I could not bring myself to do it — I used my open hands, which felt more honest about what we were doing, and which drew people toward me rather than away. I still cannot tell you whether that was virtue or weakness. A fellow marine officer, who had no business in a crowd-control line and knew it, came to me wide-eyed: “What do I do? There are desperate women and children begging me to cross the tarmac.” I told her to push them back. She nodded, and went back to her position, and did it. I do not know if there was a right answer to give her. I know that she went back.
People call those two weeks chaos, and they were. But the chaos had a source: distance. Washington grounded planes, then rushed to fill them, reacting to what its leaders saw on the news. The marines holding the gates were 19- and 20-year-olds. A crowd of thousands is a formidable physical force. It pressed against the gates, day and night, for two weeks, and the marines leaned into it for hours at a stretch, in full kit, in the August heat, shouting instructions no one could hear until their voices gave out. Infants came forward over the concertina wire, passed hand to hand by strangers, sent by mothers who judged that any place but Afghanistan was safe for their baby. During this chaos, the marines barely slept resting in two-hour stints spent on their phones, piecing the operation together in the news. And to many desperate Afghans, those same exhausted teenagers were the last American face, the one that turned them away, back into a country about to be ruled by the very men successive U.S. presidents had spent 20 years promising to defeat.
The discipline held even after the worst of it. On Aug. 26, a suicide bomber at Abbey Gate killed 13 Americans and roughly 170 Afghans. My team helped move casualties from the gate to the Norwegian hospital at the airport. Later that night, while the fallen were gathered in the mortuary affairs tent, we planned how to evacuate their remains from the country within 24 hours. We assembled the vehicles we had hotwired days earlier to move the living and used them again to carry the dead. The next morning, the same young Americans went back out, kept the evacuation moving, and maintained their discipline.
There is a clinical name for what those weeks did. Moral injury is not what is done to you, but what you are made to do, or made to be, against your own code. The servicemembers in Kabul were made to be the barrier. The nation had spent 20 years promising the Afghans who worked with us that we would not forget them and then arranged an ending where that promise was shattered face-to-face at a gate by young Americans raised on an ethos of honor. The cruelty was in the orders that required them to hold that ethos while doing the unforgivable.
I’ve often heard three objections on the framing thus far. The first says the withdrawal was going to be ugly under any plan, and that the chaos of August was simply the price of ending a 20-year war. Perhaps so. But the ugliness of those two weeks is not the indictment. The indictment is what came after — five years in which no one above a certain rank agreed to carry any part of the moral weight back up the chain. The second objection holds that the distance between the people who decide and the people who execute is a feature of every war ever fought, and that a democracy corrects for it at the ballot box. Yes, elections punish, but they do not account for anything. And the distance at Kabul was not some constant of warfare. It was a choice, and it widened every time an assessment went unread.
The third objection comes from inside my own tribe, from those who worry that the language of moral injury recasts people who made hard calls as victims. The marine officer who asked me what to do about the women and children, then walked back to her position and did her duty, is nobody’s victim. Moral injury is simply what agency costs when every available choice wounds someone. As veteran Will Selber and psychologist Katherine Selber wrote about three years ago in their invaluable treatment of moral injury after Afghanistan, “The lack of frank, open discussions about America’s war in Afghanistan exacerbates many veterans’ moral injury.”
Five years on, neither party will claim the Kabul generation. Democrats avoid the withdrawal because an honest examination of it implicates their own decisions. Republicans invoke it mostly as a weapon: an Abbey Gate raised at rallies and hearings in ways that have less to do with the fallen than with the campaign calendar, conscripting the grief of Gold Star families into service they never volunteered for.
Our injury is deepened when we watch our leaders refuse to save even the people we were sent there to save. The evidence sits in Congress. The Afghan Adjustment Act, the bill that would give our vetted, evacuated allies a path to permanent legal status, has now been introduced in three consecutive Congresses and passed by none of them. Since January, the Trump administration has issued a presidential proclamation suspending visas for Afghan nationals outright. By the State Department’s own accounting, not one Special Immigrant Visa has been issued in 2026, while more than 23,000 approved principal applicants wait. The vehicle actually moving is the Afghanistan Temporary Protected Status Act of 2026, introduced this summer with bipartisan sponsors in both chambers after the Trump administration terminated protected status for Afghans already here. Passing it would help fulfill the promise made to those allies. It would do nothing to hold accountable the officials who made the decisions that led to the withdrawal. America owes both debts: a commitment to the allies left behind and accountability for those who made the decisions.
Meanwhile, the other ledger sits unread: 13 American servicemembers dead, more than 170 innocent Afghans killed beside them, roughly 124,000 people lifted out by an improvised force. The shortfalls have been litigated in hearings, stump speeches, and ads — the achievement of the evacuation has gone largely unclaimed.
In Oct. 1983, a truck bomb destroyed the barracks of a marine battalion deployed to Beirut on a peacekeeping mission whose logic no one could quite articulate, under rules of engagement that had sentries standing post without rounds chambered, in a position their own commanders knew was indefensible. The blast killed 241 Americans, most of them in their sleep. The commission that investigated found what everyone on the ground already knew: the policy had put them there, and the policy had left them exposed. President Ronald Reagan said the responsibility rested in his office, and the institutions genuinely learned. The commission’s findings drove new force-protection standards, and the catastrophe fed directly into the Weinberger criteria and, later, the Powell doctrine on when America should commit force at all. The lessons traveled up the chain. The memory and the moral weight it carries stayed in the ranks. Kabul, so far, has produced hearings, reports, and after-action reviews.
The United States withdrew from Beirut within months, and the country forgot. The marines did not. Every October since, survivors and families gather on the parade deck of their old battalion and mourn, largely alone. What happened to them was a national decision — the weight of it was left to them. For 40 years, the arrangement has held: the institution remembers its own, and the nation that made the decision is excused from the room. The generation that held the airfield in Kabul is five years into the same trajectory. The Abbey Gate families already gather the same way.
The moral weight can never travel up the chain. The marines who held those gates will carry what they saw for the rest of their lives. The mother who pressed her dead son into my chest left him there for good — no commission finding will ever reach that. Beirut proved how this goes: the institutional lessons move upward, while the grief stays with those who survived it and their loved ones. But what the chain of command is built to carry, what should have moved up, is ownership. The leaders who made those calls could have refused to leave a 19-year-old alone with the moral fallout of carrying them out. They could have stepped out from behind institutional shields and spokespeople, looked that generation in the eye, and said: “These were our decisions. You carried them out under orders. The consequences belong to us.” It would not have lifted the weight from anyone’s shoulders, but it would have meant no one carried it alone. It requires someone willing to look at the wreckage and say, plainly: mine.
The profession of arms teaches ownership to its own every day. A commanding officer is accountable for everything the unit does or fails to do. A ship runs aground while her captain sleeps, and the captain still loses his command. A lieutenant is taught to keep her honor clean because the institution’s credibility with the next generation depends on it. The country expects that ethic of a 22-year-old while demanding little of the officials who send her.
This is not a fantasy standard. In Sept. 2021, Dutch Foreign Minister Sigrid Kaag resigned after parliament censured the government over its handling of the Kabul evacuation, and the defense minister followed a day later. The censure didn’t legally force either out. Kaag resigned on principle, defining the ethic on her way out the door: “The minister must go if the policy is rejected.” Her defense counterpart tried to dig in, quitting only after her own coalition made staying untenable. One offered her resignation, the other had it extracted. But even an extracted exit proves a system capable of imposing a public price for failure. Washington, whose withdrawal set the collapse in motion, produced neither. Not one senior official stepped down, willingly or under duress, and no American leader has spoken Kaag’s sentence under any conditions.
Congress already created an instrument for accountability in the form of the Afghanistan War Commission, a bipartisan body of 16 commissioners, but instead of receiving its final report last month on the fifth anniversary of the war’s end, Congress extended the commission’s mandate for another year with bipartisan approval from leaders in both chambers. The extension may well produce a more rigorous accounting, and the commission has earned the room to get it right. But sit with what it means: the fifth anniversary of Kabul arrives with America’s official reckoning of its longest war still unwritten. When the report appears, it should be judged by a single standard: whether it names decisions and the officials who made them or retreats into the passive voice of lessons learned. Congress should treat it as it treated the 9/11 Commission’s report: mandated agency responses and public follow-through, not a mere filing.
The country continues to ignore two distinct debts. The first is to the Afghan allies who served alongside our forces and are still waiting on our word five years later. The second is to the Americans ordered to break that word at the gates. The Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs should identify the evacuation cohort by name and screen them proactively for moral injury, much like the Selbers recommended, rather than waiting for them to surface in the disability claims backlog a decade from now. The clinical tools exist — what is missing is the institutional will to treat the force that absorbed the collapse as a collective responsibility rather than a stack of individual files. Discharging those debts will not move accountability back up the chain of command, but both are long past due.
Beirut also shows what it looks like when lessons travel up. That catastrophe fed the Weinberger criteria and later the Powell doctrine, a public framework for when America should commit force. No equivalent doctrine exists for how America should stop. Kabul is the argument for writing one. Such a doctrine would set objective triggers for starting an evacuation, so the decision cannot be held hostage to fears about what ordering one signals. It would tie the movement of allies to drawdown milestones instead of leaving them to the final month. It would settle, before the crisis, who commands the execution, because the State Department’s own after-action review found that in Kabul no one was sure. Above all, it would name in advance the official who owns the ending, so that responsibility has an address before anything goes wrong.
I think often about who kept the promise that August, since our policymakers did not. The lance corporals holding back crowds with their open hands, the bus drivers we hired, Afghans earning $20 a day, who drove into a city where working for Americans was a death sentence and came back with families they had never met. Policymakers broke the promise. Ordinary people, most of them very young, and many not even American citizens, kept their end of it anyway.
This anniversary asks for neither pity nor another round of partisan accounting. It asks for courage to hold two truths at once: that the strategy was morally bankrupt, and that the people sent to execute it were noble. If Congress cannot muster the decency to protect the allies still within reach, and the country cannot bring itself to claim the veterans who absorbed the collapse, America forfeits the moral authority to ask the next generation to stand at a gate. A democracy that privatizes its failures does not just dishonor its past — it leaves itself undefended for the future.
Omer S. Rafiq is a Marine Corps veteran who served at Hamid Karzai International Airport through the full arc of the 2021 evacuation of Kabul, from the closure of the U.S. Embassy to one of the last flights on the manifest.
Image: Lance Cpl. Nicholas Guevara via DVIDS
