Former United States Defence Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta has delivered a stark assessment of the American withdrawal from Afghanistan, describing the complete departure of US forces and the subsequent return of the Taliban to power as a “terrible mistake” and arguing that Washington failed those it had spent two decades fighting to support.
Panetta, who served as US Defence Secretary under former President Barack Obama, said the United States had invested enormous military, intelligence and economic resources in Afghanistan and had made substantial efforts to build institutions capable of sustaining the country after the eventual departure of American forces.
According to Panetta, the US mission went far beyond military operations. Washington helped establish and train Afghan security forces, develop intelligence capabilities, conduct counterterrorism operations, expand educational opportunities for women, support businesses and contribute to efforts aimed at improving the lives of ordinary Afghans.
Despite acknowledging that the Afghanistan war had continued for far too long, Panetta argued that the length and difficulty of the conflict did not justify a complete American withdrawal.
Panetta delivered his most forceful criticism while speaking to Sky News, arguing that the United States should have maintained a presence in Afghanistan and continued working alongside the Afghan people. “We betrayed all of those we fought for when we suddenly pulled all our forces out of Afghanistan and left it to the Taliban to again regain control,” Panetta said.
His remarks represent a significant criticism from a senior American national-security figure who played a central role in US counterterrorism policy during a pivotal period of the Afghanistan and wider War on Terror campaigns. Panetta’s assessment is particularly notable because of his own background in American intelligence and defence policy. As Director of the CIA, he oversaw the agency during the operation that resulted in the killing of Osama bin Laden by US special forces in Pakistan in 2011.
Panetta emphasised that the United States had made a substantial investment in Afghanistan over many years. American forces and their allies worked to establish Afghan security institutions, train military and police personnel, develop intelligence capabilities and combat terrorist organisations. Beyond security, the international mission also supported broader programmes intended to transform Afghan society. These efforts included expanding access to education for women and girls, supporting private businesses and attempting to improve economic and social conditions.
For Panetta, these investments created a responsibility that extended beyond the battlefield. He argued that Washington should have remained engaged with the Afghan people rather than abruptly ending its military presence and allowing the Taliban to rapidly reclaim control of the country.
The withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan in 2021 under President Joe Biden has remained one of the most controversial foreign-policy decisions of his administration. The final phase of the withdrawal was accompanied by the rapid collapse of the Afghan government and security forces and the Taliban’s return to Kabul. The dramatic events surrounding the withdrawal generated intense criticism in Washington, including from former military commanders, intelligence officials, lawmakers and senior national-security figures.
Critics have argued that the withdrawal was poorly executed, that the Afghan government and security forces collapsed more rapidly than anticipated, and that the United States surrendered much of the leverage it had built over two decades.
Supporters of the withdrawal, however, have argued that the war had become unsustainable and that the United States could not maintain an open-ended military commitment in Afghanistan indefinitely. Panetta’s latest comments place him firmly among those who believe that the United States should have adopted a different approach one that would have preserved a limited presence while continuing to support Afghan institutions.
At the heart of Panetta’s criticism is the argument that military withdrawal should not necessarily mean the abandonment of a country or population with which the United States had been deeply engaged for decades. He maintained that Washington had a continuing responsibility to support Afghans who had worked alongside the United States and who had relied upon American assistance to build institutions and pursue a different future.
For Panetta, the decision to leave Afghanistan was therefore not merely a military calculation. It represented a broader strategic and moral question concerning the commitments made by the United States to its Afghan partners. His remarks also underline the enduring debate within the American foreign-policy establishment over how the United States should balance military commitments, counterterrorism objectives, strategic interests and responsibilities toward local partners.
More than five years after the Taliban returned to power, the consequences of the US withdrawal continue to shape discussions about Afghanistan, American foreign policy and the future of international intervention. The debate extends beyond the question of whether the United States should have remained militarily engaged. It also concerns the long-term consequences of the withdrawal for Afghan institutions, human rights, women and girls, counterterrorism efforts, regional security and the credibility of American commitments to partners.
Panetta’s comments provide a powerful reminder that the Afghanistan question remains unsettled within the American strategic establishment. The former defence secretary’s central argument is that, although the war had lasted too long, Washington should not have interpreted the desire to end the war as a reason to abandon its engagement with the Afghan people altogether.
Panetta’s criticism comes against the backdrop of Afghanistan’s continuing political and security challenges following the Taliban’s return to power. The country remains at the centre of complex regional security calculations, while neighbouring states continue to monitor developments closely.
For the United States, the Afghan experience has also become an important case study in the limits of military intervention, nation-building and the challenges of transferring security responsibilities to local partners. For Afghanistan itself, the withdrawal marked the end of a two-decade international military presence and the beginning of a new political era under Taliban rule.
Panetta’s remarks suggest that, regardless of differing views on the original intervention or the eventual withdrawal, the consequences of the decision will continue to be examined for years to come.
