An Afghan War Veteran Reports Back

I deployed to Helmand Province in 2008 as an enlisted Marine infantryman. I returned there a decade later as a journalist.

Thomas Gibbons-Neff, right, of Bravo Company, 1st Battalion 6th Marines, on May 16, 2008, in Helmand Province, in a photo he provided.
Thomas Gibbons-Neff, right, of Bravo Company, 1st Battalion 6th Marines, on May 16, 2008, in Helmand Province, in a photo he provided.
TT

An Afghan War Veteran Reports Back

Thomas Gibbons-Neff, right, of Bravo Company, 1st Battalion 6th Marines, on May 16, 2008, in Helmand Province, in a photo he provided.
Thomas Gibbons-Neff, right, of Bravo Company, 1st Battalion 6th Marines, on May 16, 2008, in Helmand Province, in a photo he provided.

What is it like to have been a Marine in Afghanistan and returned there as a journalist? That’s a question I get asked a lot.

I never really have an answer.

The 20-year-old and 22-year-old versions of myself who deployed to Helmand Province in 2008 and 2009 as an enlisted Marine infantryman were just that, different versions. A decade later, what’s left of them are two old journals and an entry left behind from my first deployment that I recall quite often.

“I think it’s the end of Day 20 out here,” I wrote in early May 2008. “It’s hard to explain this place, and I feel it’s going to take the rest of my life to figure out what happened here.”

It has been 11 years since I wrote that passage, and it’s still just as true. Granted I figured out what happened in Helmand Province in 2008. It was the first chapter in a misguided counterinsurgency strategy built atop the constellation of outposts that the American military eventually handed to the Afghans in 2014. We watched them collapse under the Taliban in the months that followed.

But this month I walked out the back of a helicopter after it landed at a dusty American Special Forces outpost in eastern Nangarhar Province. The war hadn’t ended, just those earlier chapters from my 20s.

The gravel felt familiar. The drone of the generators sounded familiar. The discarded burning trash on the small base’s periphery smelled like the place I once called home for nearly two years.

I was back in some estranged corner of “my war” to report on the American military’s war against the Islamic State affiliate in the country. At this small base, called Mission Support Site Jones, a Special Forces team and a consortium of other soldiers were trying to keep the extremists relegated to the mountains along the Pakistani border.

It was a strange thing, coming back to a place that seemed stuck in time, ripped from an earlier version of my life. But they had Wi-Fi — we certainly didn’t have that in 2008.

At dusk, I kept expecting to bump into friends from my platoon: Jorge, Ryan and Matt shuffling back from the PVC pipes half buried in the ground that doubled as urinals; their outlines distinctly recognizable after so many days in the field.

But my friends are long gone. Jorge is a police officer outside Houston. Ryan works construction in Northern California. And Matt is dead. In their place were three random soldiers — 20-somethings who eyed me with suspicion. Just as we used to do when a reporter showed up in Helmand with unclear intentions from an outlet we had never heard of or cared to follow: Reuters? BBC? What does NPR stand for?

Early the next morning I climbed up into one of the watchtowers on the southern corner of the base. The sentry had just started his six-hour shift. He didn’t say much and I stared at the mountains in the distance.

A decade ago that would have been me. Easing back on a chair of makeshift sandbags and deciding what I wanted to think about for the next half-dozen hours or so. Sifting through a shelf of memories, my brain then mostly filled with remnants of high school and the 10 days of leave before we deployed.

“You were probably told to avoid talking to me,” I said to the soldier leaning on the tower’s machine gun.

It was a rhetorical assertion, but my nostalgia had been replaced with the slow realization that I was currently employed by The New York Times and not the United States Marine Corps.

The soldier acknowledged the question and said little else, other than that his platoon sergeant had very much reinforced that point before my arrival.

“It’s like every war movie you’ve ever seen but it doesn’t end in 120 minutes,” I wrote in 2008. “It’s on loop.”

(The New York Times)



Iran Opts for Dialogue with Europe ahead of Trump's Return to Office

President Donald Trump shows a signed Presidential Memorandum after delivering a statement on the Iran nuclear deal from the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House, Tuesday, May 8, 2018, in Washington. (AP)
President Donald Trump shows a signed Presidential Memorandum after delivering a statement on the Iran nuclear deal from the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House, Tuesday, May 8, 2018, in Washington. (AP)
TT

Iran Opts for Dialogue with Europe ahead of Trump's Return to Office

President Donald Trump shows a signed Presidential Memorandum after delivering a statement on the Iran nuclear deal from the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House, Tuesday, May 8, 2018, in Washington. (AP)
President Donald Trump shows a signed Presidential Memorandum after delivering a statement on the Iran nuclear deal from the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House, Tuesday, May 8, 2018, in Washington. (AP)

It is difficult to predict what the outcomes will be of the discussions between Iran, France, Britain and Germany about Tehran’s nuclear program in Geneva on Friday.

Last week, the UN atomic watchdog's 35-nation Board of Governors passed a resolution again ordering Iran to urgently improve cooperation with the agency and requesting a "comprehensive" report aimed at pressuring Iran into fresh nuclear talks.

Britain, France, Germany and the United States, which proposed the resolution, dismissed as insufficient and insincere a last-minute Iranian move to cap its stock of uranium that is close to weapons-grade. Diplomats said Iran's move was conditional on scrapping the resolution.

Iran has been weighing its response to the censure, debating whether to increase uranium enrichment or by being open to the proposals expected at the Geneva talks.

The discussions may seek a new nuclear deal instead of the 2015 one with Tehran that is in tatters.

As it stands, Iran is likely to opt for negotiations instead of escalation due to a number of internal, regional and international reasons.

Diplomatic sources in Paris noted US President-elect Donald Trump’s appointments of officials handling Middle East affairs, underscoring their unreserved support to Israel and clear hostility to Iran.

These appointments may lead Iran to think twice before resorting to any escalation.

Even before Trump has taken office, his circles have said that the new president will take “several executive decisions related to Iran and that will be declared on his first day in office.” The decisions will be binding and do not need Congress’ approval.

However, Trump is unpredictable and the sources did not rule out the surprise possibility of him striking a deal with Iran related to its nuclear program and behavior in the Middle East. This means that Tehran will have to make major concessions, including abandoning its policy of “exporting the revolution”.

This remains a far-fatched possibility, however. In all likelihood, Washington under Trump will return to his “maximum pressure” policy against Iran on political, diplomatic and economic levels to make it return to the negotiations table and agree on a deal that completely ends its nuclear ambitions.

So, at the Geneva meeting on Friday, Tehran will seek to achieve two main goals: a nuclear breakthrough during what remains of US President Joe Biden’s time in office, and attempt to lure the European powers away from Trump.

The truth is that Tehran is wading in the unknown. One only has to go back to Trump’s past statements about how Israel should have struck Iran’s nuclear facilities during its October 26 attack on the country.

Trump has already shown Iran his hardline stance when he ordered the assassination of Quds Forces leader Qassem Soleimani near Baghdad airport in January 2020.

Based on this, Tehran is scrambling to avert a joint American-Israeli strike that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been dreaming of.

Iran is vulnerable now due to two main reasons: the Israeli strike in October weakened Iran’s air defenses and Netanyahu has said that Israeli jets can now run rampant over Iran without any worries.

And Tehran can no longer rely on its allied militias to threaten Israel with all-out war. Hamas in Gaza is no longer in a position to threaten Israel and neither is Hezbollah in Lebanon.

So, Iran now finds itself exposed and would rather turn to negotiations with Europe than risk escalation that would cost it dearly with Israel now that it can no longer rely on Hamas and Hezbollah.