This tragedy never should have been allowed, which makes our pain deeper
Nas horas que se seguiram aos atentados suicidas no aeroporto de Cabul, que ceifaram a vida de treze militares americanos e dezenas de civis afegãos, Donald Trump ergueu sua voz para responsabilizar o presidente Biden — mesmo tendo sido ele próprio o arquiteto do acordo que iniciou a retirada das tropas. O episódio ilumina uma tensão antiga na história das nações: a de que as decisões de um tempo colhem seus frutos em outro, e que o peso do luto raramente recai sobre quem primeiro plantou as sementes da partida.
- Treze soldados americanos e ao menos sessenta civis afegãos morreram em atentados suicidas nas imediações do aeroporto de Cabul, no dia 26 de agosto — o dia mais letal para as forças dos EUA no Afeganistão em mais de um ano.
- O grupo ISIS-K reivindicou os ataques em meio ao caos da evacuação, explorando a vulnerabilidade de uma multidão desesperada que tentava deixar o país antes do prazo final de 31 de agosto.
- Trump, sem ocupar cargo algum, emitiu uma declaração acusando Biden de falhar na proteção dos soldados — ignorando que foi ele mesmo quem negociou com o Talibã e ordenou o início da retirada em 2020.
- O Talibã declarou que qualquer extensão do prazo de 31 de agosto seria uma 'linha vermelha', deixando as forças ocidentais presas entre a urgência da evacuação e a ameaça de novos confrontos.
- A tragédia expôs a fratura política entre as duas administrações: ambas comprometidas com a saída, mas apenas uma presente no momento em que o custo humano se tornou inegável.
Na tarde de 26 de agosto, explosões suicidas rasgaram o perímetro do aeroporto de Cabul, matando treze militares americanos, ferindo outros quatorze e ceifando a vida de ao menos sessenta civis afegãos. Com mais de 140 feridos, foi o dia mais mortífero para as forças dos EUA no Afeganistão desde fevereiro de 2020. O ataque foi reivindicado pelo ISIS-K, braço afegão do Estado Islâmico, e ocorreu enquanto os americanos corriam para concluir a evacuação antes do prazo imposto pelo Talibã.
Donald Trump reagiu em poucas horas. Em uma declaração, prestou condolências às famílias dos soldados e aos civis afegãos, mas foi além: responsabilizou diretamente o presidente Biden pela falha de segurança, afirmando que a tragédia jamais deveria ter sido permitida. Não era a primeira vez — em 15 de agosto, dia em que Cabul caiu para o Talibã, Trump já havia pedido a renúncia de Biden, classificando a retirada como 'uma das maiores derrotas da história americana'.
O que tornava a crítica politicamente complexa era o que Trump deixou de mencionar: foi ele quem, em fevereiro de 2020, ordenou o fim da presença militar americana no Afeganistão e negociou diretamente com o Talibã. O acordo previa a retirada total das forças dos EUA e da OTAN até abril de 2021, em troca de garantias — que nunca se concretizaram — de que o grupo cessaria ataques e romperia laços com organizações terroristas.
O Talibã tomou Cabul em 15 de agosto, onze dias antes dos atentados. Biden optou por não adiar a retirada, mesmo diante da deterioração da segurança. O porta-voz talibã Suhail Shaheen foi categórico: qualquer extensão do prazo de 31 de agosto seria inaceitável. Os treze soldados mortos e os civis afegãos massacrados pagaram o preço de uma decisão que atravessou duas presidências — mas que encontrou apenas uma delas no poder quando a conta chegou.
On Thursday, August 26, suicide bombings tore through the perimeter of Kabul's airport, killing thirteen American service members and wounding fourteen others. At least sixty Afghan civilians died in the blasts, with more than 140 injured. It was the deadliest day for U.S. forces in Afghanistan since February 2020, when two soldiers were killed by an Afghan Army officer who opened fire on them.
Donald Trump, no longer in office, issued a statement within hours. He called the attacks a tragedy and sent condolences to the families of the fallen soldiers and to Afghan civilians caught in what he described as a savage assault. But he did not stop there. He blamed President Biden directly, saying the explosions should never have been permitted to happen—language that suggested the sitting president bore responsibility for the security failure. "This tragedy never should have been allowed," Trump wrote, "which makes our pain even deeper and harder to understand."
The bombings were claimed by ISIS-K, the Afghan branch of the Islamic State. They occurred as American forces were racing to complete their withdrawal from the country by August 31, a deadline the Taliban had declared a red line that could not be extended.
Trump's criticism carried a particular weight because of what he himself had set in motion. In February 2020, it was Trump who ordered the end of America's military presence in Afghanistan. He authorized negotiations between the U.S. government and the Taliban, resulting in an agreement that promised the militant group would cease attacks, refuse support to terrorist organizations, and negotiate with the Afghan government. In exchange, all American and NATO coalition forces would leave by April 2021. Trump had even expressed confidence at the time that the deal would succeed, though he warned that U.S. forces could return with overwhelming speed and force if the Taliban violated the terms.
The agreement, of course, collapsed. The Taliban took Kabul on August 15, just eleven days before the airport bombings. Biden chose not to delay the withdrawal despite the deteriorating security situation. The Taliban, through spokesman Suhail Shaheen, made clear that any extension of the August 31 deadline was unacceptable.
On August 15, the day Kabul fell, Trump had already called for Biden's resignation. He cited not only Afghanistan but also rising COVID-19 cases, the situation at the southern border, energy policy, and economic conditions. He called the withdrawal "one of the greatest defeats in American history." He did not mention his own role in initiating it.
The gap between Trump's criticism and his own decisions revealed a political reality: both administrations had committed to leaving Afghanistan, but only one was in power when the consequences arrived. The thirteen dead soldiers, the wounded, the Afghan civilians killed in the chaos—these were the price paid during Biden's watch, even though the path to that moment had been laid years before.
Notable Quotes
This tragedy never should have been allowed, which makes our pain even deeper and harder to understand.— Donald Trump, in a statement on the Kabul attacks
It is a red line.— Taliban spokesman Suhail Shaheen, on the August 31 withdrawal deadline
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does Trump's criticism carry so much weight here, given that he started the withdrawal?
Because he's not in power. He can define the failure without owning the execution. Biden has to live with the actual consequences—the dead soldiers, the chaos—while Trump gets to say what should have been done differently.
Did Trump's deal with the Taliban actually have any chance of working?
On paper, it looked reasonable. The Taliban promised not to attack, not to harbor terrorists, to negotiate with the Afghan government. But the agreement assumed the Taliban would honor commitments made to a foreign power they'd just spent twenty years fighting. When Trump warned they could return with overwhelming force if terms were broken, he was essentially saying: we don't trust this, but we're leaving anyway.
So Biden inherited an impossible situation?
He inherited a withdrawal timeline and a Taliban that had no incentive to keep promises. But he also chose not to extend the deadline, even as the security situation deteriorated. That was his decision to make, and it's the one people remember.
What about the Afghan civilians who died?
They're the ones with no voice in this argument. Over 140 wounded, at least 60 dead. They weren't part of any agreement. They were just trying to survive in a country that was collapsing in real time.
Does Trump's warning about returning with force still matter?
It's rhetoric now. The U.S. is leaving. The Taliban has set August 31 as a line that cannot be crossed. There's no mechanism for that threat to mean anything anymore.