Skip to content

During an hour-long conversation mid-flight, he laid out…

“During an hour-long conversation mid-flight, he laid out his theory of the war. First, Jones said, the United States could not lose the war or be seen as losing the war. 'If we're not successful here,' Jones said, 'you'll have a staging base for global terrorism all over the world. People will say…” quote by Bob Woodward
Download Open image
““During an hour-long conversation mid-flight, he laid out his theory of the war. First, Jones said, the United States could not lose the war or be seen as losing the war. 'If we're not successful here,' Jones said, 'you'll have a staging base for global terrorism all over the world. People will say the terrorists won. And you'll see expressions of these kinds of things in Africa, South America, you name it. Any developing country is going to say, this is the way we beat [the United States], and we're going to have a bigger problem.' A setback or loss for the United States would be 'a tremendous boost for jihadist extremists, fundamentalists all over the world' and provide 'a global infusion of morale and energy, and these people don't need much.' Jones went on, using the kind of rhetoric that Obama had shied away from, 'It's certainly a clash of civilizations. It's a clash of religions. It's a clash of almost concepts of how to live.' The conflict is that deep, he said. 'So I think if you don't succeed in Afghanistan, you will be fighting in more places. 'Second, if we don't succeed here, organizations like NATO, by association the European Union, and the United Nations might be relegated to the dustbin of history.' Third, 'I say, be careful you don't over-Americanize the war. I know that we're going to do a large part of it,' but it was essential to get active, increased participation by the other 41 nations, get their buy-in and make them feel they have ownership in the outcome. Fourth, he said that there had been way too much emphasis on the military, almost an overmilitarization of the war. The key to leaving a somewhat stable Afghanistan in a reasonable time frame was improving governance and the rule of law, in order to reduce corruption. There also needed to be economic development and more participation by the Afghan security forces. It sounded like a good case, but I wondered if everyone on the American side had the same understanding of our goals. What was meant by victory? For that matter, what constituted not losing? And when might that happen? Could there be a deadline?””

Bob Woodward

About This Quote

This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.

The quote argues that US failure in Afghanistan would embolden jihadist groups, undermine international institutions, and spread conflict, while emphasizing the need for multilateral ownership, good governance, and development over pure militarism.

In simple terms: If the US loses, terrorism spreads and global bodies lose credibility; success needs shared effort and nation‑building.

Key Takeaway

Prioritize multilateral engagement and governance reforms.

Themes

geopolitics war policy international relations

Mood

cautious analytical concerned

Type

political strategic reflective

When to use this quote

  • diplomatic negotiations
  • military planning
  • development aid
  • anti‑corruption reforms
  • regional security conferences

Key Concepts

clash of civilizations over‑militarization state building counterterrorism

Questions to Reflect On

  • How can multilateral ownership be ensured without diluting accountability?
  • What balance of military and civil efforts yields sustainable peace?
A Different Perspective

Over‑reliance on military solutions can neglect local dynamics and prolong conflict.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ No ratings yet

More by Bob Woodward

Explore all 100 Bob Woodward quotes

More Afghanistan quotes

Browse all 1,159 Afghanistan quotes