Without soldiers on the ground, the United States faced a strategic problem.
En Helsinki, los máximos jefes militares de Estados Unidos y Rusia se reunieron para enfrentar una pregunta que ninguna retirada puede silenciar: ¿quién vigila el vacío que deja una guerra que termina? Con las tropas estadounidenses fuera de Afganistán pero las amenazas terroristas intactas, Washington busca nuevos puntos de apoyo en Asia Central, mientras Moscú traza líneas que no desea ver cruzadas. Es el viejo dilema de las grandes potencias: cómo compartir un mundo que ninguna está dispuesta a ceder.
- La retirada estadounidense de Afganistán no clausuró la guerra contra el terrorismo, sino que la dejó sin infraestructura desde donde librarla.
- Washington presiona a los países vecinos de Afganistán para instalar bases militares e intercambiar inteligencia, pero Moscú ha advertido directamente a esas naciones que no abran sus puertas a tropas americanas.
- Un ataque con dron en Kabul, presentado inicialmente como un golpe certero contra un extremista, resultó haber matado a diez civiles, siete de ellos niños, poniendo en duda la fiabilidad de la guerra remota.
- Milley y Gerasimov se reunieron en privado, sin declaraciones sustantivas, en un diálogo que lleva años intentando contener lo que podría convertirse en una colisión directa de intereses.
- El futuro de la lucha antiterrorista en Afganistán depende ahora de negociaciones diplomáticas y militares cuyo resultado aún no tiene forma visible.
Mark Milley, el oficial de mayor rango del ejército estadounidense, se reunió con su homólogo ruso, el general Valery Gerasimov, en Helsinki a finales de septiembre. El encuentro llegaba pocas semanas después de que las tropas americanas abandonaran Afganistán tras dos décadas de guerra, dejando un vacío estratégico que ambas potencias debían ahora gestionar desde posiciones opuestas.
Sin soldados sobre el terreno, Washington necesitaba otra cosa: posiciones avanzadas. El Pentágono buscaba establecer bases militares en los países que bordean Afganistán —Tayikistán, Uzbekistán, Turkmenistán— junto con acuerdos de inteligencia que permitieran seguir combatiendo al terrorismo desde la distancia. Rusia respondió con claridad. El canciller Ryabkov advirtió en julio que cualquier despliegue estadounidense en esa región era inaceptable, y Moscú trabajó activamente para convencer a los líderes centroasiáticos de no ceder ese espacio.
La reunión fue descrita oficialmente como parte de los esfuerzos de reducción de riesgos. Ninguno de los dos generales reveló el contenido de sus conversaciones. Pero el contexto hablaba por sí solo: días antes, un ataque con dron estadounidense en Kabul, presentado inicialmente como un golpe contra un extremista islámico, había resultado ser un error fatal. Murieron diez civiles, siete de ellos niños. El general McKenzie reconoció el error, aunque aclaró que eso no detendría futuras operaciones con drones.
Milley y Gerasimov llevan años hablando, al menos seis veces en los últimos tres años. No son extraños. Son dos militares que intentan administrar una región donde los intereses de sus países chocan sin solución sencilla a la vista. Estados Unidos quiere mantener su capacidad antiterrorista en Afganistán. Rusia no quiere ver tropas americanas en su frontera. Lo que quedaba por ver era si existía algún espacio entre esas dos posiciones donde ambos pudieran coexistir.
Mark Milley, the highest-ranking military officer in the United States, sat down with his Russian counterpart, General Valery Gerasimov, in Helsinki on a Wednesday in late September. The timing was not accidental. Just weeks earlier, American troops had withdrawn from Afghanistan after two decades of war, leaving behind a vacuum that both Washington and Moscow now had to navigate—though in opposite directions.
Without soldiers on the ground, the United States faced a strategic problem. Al Qaeda and the Islamic State still operated in Afghanistan, and American officials worried they would regroup and strike at the homeland or its allies. To prevent that, Washington needed something it no longer had: forward positions. The Pentagon wanted to establish military bases in the countries that bordered Afghanistan—Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and others in Central Asia. It also wanted intelligence-sharing agreements and other counterterrorism arrangements. These were not abstract requests. They were the infrastructure of a war that was supposed to continue, just from a distance.
Russia had other ideas. In July, Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov had delivered a blunt warning: any deployment of American troops in countries adjacent to Afghanistan was unacceptable. He did not soften the language. Ryabkov said Moscow had told the United States directly and clearly that such a move would change not just how Russia perceived events in the region, but the relationship between the two powers itself. Russia had also been working the phones in Central Asia, warning those nations' leaders not to allow American soldiers within their borders. It was a quiet but forceful campaign to keep the United States out.
The meeting in Helsinki was framed as a continuation of risk-reduction talks, a way to lower tensions and prevent conflicts from spiraling. Both sides agreed not to discuss what was actually said—a pattern they had established in previous conversations. Milley declined to brief reporters traveling with him. His spokesman, Colonel Dave Butler, offered only the vaguest language: the generals had met to reduce risks and de-escalate.
But the context was impossible to ignore. Just days before the meeting, the United States had carried out a drone strike in Kabul during the chaotic final phase of the American evacuation. Officials initially said the strike had killed an Islamic extremist planning to attack the airport. That story held for a while. Then it unraveled. The strike had killed ten civilians, seven of them children. It was a mistake—a tragic one, in the words of General Frank McKenzie, who heads United States Central Command. McKenzie said the error did not mean the United States would stop conducting drone strikes against terrorists in Afghanistan. But the incident had raised hard questions about the future of remote warfare, about the reliability of intelligence gathered from thousands of miles away, about the cost of fighting an enemy you cannot see.
Gerasimov and Milley had spoken at least six times in the previous three years, including twice already in 2021. They had met in person in Bern at the end of 2019. These were not first conversations between strangers. They were the ongoing dialogue of two military powers trying to manage a region where their interests collided. The United States wanted to maintain its counterterrorism capability in Afghanistan. Russia wanted to prevent American military expansion on its doorstep. Neither side was going to simply concede. What remained to be seen was whether they could find some way to coexist in the space between those two positions.
Citações Notáveis
Any deployment of American troops in countries adjacent to Afghanistan is unacceptable— Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, July 2021
The strike was a tragic error, but not comparable with future counterterrorism attacks— General Frank McKenzie, US Central Command
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does the US need bases in Central Asia if it's no longer fighting in Afghanistan itself?
Because the threat didn't disappear when the troops left. Al Qaeda and ISIS are still there, still plotting. Without bases nearby, the US loses the ability to respond quickly—it loses eyes and ears on the ground. Drones can only do so much if you don't have good intelligence.
And Russia sees those bases as a threat to itself?
Not just a threat. An encroachment. Russia has its own interests in Central Asia—influence, stability on its southern border. American military presence there looks like the US trying to contain Russia, to build a ring of bases around it. From Moscow's perspective, it's the same pattern that's been playing out for decades.
But surely they can negotiate something. They've talked before.
They talk constantly. But talking and agreeing are different things. Russia has already warned the Central Asian countries not to host American troops. That's not a negotiating position—that's a line in the sand. The US wants bases. Russia says no. It's hard to split the difference on something like that.
What about the drone strike that killed the civilians? Does that change anything?
It complicates things. It raises questions about whether remote warfare even works—whether you can fight a war from thousands of miles away without making catastrophic mistakes. If the US can't reliably conduct drone strikes, then the whole rationale for bases in Central Asia becomes weaker. But it doesn't resolve the fundamental disagreement between Washington and Moscow.
So what happens next?
They keep talking. They keep warning each other. And the region stays caught in the middle, trying to figure out which power to align with, or whether it can stay neutral. That's the real story—not what Milley and Gerasimov say to each other, but what the countries around Afghanistan do.