The shocking collapse of Afghan military amidst the advance of Taliban is more than a great danger - there needs a complete re-examination on the U.S. policies

I'll take an example of a far away past.

In 1950, when North Korea, armed to teeth by the Soviet Union, invaded the poorly organised South, the South was nearly overrun. The United States and her allies came to intervene, successfully curbed the communist expansion, and saved the South, recovered Seoul, before a ceasefire treaty was signed in 1953, temporarily halted all hostilities. Since 1953, South Korea began its sojourn journey from a completely devastated nation to become one of the greatest economic prospects in the modern world. All were achieved under a similar American-backed system.

However, with the exception of South Korea, almost every America-backed government collapsed immediately when the United States began the process of leaving. Why? And what happened? South Korea's success should have been copied. Instead, what we saw was South Vietnam, Iraq and most recently, Afghanistan - where America-backed administrations collapsed horrendously. What makes them lack so much from South Korea, or, there is something wrong with American diplomacy?

It's better to understand this if you are a Korean. By 1953, the Republic of Korea (South) was born with one of the worst human development in the world, below Ghana and Tunisia. Your country had a very weak-structured government. Meanwhile, communist sympathisers with Kim Il-sung were everywhere, you didn't know when would they stage a revolution. This came to the ears of Syngman Rhee, the first President-dictator of the Republic. To deal with the problem, Syngman Rhee ruled as a strongman. Under Rhee, he immediately institutionalised the establishment of the Christian Church as a religious tool against communism, filling the military with religious figures (communists have been notoriously anti-religion) and the widespread repression of dissidents, adding with merciless massacres on communists. He was deposed in 1960, but his hand-picked successor, Park Chung-hee, was even more draconian.

Park Chung-hee removed the elected government in 1962, wishing to fulfil the work Rhee left. With a similar authoritarian mind, Park Chung-hee initiated massive economic reforms, while at the same time held a strong grip on the secret police and military. Park's experience as a veteran of WWII and the Korean War shaped his belief on only a complete, even inhumane, authoritarian grip, that South Korea could survive the communist north. During this time, he sent soldiers to Vietnam and received aid from the United States, so that American troops could stay in the peninsula; he also began an insane nuclear program, which would be suspended by the future administration. Park was quick to amass billions of dollars transforming South Korea and survived various assassination attempts, including two from North Korea. By the 1970s, Park's popularity deteriorated, despite the economic miracle, and was killed in 1979. But Park was able to fill his loyalists in power to secure the base.

Chun Doo-hwan came to power in 1980, after Park's death, but the authoritarian grip was unchanged. He sought to keep continuing the economic miracle whilst at the same time he tried to eradicate all the remnants of communist forces there. He utilised brutal methods, notably the massacre of Gwangju in 1980 and operating re-education camps under the mask of anti-communism. By this time, his eight-year reign was seen as similar as Rhee and Park. He was toppled in 1988, but by this time, South Korea's rival, North Korea, was weak enough to be no longer threatening economically, considering the collapse of the Soviet Union was clear. That meant the process of democratisation had begun, with South Korea now being the hub of world's economy in Asia and a promising democracy.

South Korea's dictator Park Chung-hee, reigned from 1962 till his assassination in 1979.

As such, many people have been dazzling to see how America-backed governments in other parts of Asia went downhill so quickly, except for South Korea. Why is the South Korean model not being used as a potential key for the United States to handle with various allies in Asia?

The answer is very complex due to multifaceted issues relating to the culture, history and legacy. Yet it all ended with one thing: the U.S. implemented wrong men in charge, something it should have undone at first and learnt from how it pumped up South Korea successfully. In the case of South Vietnam, it built a cult surrounding the extremely corrupt Ngo Dinh Diem, who valued his own Catholic dynasty. In Iraq, it created a sectarian parliamentary government after killing Saddam Hussein. In Afghanistan, it could not manage to build a proper government without support from the Pashtun majority due to the latter's alignment with Taliban. This mismanagement didn't end with allies-in-war of America; back in the 1990s when Russia transititioned from a communist to a capitalist state, the United States provided backup for the notoriously corrupt Boris Yeltsin and did not listen to widespread public grievances Russians endured.

Such these mistakes engineered its opponents to revenge.

In South Vietnam, when it became clear that Ngo Dinh Diem's government had become unpopular, the CIA installed a coup, killing him and put a pro-American symbolic head in charge, but instead opened a series of unstable juntas as neither these governments had their capabilities to leverage the American interests and the disenfranchised Vietnamese populace. When the Americans left, the ARVN (Army of the Republic of Vietnam) slowly collapsed despite its superior facilities and weapons, before finally disappeared in 1975.

In Russia, soon after Putin took power, he restarted the empire-building project and became increasingly belligerent against the United States, going as far as hacking the 2016 elections with helps from Israel to bring Donald Trump to power as a "repatriation". Russia has also aided right-wingers across the EU to rebel against the Union, as well as having tacit backing for autocratic governments of Poland, Slovenia and Hungary (the most recent pass of television bill by the PiS regime in Poland sought to undermine political freedom in the country was a copycat of Russia's media law) - much to the shock of Europe.

In Iraq, the establishment of a sectarian government resulted in Iraqi Armed Forces quickly collapsed when Islamic State (Daesh), which shares similar level of terror to Taliban, advanced. Even when ISIS fell, Iraqi military is still unable to escape the Iranian meddling, resulting in Iraq easily capitulated without firing a live round, while ISIS remnants remain deeply hidden and wait for its resurgence.

In Afghanistan, this is extremely dangerous as the ongoing quick collapse of Afghan civilian and military administration can bring the reign of terror Taliban long wanted for to be back. Not just that, Al-Qaeda and ISIS can also get the benefits from it - many Taliban commanders on its rapid advance in Afghanistan have been indoctrinated with the terror methods Daesh members taught them.

For the United States, it has totally missed out how to move out from the Cold War ethics. Instead of becoming more and more rational about the new world post-Cold War in order to engage with new challenges, it maintains the same paranoia. As the U.S. fails to see out, less and less allies trust the country to hold the promise. Ukraine, which is at war with Russia, fears it could be the next victim, after seeing how Afghanistan is on the verge of returning to the status as a failed state when NATO is evacuating.

The United States needs a complete re-examination of itself - to see how and why the country's leadership keeps up with this outdated Cold War mentality, and why it didn't learn from South Korea instead. Only by wondering itself the mistakes of the past, and why it succeeded with South Korea but  not the others, the United States may move to the future and begin to engage with the difficult reality, when conflicts with China are looming.