888,246. That’s the number of British, colonial and Commonwealth soldiers who died in the First World War. And that’s also the number of red ceramic poppies placed in the moat around the Tower of London to honour those who had fallen in the Great War.

Each year, Remembr­ance Day is observed across the UK in memory of soldiers, sailors and airmen killed in the many wars Britain has fought. Red poppies adorn millions of lapels and dresses across the country. TV anchors, politicians and common citizens wear them as a mark of grief. At street corners in towns and cities, volunteers from The Royal British Legion hand out plastic and paper poppies to passers-by who place their donations to the Legion in small, round boxes.

The large ceramic flowers around the Tower are being sent to hundreds of thousands of donors who had contributed 25 pounds each. Last year, the Legion collected 30 million pounds; this year, the figure is already 40 million. The money is used to support war veterans and their families.

The spectacle created by 888, 246 flame-red poppies around the Tower of London drew tens of thousands of visitors every day. The Queen visited the site to pay homage to the fallen, and the government decided to extend the date by which the poppies were to be removed. Poppies were originally chosen to symbolise the flowers on the field of Flanders in Belgium where so many thousands of soldiers were massacred in ferocious fighting that involved infantrymen charging fortified positions defended by machine guns and artillery.

This Remembrance Sunday was special as it fell on the hundredth anniversary of the British entry into what became known as the First World War. Looking back, it is hard to imagine such a huge sacrifice in a war that still makes no sense, and serves to remind us that once the war drums start pounding, politicians quickly lose control over events. In this case, although the German Kaiser wanted to delay his army’s push into Belgium, he was told by his generals that it was too late as the intricate Schlieffen Plan had come into motion.

2014 also marks the end of Britain’s Fourth Afghan War, and there have been numerous articles and TV discussions about what — if anything — was achieved. The consensus is that the country’s longest war in modern history has ended if not in defeat, certainly not in victory. In a two-part documentary called Afghanistan: The Lion’s Last Roar?, generals admitted that the army had not been prepared for the scale and ferocity of the fighting.

One American expert was of the view that Afghanistan may have been the scene of Britain’s last major overseas military operation. Around two-thirds of Britons polled recently thought that the Afghan war had not been worth the lives and money spent on it. And as Cameron’s defeat in parliament over intervention in Syria shows, there is little stomach to send soldiers abroad to fight and die in distant lands.

When I compare the casualties in Afghanistan with the enormous loss of lives in the First World War, I am struck by how attitudes have changed over the last century. Now, each coffin carrying a dead soldier is driven solemnly with hundreds of mourners lining the streets. Footage of his family is shown on national TV, while his funeral is widely covered by the media. This personalisation of the dead has made Britons increasingly reluctant to put more lives at risk.

Also, as a result of Tony Blair’s lies to the British public when he took the country to war against Iraq, the public’s trust in politicians has declined sharply. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq posed any threat to Britain, and now there is little support for any more foreign adventures. This clearly restricts politicians wishing to pursue glory and vague objectives abroad.

Whatever few gains have been made in Afghanistan over the last 13 years are fragile and vulnerable. Reports from the war-ravaged country suggest that the Taliban are tightening their grip over provinces like Helmand that had been the scene of many bloody battles between the militants and ISAF troops.

In the immediate aftermath of the attack on Afghanistan, Blair flew in to visit British troops, and promised Afghans that unlike the past, this time they would not be abandoned. And yet this is precisely what has happened. After hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives spent since the 2001 invasion, there is every danger of the country slipping back into Taliban control.

It is true that this period has seen positive things like education for hundreds of thousands of girls, and the introduction of a nascent democratic order. But billions have been wasted, and many opportunities to do so much more lost.

Another setback for the British army has been a loss of professional reputation. Both in Basra and Helmand, units had to be bailed out by the Americans. Before the two wars began, the British boasted of their expertise in counter-insurgency warfare gained in Malaysia, Kenya and Ireland. But against different enemies and in different conditions, they were severely tested and found lacking.

Americans, too, have lost their appetite for war. So both countries are now resorting to air power to achieve their limited aims in Iraq and Syria, although Britain has yet to launch air raids against the Islamic State in Syria.

And yet there will be situations in the future when national interest might require boots on the ground. If and when that happens, politicians will have to make a very strong case before the public climbs on board. If politicians have indeed learned the lesson that force is not the first solution to problems, this may be the one positive thing to emerge from 13 years of bloodshed.

Published in Dawn, November 17th, 2014