Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Chaos and Fear Stalk Afghanistan on 9/11
Common Ground Common Sense > National & International News > Op-Ed Articles from the Mainstream Media > Op-Ed Articles from the Mainstream Media Archive
Snuffysmith
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060925/afghanistan
Chaos and Fear Stalk Afghanistan on 9/11 Anniversary
Christian Parenti
Kabul

The fifth anniversary of September 11 finds Afghanistan in a deepening crisis. Security is deteriorating in most parts of the country, due to Taliban insurgency and general lawlessness. Economic development is largely stalled in the south and moving very slowly in the north. Kabul is mired in corruption and layer upon layer of dysfunctional bureaucracy. Bribery is so rampant that even sections of the government have to bribe each other to get simple tasks accomplished.

Most disturbing is the deteriorating security environment, which was punctuated by a massive suicide car bomb that ripped into a US convoy on September 8, a mere 300 yards from the US Embassy and just in front of the main monument honoring the Mujahadeen leader Ahmed Shah Massoud, who was killed by al Qaida two days before the attack on the World Trade Center in New York. The suicide attack killed two US soliders, destroying their vehicle and sixteen Afghan civilians. Dozens more were wounded.

"Now everyone is very sad in Kabul," said a young man who lives near where the suicide bomb struck. "Many people were injured. Even my brother called from Belgium, he was so worried."

Two days later the Taliban killed the governor of the relatively stable, eastern province of Paktia with another suicide bomb. The victim, Governor Abdul Hakim Taniwal, was an Afghan ex-pat, a former sociologist who gave up a comfortable life in Australia to help reconstruct his country. His murder was the forty-eighth suicide bombing this year. Today, at his funeral, another bomb claimed at least five more lives.


In the week leading up to the 9/11 anniversary several rockets hit central Kabul and the airport and one NATO solider was killed by a suicide bomb. At least one other IED was discovered before detonation. And now the US military has announced that they believe a "suicide cell" is operating inside the capital--so sealing Kabul's four main entrance points might not prevent further attacks.

In the south, British-led NATO forces are engaged in an all-out fight against Taliban guerrillas, in the grandly named Operation Medusa. Since early August NATO forces (know locally under the acronym ISAF) have had twenty-three soliders of various nationalities killed and an undisclosed number wounded. Six ISAF troops have died in the last week alone.

Taliban fighters in southern Zabul province interviewed by The Nation in February explained that their war as a jihad against the corruption of the Kabul government and what they see as oppressive foreign troops who do not respect Islam or Pashtun culture.

The British military claims to be super-adroit at handling restive natives, but many accounts portray the British-led counterinsurgency in the south as badly botched. On September 9 and 10, NATO forces used artillery and close air support to kill ninety-four insurgents one day and ninety-two the next, describing the second battle among villages and orchards as a "Taliban counter-attack."

There are reports of civilian casualties filtering from the Operation Medusa battleground, but follow-up investigation by journalists--particularly non-Afghan reporters--is impossible as the Taliban are almost totally hostile to the press.

At a September 10 press briefing, NATO spokesman Mark Laity attempted to assure journalist that there would be a full investigation into civilian deaths, while an officer in the south simply affirmed that the Taliban in the Panjwayi-Zhari area of Kandahar Province "have suffered significant attrition."

"They don't seem to understand that if you kill one person you make an enemy of the whole family," said Omar, an increasingly pessimistic Kabul businessman.

As hostility among the Pashtun tribes of the South grows fiercer, NATO tactics have escalated to ever more lethal levels.

One British officer, Captain Leo Docherty, a former aide de camp to the commander of UK forces in Helmand province, was so disgusted by the war that he quit the British Army last month, calling the campaign in Afghanistan "grotesquely clumsy" and "a textbook case of how to screw up a counterinsurgency." He accused UK and US forces of bombing and strafing villages.

Such high-tech brutality is no doubt party fueled by NATO's failure to fill its original commitments: ISAF's nearly 20,000 troops are thinly spread, operating across 85 percent of the country.

Just south of Kabul, in Logar province, residents report that the Taliban are in control of whole districts; their power is based in part on local loyalties to the Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a warlord who was once backed by the CIA but is now with the Taliban, and partly on their attempts to eradicate corrupt government officials and allow poppy cultivation--both of which are very popular with poor farmers.

Economically the situation in Afghanistan is little better. Kabul has, by some estimates, more that doubled in size since 2001 and is now home to an estimated 4 million people most of whom live in squalid conditions. There is only about four hours of city power on most days. Water is also in short supply, most slum dwellers have to buy it from tanker trucks; in the countryside drought and lack of infrastructure are withering crops. Many NGOs continue to scale back: during the May 29 Kabul riots international officers were attacked and NGO staff (almost all local Afghans) are getting killed on the roads. These murders rarely make the news.

Several key highway links have been paved and that has improved commerce and communications. But the road from Kabul to Kandahar, which is now good, suffered from very bad security.

In the face of all this, NATO member states meeting in Warsaw acknowledged the need to fulfill their commitments in Afghanistan by sending more troops--but they did not actually promise to do so.

The sad contradiction of Afghanistan is that many of the individuals and NGOs that joined the reconstruction effort here were not supportive of the American-led assault for fear that it would serve as a stepping-stone to Iraq and quickly devolve into a neocolonial occupation. But the fall of the Taliban was also seen as Afghanistan's last, best chance at avoiding several more decades of anarchy, privation and civil war. That hope is now fading.
Snuffysmith
Resurgent Taliban takes advantage of Afghan chaos
Cynthia Tucker - Universal Press Syndicate

09.11.06 - On Sept. 20, 2001, President Bush delivered the speech of a lifetime, reassuring a stunned nation and promising swift and certain retribution. "Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done," he declared in one of his more memorable turns of phrase.

I believed him. When he later announced the campaign to stamp out the Taliban, I applauded. Like most Americans, I desperately wanted to see a strong and competent president who would ferret out the terrorists, shut down their recruitment pipeline and restore our sense of security. I didn't think any of that would be easy, but I thought Bush meant what he said.

He didn't.

The incursion into Afghanistan -- which started out well enough -- was just the first of a series of half-hearted feints at doing the right thing, just the beginning of a long and disastrous season of public relations gimmicks designed to rally Americans around the flag and lay the groundwork for an imperial presidency. Bush had no intention of putting enough troops on the ground to rout the Taliban and catch Osama bin Laden; he didn't plan to spend the money or make the commitment to rebuild Afghanistan; he didn't have the vision or the patience required to resurrect a failed state.

So it comes as no great surprise that, five years after 9/11, Afghanistan has reverted to a cauldron of violence and corruption, a haven for jihadists and narco-terrorists, a miserable backwater teeming with contempt for central government authority. Currently, coalition soldiers are dying in Afghanistan at nearly the same rate as in Iraq as they tangle with a resurgent Taliban and a motley assortment of warlords.

As in Iraq, reconstruction efforts have faltered because of security issues. As a report in the London-based Financial Times put it, "With this growing lawlessness, the very conditions that brought the Islamic student militia of the Taliban to power in 1996 are being re-created."

Jihadists fund their insurgence with drugs; this year, Afghanistan's opium harvest will be "a staggering 92 percent of total world supply," according to Antonio Maria Costa, executive director of the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime. In 2001, under Taliban rule, the battered country had about 29 square miles of opium poppies under cultivation; this year, an estimated 637 square miles are under cultivation.

The worst news of all is the recent capitulation to pro-Taliban militants by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, who signed an accord in which he promised to stop trying to root out Taliban terrorists who hide in the rugged western mountains of Pakistan. Musharraf, of course, is a strong U.S. ally who has just given quarter to our enemies. (The Pakistani leader extracted a pledge from tribal leaders that they would stop allowing cross-border raids by pro-Taliban forces into Afghanistan, but Western allies can hardly depend on that promise.)

Still, it's hard to blame Musharraf for our failure to capture bin Laden. The Pentagon and the White House are responsible for allowing bin Laden to slip the noose in December 2001, when key intelligence sources placed him somewhere in the caves of Tora Bora, on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

The Pentagon didn't have enough troops on the ground to cut off possible escape routes, partly because top military officials had already begun to change their focus to an invasion of Iraq. Gen. Tommy Franks left bin Laden's capture up to tribal leaders and other surrogates, and bin Laden and several of his lieutenants escaped.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld never had much enthusiasm for striking Afghanistan, complaining that there "weren't any good targets" there, according to Richard Clarke, a former national terrorism expert. Never mind that Afghanistan was the training ground for al-Qaida, the group responsible for the atrocities of 9/11. (Clarke's book, "Against All Enemies," was an early contribution to the growing canon exposing the mistakes, misjudgments, arrogance and incompetence of the Bush administration's "war on terror.")

Rumsfeld's poor judgment continued when he refused Secretary of State Colin Powell's request in 2002 to send several thousand U.S. troops to help secure areas of Afghanistan outside Kabul. As a consequence, President Hamid Karzai has never gained control of his country.

In June 2004, Bush stood in the Rose Garden with Karzai for a "Mission Accomplished" moment, proudly declaring, "Afghanistan is no longer a terrorist factory sending thousands of killers into the world." No, now it's a drug factory sending tons of heroin into the world. A new crop of terrorists won't be far behind the new crop of dope.


© 2006, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution


URL: http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=21341
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.