Showing posts with label Af-Pak Channel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Af-Pak Channel. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

De-Oxygenating in Afghanistan?

AFPAK Channel reports:

Over the weekend, at least 14 Afghan policemen and a district governor were killed in Taliban attacks in Afghanistan's northern Kunduz province, some of whom were possibly poisoned beforehand, and in Badakhshan province (AP, AFP, NYT, The News). Several coalition service members and Afghan civilians were killed in roadside bombings over the weekend in southern and eastern Afghanistan, and a NATO spokesman told reporters, "We are taking the oxygen out of the insurgency" (AP, AJE, Reuters). . .

At next week's international conference in Kabul, Hamid Karzai reportedly plans to ask for at least 50 percent of the nearly $13 billion pledged to Afghanistan over the next five years to be channeled through the Afghan government, in spite of rampant corruption (Reuters). . .

Afghanistan's security forces remain riddled with corruption, drug addiction, and Taliban infiltration, in addition to a flawed system for measuring their progress (Independent).


What appears to be happening is chaos. It is hard to see a sympathetic figure or group anywhere in Afghanistan. The NATO spokesman who was told to say that NATO is taking the oxygen away from the insurgency was exaggerating. Only time will tell what is to be, but President Obama has promised to withdraw fighting forces within about one year, and before you know it, there will be reports that the bitter winter is approaching and fighting will cease.

Are the Taliban going to be strangled for lack of oxygen within months?

Do you really want Hamid Karzai's government to get "at least" half the money going into Afghanistan for years? If so, perhaps you own shares in banks in Dubai or Switzerland.

Copyright (C) Long Lake LLC 2010

Monday, June 14, 2010

Rationale for AFghanistan War Looking Dumber

From AFPAK Channel:

After a particularly unconvincing March 8 intelligence briefing at NATO headquarters in Kabul that U.S. officers had hoped would persuade Karzai to remove his influential half-brother Ahmed Wali Karzai from power in Kandahar, Gen. McChrystal directed his subordinates to "stop saying bad stuff about AWK" and work with him instead (Wash Post). AWK, who reportedly reads all his press clippings, allegedly met now-captured Taliban no. 2 Mullah Baradar twice in January in the border town of Spin Boldak (NYT). The U.S. military's intelligence network, initially designed for tracking insurgents, is now focusing more on identifying Afghanistan's pervasive corruption (NYT).

Is it worth printing money for this?

And from the same issue, in follow-up re the revelation about mineral wealth in Afghanistan, the military is part of the deal:

Although there are "a lot of ifs," according to Gen. David Petraeus, "there is stunning potential here."

I thought the military was for war-fighting, not prospecting.

Now we know part of what German president Koeler was referring to before he recently resigned:

Koehler said May 22 upon his return from a trip to Afghanistan that "in emergencies, military intervention is necessary to uphold our interests, like for example free trade routes, for example to prevent regional instabilities which could have a negative impact on our chances in terms of trade, jobs and income."

The more the U. S./NATO effort in Pak-ghanistan appears to be an old-fashioned imperialist war for control of mineral and opium resources, the more the effort will breed opposition. It won't matter how many "militants" are killed by Predators.

Meanwhile the 100,000 American soldiers in Afghanistan could be doing useful things at home for the same expense and without all the death and disability they are suffering.

Killing "foreigners" (al-Qaeda) with drones is inexpensive and internationally defensible. The rest of this effort is looking dicier by the day.

Copyright (C) Long Lake LLC 2010

Friday, December 11, 2009

Not All Rosy in Pakistan

In Pakistan's Failing War on Terror, Foreign Policy's Af-Pak Channel gives the reader an alternative reality from that seen via pro-government unverified reports of one success after another in the fight against militants in Pakistan, via www.dawn.com.

Reading this downbeat article is reminiscent of reading about something from other foreign wars. The truth is that neither you nor I will ever really understand this part of the world. There is so much of local politics in all this stuff that even if we were to believe what we were told, we lack the full context to understand what it means.

What appears to be true is that neither the Afghans nor the Pakistanis like Americans.

Have we not enough problems at home?

We bought Osama bin Laden once. Can we really not buy off al-Qaeda to enough of an extent that it will play nice enough that we can throttle back our offensive war machine that former General Eisenhower warned against?

Reading the Af-Pak Channel piece, I just wonder if all this military activity is worth it, no matter that there are truly "bad guys" out there. Remember that the USSR collapsed due to over-reach and a failing economy. Let's make sure that doesn't happen to us next.

Caveat warrior.

Copyright (C) Long Lake LLC 2009