Published on Monday, April 12, 2010 by Associated Press
Anti-American Protests Sparked after NATO Forces Open Fire on Cilivian Afghan Bus
Afghan official: 4 civilians killed by NATO troops
by Noor Khan and Kathy Gannon
Article found at http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/04/12-1
Here are excerpts from the article.
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan —
....The international troops opened fire on the civilian bus early Monday in a southern Afghan city, killing four people and wounding 18, the local governor's spokesman said.(AP Photo/Allauddin Khan)
....A passenger interviewed at Kandahar hospital, Rozi Mohammad, said they had just left the Kandahar terminal when the bus pulled over to allow an American convoy to pass. Shooting broke out as the third or fourth American vehicle went by, he said, with gunfire coming from the direction of the convoy.
....Within hours, scores of Afghans had blocked the main highway out of Kandahar city with burning tires, chanting "Death to America," and calling for the downfall of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, himself a Kandahar native.
....Kandahar's mayor said Monday's shootings would likely deal a major setback to coalition hopes of winning popular support for the upcoming offensive."
Monday, April 12, 2010
Marja residents say security has not improved
Juan Cole points out on his Informed Comment blog today that the US-led assault on Marja has not brought local residents the security they were promised.
Cole:
The violence is placing in doubt supposed US achievements on the security front. Pajwhok News Agency reports that, ironically, the residents of Marjah are complaining about poor security in the aftermath of the US move into that area. They say that there is poor security, that civilians are caught in the cross-fire between US/ Afghanistan National Army troops and the Taliban, and that it is dangerous to work their fields (Marjah is a set of agricultural villages and scattered farm houses). They say that the Afghanistan police have not provided even the level of security that the Taliban once had.
Here are excerpts from the report by the Pajwhok News Agency, to which Cole alludes. You can find the full report at http://www.outlookafghanistan.net/news_Pages/Main%20news3.html#70
Report: Marjah Residents Complain of Poor Security
LASHKARGAH - Residents of the Marjah district in southern Helmand province say a recent military operation has failed to bring any improvement to their lives. Instead the offensive has added to their problems.
Cole:
The violence is placing in doubt supposed US achievements on the security front. Pajwhok News Agency reports that, ironically, the residents of Marjah are complaining about poor security in the aftermath of the US move into that area. They say that there is poor security, that civilians are caught in the cross-fire between US/ Afghanistan National Army troops and the Taliban, and that it is dangerous to work their fields (Marjah is a set of agricultural villages and scattered farm houses). They say that the Afghanistan police have not provided even the level of security that the Taliban once had.
Here are excerpts from the report by the Pajwhok News Agency, to which Cole alludes. You can find the full report at http://www.outlookafghanistan.net/news_Pages/Main%20news3.html#70
Report: Marjah Residents Complain of Poor Security
LASHKARGAH - Residents of the Marjah district in southern Helmand province say a recent military operation has failed to bring any improvement to their lives. Instead the offensive has added to their problems.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
A few miscellaneous facts on profligate US occupation of Afghanistan
The following excerpts come from a longer article by Tom Englehardt that appears at http://www.zcommunications.org/believe-it-or-not-2010-imperial-edition-by-tom-engelhardt
The article is titled "Believe It or Not (2010 Imperial Edition)," with a subtitle: "US War-Fightin Numbers to Knock Your Socks Off."
Engelhardt writes regular in-depth articles at tomdispatch and other sites that keep readers up-to-date on a vareity of topics, particularly US foreign policy and wars. The excerpted paragraphs that follow illustrate the enormous sums the US military wastes in Afghanistan, though, as Engelhardt's essay reveals, the proflicacy is not limited to Afghanistan. There is also reflected in the numbers the ongoing power of the military-industrial complex, the hubris of our government leaders, including President Obama when it comes to Afghanistan, the hollowness of the U.S. Congress on most military matters, and the counter-productive consequences associated with the self-congratulatory claim of American hegemony.
-----------------------------------
Excerpts from Tom Engelhardt's essay.
....* Believe it or not, for instance, U.S. commanders in our war zones have more than one billion congressionally mandated dollars a year at their disposal to spend on making "friends with local citizens and help[ing] struggling economies." It's all socked away in the Commander's Emergency Response Program. Think of it as a local community-bribery account which, best of all, seems not to require the slightest accountability to Congress for where or how the money is spent.
....* Believe it or not, the Defense Logistics Agency shipped 1.1 million hamburger patties to Afghanistan in the month of March 2010 (nearly doubling the March 2009 figure). Almost any number you might care to consider related to the Afghan War is similarly on the rise. By the fall, the number of American troops there will have nearly tripled since President Obama took office; American deaths in Afghanistan have doubled in the first months of 2010, while the number of wounded has tripled; insurgent roadside bomb (IED) attacks more than doubled in 2009 and are still rising; U.S. drone strikes almost doubled in 2009 and are on track to triple this year; and fuel deliveries to Afghanistan have nearly doubled, rising from 15 million gallons a month in March 2009 to 27 million this March. (Keep in mind that, by the time a gallon of gas has made it to U.S. troops in the field, its cost is estimated at up to $100.)
....* Believe it or not, according to Nick Turse of TomDispatch.com, nearly 400 bases for U.S. troops, CIA operatives, special operations forces, NATO allies, and civilian contractors have already been constructed in Afghanistan, topping the base-building figures for Iraq by about 100 in a situation in which almost every bit of material has to be transported into the country. The base-building spree has yet to end.
* Believe it or not, according to the Washington Post, the Defense Department has awarded a contract worth up to $360 million to the son of an Afghan cabinet minister to transport U.S. military supplies through some of the most dangerous parts of Afghanistan -- and his company has no trucks. (He hires subcontractors who evidently pay off the Taliban as part of a large-scale protection racket that allows the supplies through unharmed.) This contract is, in turn, part of a $2.1 billion Host Nation Trucking contract whose recipients may be deeply involved in extortion and smuggling rackets, and over which the Pentagon reportedly exercises little oversight.
.... And there's one more small contrast to be made when it comes to the finest military in the history of the world: for all the private security guards, mountains of burgers, lakes of gasoline, miles of blast walls, and satchels of cash to pass out to the locals, it's been remarkably unsuccessful in its pacification campaigns against some of the motliest forces of our time. The U.S. military has been fought to something like a draw by relatively modest-sized, relatively lightly armed minority insurgencies that don't even pass muster when it comes to shooting straight. Vast piles of money and vast quantities of materiel have been squandered; equipment by the boatload has been used up; lives have been wasted in profusion; and yet the winners of our wars might turn out to be Iran and China.
The article is titled "Believe It or Not (2010 Imperial Edition)," with a subtitle: "US War-Fightin Numbers to Knock Your Socks Off."
Engelhardt writes regular in-depth articles at tomdispatch and other sites that keep readers up-to-date on a vareity of topics, particularly US foreign policy and wars. The excerpted paragraphs that follow illustrate the enormous sums the US military wastes in Afghanistan, though, as Engelhardt's essay reveals, the proflicacy is not limited to Afghanistan. There is also reflected in the numbers the ongoing power of the military-industrial complex, the hubris of our government leaders, including President Obama when it comes to Afghanistan, the hollowness of the U.S. Congress on most military matters, and the counter-productive consequences associated with the self-congratulatory claim of American hegemony.
-----------------------------------
Excerpts from Tom Engelhardt's essay.
....* Believe it or not, for instance, U.S. commanders in our war zones have more than one billion congressionally mandated dollars a year at their disposal to spend on making "friends with local citizens and help[ing] struggling economies." It's all socked away in the Commander's Emergency Response Program. Think of it as a local community-bribery account which, best of all, seems not to require the slightest accountability to Congress for where or how the money is spent.
....* Believe it or not, the Defense Logistics Agency shipped 1.1 million hamburger patties to Afghanistan in the month of March 2010 (nearly doubling the March 2009 figure). Almost any number you might care to consider related to the Afghan War is similarly on the rise. By the fall, the number of American troops there will have nearly tripled since President Obama took office; American deaths in Afghanistan have doubled in the first months of 2010, while the number of wounded has tripled; insurgent roadside bomb (IED) attacks more than doubled in 2009 and are still rising; U.S. drone strikes almost doubled in 2009 and are on track to triple this year; and fuel deliveries to Afghanistan have nearly doubled, rising from 15 million gallons a month in March 2009 to 27 million this March. (Keep in mind that, by the time a gallon of gas has made it to U.S. troops in the field, its cost is estimated at up to $100.)
....* Believe it or not, according to Nick Turse of TomDispatch.com, nearly 400 bases for U.S. troops, CIA operatives, special operations forces, NATO allies, and civilian contractors have already been constructed in Afghanistan, topping the base-building figures for Iraq by about 100 in a situation in which almost every bit of material has to be transported into the country. The base-building spree has yet to end.
* Believe it or not, according to the Washington Post, the Defense Department has awarded a contract worth up to $360 million to the son of an Afghan cabinet minister to transport U.S. military supplies through some of the most dangerous parts of Afghanistan -- and his company has no trucks. (He hires subcontractors who evidently pay off the Taliban as part of a large-scale protection racket that allows the supplies through unharmed.) This contract is, in turn, part of a $2.1 billion Host Nation Trucking contract whose recipients may be deeply involved in extortion and smuggling rackets, and over which the Pentagon reportedly exercises little oversight.
.... And there's one more small contrast to be made when it comes to the finest military in the history of the world: for all the private security guards, mountains of burgers, lakes of gasoline, miles of blast walls, and satchels of cash to pass out to the locals, it's been remarkably unsuccessful in its pacification campaigns against some of the motliest forces of our time. The U.S. military has been fought to something like a draw by relatively modest-sized, relatively lightly armed minority insurgencies that don't even pass muster when it comes to shooting straight. Vast piles of money and vast quantities of materiel have been squandered; equipment by the boatload has been used up; lives have been wasted in profusion; and yet the winners of our wars might turn out to be Iran and China.
Winning in Afghanistan is a costly illusion
Bill Moyers interview with Andrew Bacevich, on the Afghanistan War, our failed approach, and alternatives - 4-9-10
I’ve identified main themes from the interview in bold type, and then paraphrased or directly quoted (in italics) from the transcribed text. The full transcription is available at the Bill Moyers Journal Internet site at http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04092010/transcript3.html The interview is worth considering because of Bacevich’s experience in the military and his insightful and critical writing on the US militarized foreign policy (e.g., The Limits of Power.) He is emphatic that "winning" through military force is a costly illusion.
The counterinsurgency war called for by the US general staff in Afghanistan is undermined by senseless killing of Afghan civilians by American soldiers
American soldiers and special operations forces continue to be responsible for all too frequent civilian casualties. They undermine one of the essential aspects of counterinsurgency, namely, to win the hearts and minds of the civilian population, all the while protecting them.
Moyers adds, “General McChrystal himself has said that we’ve shot – and this is his words not mine – an amazing number of people over there who did not seem to be a threat to this troops.”
This pattern of killing calls into question either the sincerity of the strategy or the “extent to which McChrystal is actually in control of the forces that he commands.” How therefore can Afghans believe that US troops are in their country to help them.
The problem is in part related to the fact that the Special Forces operate in secret and have no timely accountability to the regular army chain of command.
The top US generals have acknowledged many times that there can be no military victory in Afghanistan.
Bacevich emphasizes that both General Petraeus and General McChrystal are on record numerous times saying “that we will not win a military victory, that the only solution to be gained, if there is one, is through bringing success to this project of national-building.”
But how long? The US military is now in its ninth year in Afghanistan and “there is no end in sight.” There appear to be no benefits for either the Afghan people or the US citizenry. No strategic purpose. Meanwhile, the US military has spent appalling amount of money and to no satisfactory end.
What then are better approaches?
One, reconstruction, rebuilding -
If there is no military victory in sight, we need a different approach. “Why not put a legion of social reformers” in the country.
Two, in order to change Afghan society, we need an effective partner in the form of the country’s President and government.
This is not the case. It is another corrupt government.
Obama’s stated purpose for increasing troops in Afghanistan is that it is the only way to prevent Al Qaeda or the Taliban from turning the country into a rogue state and safe haven for terrorists.
President Obama identifies a purpose for why we spend huge sums of money and increase the number of American troops in Afghanistan. He wants to prevent the Taliban “from creating another rogue state.”
Obama’s views on this matter are misconceived.
Bacevich thinks that this conception of a centralized terrorist force, making plans for terrorist acts and having them implemented helter skelter around the world is incorrect. From his perspective, we are not facing “a transnational movement.” And the desired, but absurdly conceived transformation of Aghanistan, even if successful, would not guarantee that there would not be other 9/11 events in the US.
Three, the jihadist threat requires an internationally coordinated police effort.
The best we can do against jihadist threats from different parts of the world and from within our own country is to treat the problem as an “international criminal conspiracy,” requiring “a ruthless, sustained, international police effort to identify the thugs, root out the networks and destroy it.”
Four, American military leaders should plan for the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan
We should get out of this war and there is a simple way to do it. It is time for General McChrystal “to organize an orderly extrication of US forces.”
In response to a later question from Moyers, Bacevich repeats that we should bring the troops out of Afghanistan in some orderly, planned way. “…the perpetuation of the war in Afghanistan is not good for this country and for our people.”
BILL MOYERS: Why?
ANDREW BACEVICH: “Because we are squandering our treasure. We are losing lives for no purpose. And ultimately, the perpetuation of this unnecessary war does, I think, serve to exacerbate the problems within the Islamic world, rather than reducing those problems.”
Unfortunately, US leaders are not planning for an orderly withdrawal of troops and so the senseless war not only continues but is buttressed with additional troops.
We em to be in a situation “where permanent war” has “become the norm. And we don’t know what to do about it.”
Obama and the top generals do not want to lose this war after putting so much money, troops, and American credibility on the line.
President Obama is committed to increasing the number of American troops there and doesn’t want to quit in failure. But, Bacevich notes, we have pulled the military out of places where the costs and opposition from American citizens had become too high, namely, from Somalia and from South Vietnam.
I’ve identified main themes from the interview in bold type, and then paraphrased or directly quoted (in italics) from the transcribed text. The full transcription is available at the Bill Moyers Journal Internet site at http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04092010/transcript3.html The interview is worth considering because of Bacevich’s experience in the military and his insightful and critical writing on the US militarized foreign policy (e.g., The Limits of Power.) He is emphatic that "winning" through military force is a costly illusion.
The counterinsurgency war called for by the US general staff in Afghanistan is undermined by senseless killing of Afghan civilians by American soldiers
American soldiers and special operations forces continue to be responsible for all too frequent civilian casualties. They undermine one of the essential aspects of counterinsurgency, namely, to win the hearts and minds of the civilian population, all the while protecting them.
Moyers adds, “General McChrystal himself has said that we’ve shot – and this is his words not mine – an amazing number of people over there who did not seem to be a threat to this troops.”
This pattern of killing calls into question either the sincerity of the strategy or the “extent to which McChrystal is actually in control of the forces that he commands.” How therefore can Afghans believe that US troops are in their country to help them.
The problem is in part related to the fact that the Special Forces operate in secret and have no timely accountability to the regular army chain of command.
The top US generals have acknowledged many times that there can be no military victory in Afghanistan.
Bacevich emphasizes that both General Petraeus and General McChrystal are on record numerous times saying “that we will not win a military victory, that the only solution to be gained, if there is one, is through bringing success to this project of national-building.”
But how long? The US military is now in its ninth year in Afghanistan and “there is no end in sight.” There appear to be no benefits for either the Afghan people or the US citizenry. No strategic purpose. Meanwhile, the US military has spent appalling amount of money and to no satisfactory end.
What then are better approaches?
One, reconstruction, rebuilding -
If there is no military victory in sight, we need a different approach. “Why not put a legion of social reformers” in the country.
Two, in order to change Afghan society, we need an effective partner in the form of the country’s President and government.
This is not the case. It is another corrupt government.
Obama’s stated purpose for increasing troops in Afghanistan is that it is the only way to prevent Al Qaeda or the Taliban from turning the country into a rogue state and safe haven for terrorists.
President Obama identifies a purpose for why we spend huge sums of money and increase the number of American troops in Afghanistan. He wants to prevent the Taliban “from creating another rogue state.”
Obama’s views on this matter are misconceived.
Bacevich thinks that this conception of a centralized terrorist force, making plans for terrorist acts and having them implemented helter skelter around the world is incorrect. From his perspective, we are not facing “a transnational movement.” And the desired, but absurdly conceived transformation of Aghanistan, even if successful, would not guarantee that there would not be other 9/11 events in the US.
Three, the jihadist threat requires an internationally coordinated police effort.
The best we can do against jihadist threats from different parts of the world and from within our own country is to treat the problem as an “international criminal conspiracy,” requiring “a ruthless, sustained, international police effort to identify the thugs, root out the networks and destroy it.”
Four, American military leaders should plan for the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan
We should get out of this war and there is a simple way to do it. It is time for General McChrystal “to organize an orderly extrication of US forces.”
In response to a later question from Moyers, Bacevich repeats that we should bring the troops out of Afghanistan in some orderly, planned way. “…the perpetuation of the war in Afghanistan is not good for this country and for our people.”
BILL MOYERS: Why?
ANDREW BACEVICH: “Because we are squandering our treasure. We are losing lives for no purpose. And ultimately, the perpetuation of this unnecessary war does, I think, serve to exacerbate the problems within the Islamic world, rather than reducing those problems.”
Unfortunately, US leaders are not planning for an orderly withdrawal of troops and so the senseless war not only continues but is buttressed with additional troops.
We em to be in a situation “where permanent war” has “become the norm. And we don’t know what to do about it.”
Obama and the top generals do not want to lose this war after putting so much money, troops, and American credibility on the line.
President Obama is committed to increasing the number of American troops there and doesn’t want to quit in failure. But, Bacevich notes, we have pulled the military out of places where the costs and opposition from American citizens had become too high, namely, from Somalia and from South Vietnam.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Marja - Paying money to the "enemy"?
Here are some excerpts from an online article by the Afghanistan News. The central point of the article is US Marines have paid local residents thousands of dollars as compensation for property damage resulting from the US-led assault. Where did the money go? Some of it ended up in the pockets of local "Taliban" and used "to acquire ammunition and weapons to be used against foreign troops" [US, etc., troops]. This is yet another indication that the US/NATO occupation of Afghanistan is not very good in identifying the enemy or how to fight it. The highly publicized attacks on Marja do not give one much confidence in those who are making US policy in Afghanistan.
--------------------------------
Excerpts from http://www.afghanistannews.net/story/619692
Taliban using 'compensation' money against Marines in Marja
Afghanistan News.NetSunday 4th April, 2010 (ANI)
"In an attempt to garner public support, US Marines engaged in an intense battle with the Taliban in Marja, have been offering thousands of dollars a week to the local residents as compensation for property damage, but the move has backfired as the insurgents are using the same money against the international forces stationed in Afghanistan."
"Both Afghan and US officials are aware of the fact that the Taliban is using the compensation for acquiring arms and ammunitions to be used against foreign troops, but they say it is hard to recognise the extremists among the masses"....
"We've got to re-evaluate our definition of the word 'enemy'. Most people here identify themselves as Taliban."
--------------------------------
Excerpts from http://www.afghanistannews.net/story/619692
Taliban using 'compensation' money against Marines in Marja
Afghanistan News.NetSunday 4th April, 2010 (ANI)
"In an attempt to garner public support, US Marines engaged in an intense battle with the Taliban in Marja, have been offering thousands of dollars a week to the local residents as compensation for property damage, but the move has backfired as the insurgents are using the same money against the international forces stationed in Afghanistan."
"Both Afghan and US officials are aware of the fact that the Taliban is using the compensation for acquiring arms and ammunitions to be used against foreign troops, but they say it is hard to recognise the extremists among the masses"....
"We've got to re-evaluate our definition of the word 'enemy'. Most people here identify themselves as Taliban."
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Statement by Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA)
http://www.rawa.org/rawa/2010/03/07/emancipation-of-afghan-women-not-attainable-as-long-as-the-occupation-taliban-and-national-front-criminals-are-not-sacked.html
Emancipation of Afghan women not attainable as long as the occupation, Taliban and “National Front” criminals are not sacked!
Statement of the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) on the International Women’s Day, March 8, 2010
Today, on the 8th of March, Afghan women are mourning for the gang-rape of Bashiras and Saimas, for being flogged by most lowed elements, for being auctioned in open market and for their young daughters who put an end to their miserable lives by self-immolation. But the perpetrators of all these crimes are forgiven; therefore they enjoy complete immunity, are still holding their official positions and tightening it through plundering our people and country.
February 2010: Local warlords in Ghor province in Western Afghanistan publicly flogged two Afghan women.
Though we don’t expect anything different from the most corrupt and dirty puppet regime of the world, the pain of Afghan women turns chronic when the world believes that the US and NATO has donated liberation, democracy and human and women rights for Afghanistan; whereas, after eight years of the US and allies’ aggression under the banner of “war on terror”, they empowered the most brutal terrorists of the Northern Alliance and the former Russian puppets – the Khalqis and Parchamis – and by relying on them, the US imposed a puppet government on Afghan people. And instead of uprooting its Taliban and Al-Qaeda creations, the US and NATO continues to kill our innocent and poor civilians, mostly women and children, in their vicious air raids.
In such conditions, we saw that Karzai, as the most demagogic and flagrant President, turgidly talks about the London Conference, which in fact had no positive outcome for Afghan people, where he only bargained and dealt for the return of the terrorist Taliban and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar to power and the pouring of millions of more Dollars which will go to the pockets of the Karzai family and the mafias of Fahim, Khalili, Dostum and other murderers.
The Karzai puppet and reactionary regime is implicated in corruption and blood of the poor from top to bottom. Only the hundreds of people killed in the recent avalanche tragedy in Salang and the miseries of millions of refugee Afghans in the hands of the Iranian criminal regime are enough to punish and jail many of the so-called high ranking officials for negligence and inattention to the problems of our people.
But the US government does not try to curb its Afghan stooges and allows them to commit many crimes, betrayal and lootings, so they could repress and intimidate Afghans in any possible way and stop the emergence of any anti-fundamentalist and pro-independent uprising in Afghanistan. Therefore, it comes of no surprise that the decay and corruption of top criminals such as Rabbani, Sayyaf, Dr. Abdullah, Qanoni, Karzai family, Zia Massoud, Fahim, Khalili, Saddique Chakari, Mirwas Yassini, Zahir Aghbar, Hadi Arghandewal, Anwar Jakdalak, Ismael Khan, Atta Mohammad and others are even reflected in some Western media, who have made dirty businesses and multi-billion Dollar investments in Afghanistan and Dubai as a result of their lootings and drug-dealings in Afghanistan.
To show to the world that they value women’s rights, the US and its Afghan mafia lackeys nourished a bunch of flunkeys and pro-occupation women to hold conferences and meet the so-called “his Excellency” President Karzai and his US-assigned spokespersons Wahid Omer, Siamak Herawi, Sibghatullah Sanjar and other traitors to ask for more ministries for Afghan women. But they are grasping the intentions of others with their own dirty mirrors and think ordinary Afghan women are unaware of the fact that even if all the members of the cabinet are made up of reactionary women such as Amina Afzali, Hassan Bano Ghazanfar, Massouda Jalal, Noorzia Atmar, Qadria Yazdanparast, Shukria Barakzai, Fouzia Kofi, Manija Bakhtari and others linked to brutal warlords, still it will not bring any positive change for Afghan women, because such women, acting as committed agents of the US government and its fundamentalist and non-fundamentalist menials, only define themselves by raising soft criticisms and asking for some reforms acceptable for the governing criminals and their foreign masters.
With money and offers of official posts, the US and its Afghan agents have bought many Afghan intellectuals. Many of the writers and poets are paid by the blood-thirsty Iranian regime who instead of raising people’s awareness and mobilizing them for pro-independence, pro-democracy and anti-fundamentalism struggle, try to pave the way for Iranian theocratic regime’s deeper involvement in Afghanistan and inflame and fuel ethnic, sectarian and lingual tensions among Afghan people.
RAWA always believes that women’s problem is a political issue and we cannot tackle it separately from the current catastrophic political situation. Without the overthrow of the current puppet regime, which is becoming more mortal and odorous than before by the inclusion of Taliban and Gulbuddini murderers, none of the thousands of the problems of our unhappy people will ever be solved.
Slogans about restoring peace, security, democracy and women’s rights will be empty and amplified claims, as long as Afghanistan has not gained its independence; the Taliban and the Northern Alliance killers are not prosecuted and the billions of wealth they have pillaged from people are not taken back from them. The benchmark to judge if any individual or organization is truly patriotic and progressive in the current situation is their struggle in any possible means against US occupation, the criminal Taliban -- who have the enslavement harness of Pakistan around their nick -- and the hirelings of Iran and the US in the “National Front”.
RAWA is eager to get united in solidarity with individuals and forces that are ready to fight for democracy in an independent front against the occupation, the Taliban, Jehadi and Khalqi and Parchami homeland-sellers.
While women of Afghanistan are experiencing a new era of captivity and are in the grip of the fundamentalist monsters, RAWA sends it heartfelt salutations to struggling brave women of Iran, Palestine, Kurdistan, Sudan, Nepal, India and the rest of the world and announces solidarity with them.
Emancipation of Afghan women not attainable as long as the occupation, Taliban and “National Front” criminals are not sacked!
Statement of the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) on the International Women’s Day, March 8, 2010
Today, on the 8th of March, Afghan women are mourning for the gang-rape of Bashiras and Saimas, for being flogged by most lowed elements, for being auctioned in open market and for their young daughters who put an end to their miserable lives by self-immolation. But the perpetrators of all these crimes are forgiven; therefore they enjoy complete immunity, are still holding their official positions and tightening it through plundering our people and country.
February 2010: Local warlords in Ghor province in Western Afghanistan publicly flogged two Afghan women.
Though we don’t expect anything different from the most corrupt and dirty puppet regime of the world, the pain of Afghan women turns chronic when the world believes that the US and NATO has donated liberation, democracy and human and women rights for Afghanistan; whereas, after eight years of the US and allies’ aggression under the banner of “war on terror”, they empowered the most brutal terrorists of the Northern Alliance and the former Russian puppets – the Khalqis and Parchamis – and by relying on them, the US imposed a puppet government on Afghan people. And instead of uprooting its Taliban and Al-Qaeda creations, the US and NATO continues to kill our innocent and poor civilians, mostly women and children, in their vicious air raids.
In such conditions, we saw that Karzai, as the most demagogic and flagrant President, turgidly talks about the London Conference, which in fact had no positive outcome for Afghan people, where he only bargained and dealt for the return of the terrorist Taliban and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar to power and the pouring of millions of more Dollars which will go to the pockets of the Karzai family and the mafias of Fahim, Khalili, Dostum and other murderers.
The Karzai puppet and reactionary regime is implicated in corruption and blood of the poor from top to bottom. Only the hundreds of people killed in the recent avalanche tragedy in Salang and the miseries of millions of refugee Afghans in the hands of the Iranian criminal regime are enough to punish and jail many of the so-called high ranking officials for negligence and inattention to the problems of our people.
But the US government does not try to curb its Afghan stooges and allows them to commit many crimes, betrayal and lootings, so they could repress and intimidate Afghans in any possible way and stop the emergence of any anti-fundamentalist and pro-independent uprising in Afghanistan. Therefore, it comes of no surprise that the decay and corruption of top criminals such as Rabbani, Sayyaf, Dr. Abdullah, Qanoni, Karzai family, Zia Massoud, Fahim, Khalili, Saddique Chakari, Mirwas Yassini, Zahir Aghbar, Hadi Arghandewal, Anwar Jakdalak, Ismael Khan, Atta Mohammad and others are even reflected in some Western media, who have made dirty businesses and multi-billion Dollar investments in Afghanistan and Dubai as a result of their lootings and drug-dealings in Afghanistan.
To show to the world that they value women’s rights, the US and its Afghan mafia lackeys nourished a bunch of flunkeys and pro-occupation women to hold conferences and meet the so-called “his Excellency” President Karzai and his US-assigned spokespersons Wahid Omer, Siamak Herawi, Sibghatullah Sanjar and other traitors to ask for more ministries for Afghan women. But they are grasping the intentions of others with their own dirty mirrors and think ordinary Afghan women are unaware of the fact that even if all the members of the cabinet are made up of reactionary women such as Amina Afzali, Hassan Bano Ghazanfar, Massouda Jalal, Noorzia Atmar, Qadria Yazdanparast, Shukria Barakzai, Fouzia Kofi, Manija Bakhtari and others linked to brutal warlords, still it will not bring any positive change for Afghan women, because such women, acting as committed agents of the US government and its fundamentalist and non-fundamentalist menials, only define themselves by raising soft criticisms and asking for some reforms acceptable for the governing criminals and their foreign masters.
With money and offers of official posts, the US and its Afghan agents have bought many Afghan intellectuals. Many of the writers and poets are paid by the blood-thirsty Iranian regime who instead of raising people’s awareness and mobilizing them for pro-independence, pro-democracy and anti-fundamentalism struggle, try to pave the way for Iranian theocratic regime’s deeper involvement in Afghanistan and inflame and fuel ethnic, sectarian and lingual tensions among Afghan people.
RAWA always believes that women’s problem is a political issue and we cannot tackle it separately from the current catastrophic political situation. Without the overthrow of the current puppet regime, which is becoming more mortal and odorous than before by the inclusion of Taliban and Gulbuddini murderers, none of the thousands of the problems of our unhappy people will ever be solved.
Slogans about restoring peace, security, democracy and women’s rights will be empty and amplified claims, as long as Afghanistan has not gained its independence; the Taliban and the Northern Alliance killers are not prosecuted and the billions of wealth they have pillaged from people are not taken back from them. The benchmark to judge if any individual or organization is truly patriotic and progressive in the current situation is their struggle in any possible means against US occupation, the criminal Taliban -- who have the enslavement harness of Pakistan around their nick -- and the hirelings of Iran and the US in the “National Front”.
RAWA is eager to get united in solidarity with individuals and forces that are ready to fight for democracy in an independent front against the occupation, the Taliban, Jehadi and Khalqi and Parchami homeland-sellers.
While women of Afghanistan are experiencing a new era of captivity and are in the grip of the fundamentalist monsters, RAWA sends it heartfelt salutations to struggling brave women of Iran, Palestine, Kurdistan, Sudan, Nepal, India and the rest of the world and announces solidarity with them.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
An alternative to the surge in troops to Afghanistan
The following few paragraphs come near the end of a much longer article by Alfred M. McCoy, "The Opium Wars in Afghanistan." You can find the full article at: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/03/31-0
McCoy, a truly outstanding scholar, helps the reader to understand the historical and ongoing role that the US has played in the destruction of Afghanistan's agricultural system, unintentionally perhaps in fostering an economy that revolves largely around the cultivation of poppies, and preserving a system that brings rewards to a few and miserable poverty for the many.
In the paragraphs taken from the article, McCoy offers an "alternative" to the strategy of surging the troops (now in process). McCoy's alternative is succinct, doable, and makes a lot of sense.
-------------------------------
"....Is there any alternative? Even were the cost of rebuilding Afghanistan's rural economy -- with its orchards, flocks, and food crops -- as high as $30 billion or, for that matter, $90 billion dollars, the money is at hand. By conservative estimates, the cost [23] of President Obama's ongoing surge of 30,000 troops alone is $30 billion a year. So just bringing those 30,000 troops home would create ample funds to begin the rebuilding of rural life in Afghanistan, making it possible for young farmers to begin feeding their families without joining the Taliban's army.
"Short of another precipitous withdrawal akin to 1991, Washington has no realistic alternative to the costly, long-term reconstruction of Afghanistan's agriculture. Beneath the gaze of an allied force that now numbers about 120,000 soldiers, opium has fueled the Taliban's growth into an omnipresent shadow government and an effective guerrilla army. The idea that our expanded military presence might soon succeed in driving back that force and handing over pacification to the illiterate [24], drug-addicted Afghan police [25] and army [26] remains, for the time being, a fantasy. Quick fixes like paying poppy farmers not to plant, something British and Americans have both tried, can backfire and end up actually promoting yet more opium cultivation. Rapid drug eradication without alternative employment, something the private contractor DynCorp tried so disastrously [27] under a $150 million contract in 2005, would simply plunge Afghanistan into more misery, stoking mass anger and destabilizing the Kabul government further.
"So the choice is clear enough: we can continue to fertilize this deadly soil with yet more blood in a brutal war with an uncertain outcome -- for both the United States and the people of Afghanistan. Or we can begin to withdraw American forces while helping renew this ancient, arid land by replanting its orchards, replenishing its flocks, and rebuilding the irrigation systems ruined in decades of war...."
McCoy, a truly outstanding scholar, helps the reader to understand the historical and ongoing role that the US has played in the destruction of Afghanistan's agricultural system, unintentionally perhaps in fostering an economy that revolves largely around the cultivation of poppies, and preserving a system that brings rewards to a few and miserable poverty for the many.
In the paragraphs taken from the article, McCoy offers an "alternative" to the strategy of surging the troops (now in process). McCoy's alternative is succinct, doable, and makes a lot of sense.
-------------------------------
"....Is there any alternative? Even were the cost of rebuilding Afghanistan's rural economy -- with its orchards, flocks, and food crops -- as high as $30 billion or, for that matter, $90 billion dollars, the money is at hand. By conservative estimates, the cost [23] of President Obama's ongoing surge of 30,000 troops alone is $30 billion a year. So just bringing those 30,000 troops home would create ample funds to begin the rebuilding of rural life in Afghanistan, making it possible for young farmers to begin feeding their families without joining the Taliban's army.
"Short of another precipitous withdrawal akin to 1991, Washington has no realistic alternative to the costly, long-term reconstruction of Afghanistan's agriculture. Beneath the gaze of an allied force that now numbers about 120,000 soldiers, opium has fueled the Taliban's growth into an omnipresent shadow government and an effective guerrilla army. The idea that our expanded military presence might soon succeed in driving back that force and handing over pacification to the illiterate [24], drug-addicted Afghan police [25] and army [26] remains, for the time being, a fantasy. Quick fixes like paying poppy farmers not to plant, something British and Americans have both tried, can backfire and end up actually promoting yet more opium cultivation. Rapid drug eradication without alternative employment, something the private contractor DynCorp tried so disastrously [27] under a $150 million contract in 2005, would simply plunge Afghanistan into more misery, stoking mass anger and destabilizing the Kabul government further.
"So the choice is clear enough: we can continue to fertilize this deadly soil with yet more blood in a brutal war with an uncertain outcome -- for both the United States and the people of Afghanistan. Or we can begin to withdraw American forces while helping renew this ancient, arid land by replanting its orchards, replenishing its flocks, and rebuilding the irrigation systems ruined in decades of war...."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
