Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Reconstruction Aid to Afghanistan Halved;
Or, "Don't Forget to Write!"


Now that it has been announced that the US won't seek more reconstruction aid for Iraq. it also turns out that the Bush administration has reduced reconstruction aid in Afghanistan from $1 bn. a year to a little ove $600 mn. The US is pulling out 3,000 troops and turning the south over to NATO. The troop pull-out in my view is a good thing-- Afghanistan is not a country that will accept a large foreign military presence, especially that of an imperial power, for very long. NATO has more legitimacy. As for fears of resurgent Taliban, they are reasonable fears. But if they genuinely become resurgent, then presumably that will be the time to deal with them.

But the cut in reconstruction aid is tragic. The US gives $2 billion a year to Egypt and $3 billion a year (actually much more) to Israel. The US budget is something like $2 trillion. Isn't rebuilding Afghanistan to the point where it doesn't fall into chaos again and threaten the world as a result worth as much as helping Egypt and Israel remain at peace? Half of Afghanistan's gross domestic product now comes from poppy sales. Europe is being flooded with its heroin, and the danger of narco-terrorism on a Colombian scale is ever present.

Afghanistan is desperately poor, devastated by a quarter century of war, deeply harmed by a decade of drought that only recently ended, and beset by ethnic and ideological divisions that recently made the place a prime base for al-Qaeda. Bush promised to reconstruct it after the Afghanistan war. How many times will the US get deeply involved there, help throw the country into chaos, and then just walk away?

Rumsfeld said it all. Afghanistan has no good targets (economic or otherwise).

1 Comments:

At 12:30 AM, Blogger InplainviewMonitor said...

"Abandoned Afghanistan"

Remember the "abandoned Afghanistan" story? The way neoliberals tell it ever after 9-11, Westerners "abandoned" Afghanistan in the 1980-1990-ies because. . . just because. As a result, Afghanistan fell under the Taliban rule, became a safe haven for Al-Queda and all this ended with WTC attack. Never mind that WTC attack was prepared mostly in the US and in the W.Europe, the way this story runs, West had to return to Afghanistan in order to rebuild it as a model third world democracy. To this neocons use to respond that they don't do nation building, and all this results in typical neocon-neolib mud wrestling.

However, what happens on the ground is that general lifestyle and reconstruction disruption is a standard tool used by guerilla revolutionaries to kick foreign occupants aka "liberators" out of the region. Considering this, both Soviet and Western withdrawal from Afghanistan appears to be a natural stage of the guerilla conflict rather than neoliberal "humanitarian blunder" or neoconservative "lack of courage".

From this prospective, WPost stories /1,2/ suggest that GWOT/GSAVE enter well familiar from Afghanistan lengthy and bloody "abandonment" stage.

1. WPost. Griff Witte. U.S. Cedes Duties in Rebuilding Afghanistan. NATO, Other Allies Take On New Roles

2. WPost. Ellen Knickmeyer. U.S. Has End in Sight on Iraq Rebuilding

3. Charles Krauthammer. No to nation building

4. Wiki on guerilla warfare

5. Kandahar (2001) Kandahar, crutches scene

 

Post a Comment

<< Home