Afghanistan Report Card

[Doc91678]

By George H. Wittman
12.21.12

Now the U.S. and NATO are being blamed for not dragging the country out of the 19th century​

.


The Associated Press discovered this month that residents of Helmand province — and presumably elsewhere in Afghanistan — are “afraid to go out after dark because of marauding bands of thieves.” The key word is bands. This means organized gangs are harassing civilians in attempts to steal money and goods. This criminal activity is reportedly to be the result of a failure of the Americans and their allies to keep the Afghan populace safe from what is referred to as “crime and corruption.” At least that’s the AP’s reading of the situation.

Ah, for the good old days of the Taliban who cut off the hands of thieves they captured. At least, according to AP, that’s supposedly what one hears when visiting Helmand these days. These and other news sources report the local police are running protection rackets, taking bribes for minor offenses, and stealing when they can’t coerce voluntary payments. And this is all supposedly an indication of the futility of eleven years of war. The problem is that in many parts of Afghanistan it’s not far from the truth.

What is most disturbing is that none of this is new. It’s certainly not the fault of ISAF troops’ inadequacy in policing. That was never their primary job. NATO civilian leaders, however — especially in the U.S. and UK — tried hard to create the impression that the billions spent on war fighting also had a target of providing a framework of “civil improvement.” From the outset Afghanistan was seen as suffering from either strict Sharia justice by the Taliban and/or local law enforcement by warlords exploiting the population in exchange for keeping the peace.

The truth is that justice and policing were always a matter primarily in the hands of tribal councils; the Americans and British first arriving in 2001 well knew this. Punishments were meted out consistent with traditional guidelines by these local councils. Today this historic system has been disrupted by the growth of power and authority of policing mechanisms that begin with a corrupt central government and stretches down to the provinces and villages.

Power tends to be returned to the local authorities when they are backed by warlords with the strength to dominate their region and defy corrupt higher level official government interests. It’s simply a question of which “sovereign” can demand the fealty of each community. As this has been well reported on in the past, why is it that journalists are now “discovering” that it has been the inadequate efforts of the Americans and NATO that have not kept the ordinary citizens safe from crime and corruption?

The Taliban faced the same problems of law and order when they ruled, but they had the strict guidance and drastic punishments of their Islamic belief system to reduce the potential for unauthorized corruption. For those living on the lower rungs of the Afghan social order there is an expected price for an ordered life. It is traditional to pay a tax (zagat) to a tribal headman. In the same sense, it is accepted that profits from illegal opium poppy production are shared with political leaders in a farmer’s region.

It is no wonder production of poppies is favored over cotton or wheat, however. Cotton and other exportable products do not bring a return competitive with the acreage of opium poppies. The U.S./ NATO- subsidized government compensation for the difference then is “taxed” by the local authorities. The final sum is less than it is with the poppy crop. It is a matter of simple economics — and hardly new.

Depending on the market at a given time, the return on poppy versus wheat production, for example, is in some estimates as high as four times in favor of the opium source. Helmand province produces about 60% of the product that is transformed into heroin and exported from Afghanistan. And according to the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crimes (UNODC), 90% of the world’s heroin is derived from Afghan production.

Journalists reporting on studies this year have conveniently decided to rediscover that Helmand is “the most dangerous and violent Afghan province.” (Statement by Ryan Evans of the Center for National Policy as quoted by AP.) Of course, the Taliban would fight the hardest to keep itself dominant there. And what is going to happen after 2014 that will change any of this when all combat capable U.S./NATO forces depart?

President Hamid Karzai must have been well aware of this when he was interviewed by NBC News on December 6 and said, “Part of the insecurity is coming from the structures that NATO and America created in Afghanistan.” He knows his assassinated brother, Wali, was one of those key contractors protecting NATO supply shipments through Taliban-infested territory. The Karzai family had well benefited from that particular “structure.”

The American Spectator : Afghanistan Report Card

 

[waltky]

Oh, now China wants to step in from the sidelines...

China could prove ultimate winner in Afghanistan
Jan 26,`13 -- China, long a bystander to the conflict in Afghanistan, is stepping up its involvement as U.S.-led forces prepare to withdraw, attracted by the country's vast mineral resources but concerned that any post-2014 chaos could embolden Islamist insurgents in its own territory.

Cheered on by the U.S. and other Western governments, which see Asia's giant as a potentially stabilizing force, China could prove the ultimate winner in Afghanistan - having shed no blood and not much aid. Security - or the lack of it - remains the key challenge: Chinese enterprises have already bagged three multibillion dollar investment projects, but they won't be able to go forward unless conditions get safer. While the Chinese do not appear ready to rush into any vacuum left by the withdrawal of foreign troops, a definite shift toward a more hands-on approach to Afghanistan is under way. Beijing signed a strategic partnership last summer with the war-torn country. This was followed in September with a trip to Kabul by its top security official, the first by a leading Chinese government figure in 46 years, and the announcement that China would train 300 Afghan police officers. China is also showing signs of willingness to help negotiate a peace agreement as NATO prepares to pull out in two years.

It's a new role for China, as its growing economic might gives it a bigger stake in global affairs. Success, though far from guaranteed, could mean a big payoff for a country hungry for resources to sustain its economic growth and eager to maintain stability in Xinjiang. "If you are able to see a more or less stable situation in Afghanistan, if it becomes another relatively normal Central Asian state, China will be the natural beneficiary," says Andrew Small, a China expert at The German Marshall Fund of the United States, an American research institute. "If you look across Central Asia, that is what has already happened. ... China is the only actor who can foot the level of investment needed in Afghanistan to make it succeed and stick it out."

Over the past decade, China's trade has boomed with Afghanistan's resource-rich neighbors in Central Asia. For Turkmenistan, China trade reached 21 percent of GDP in 2011, up from 1 percent five years earlier, according to an Associated Press analysis of International Monetary Fund data. The equivalent figure for Tajikistan is 32 percent of GDP, versus 12 percent in 2006. China's trade with Afghanistan stood at a modest 1.3 percent of GDP in 2011. Eyeing Afghanistan's estimated $1 trillion worth of unexploited minerals, Chinese companies have acquired rights to extract vast quantities of copper and coal and snapped up the first oil exploration concessions granted to foreigners in decades. China is also eyeing extensive deposits of lithium, uses of which range from batteries to nuclear components.

The Chinese are also showing interest in investing in hydropower, agriculture and construction. Preliminary talks have been held about a direct road link to China across the remote 76-kilometer (47-mile) border between the two countries, according to Afghanistan's Foreign Ministry. Wang Lian, a Central Asia expert at Beijing University, notes that superpowers have historically been involved in Afghanistan because it is an Asian crossroads - and China would be no exception. "It's unquestionable that China bears the responsibility to participate in the political and economic reconstruction of Afghanistan," he says. "A stable Afghanistan is of vital importance to (China). China can't afford to stand aside following the U.S. troop withdrawal and in the process of political transition."

MORE