This post is published with a sense of sadness and despair
The coming western defeat in Afghanistan is the result of hubris, arrogance and a disregard for other cultures and other viewpoints. We thought we could just march in and impose a brand new ideology, philosophy and attitude on the part of a people we have never understood fully and probably never will.
Our cavalier attitude toward torture, our embrace of violence as a method of solving problems and our desire to get things done quickly, undercut all the efforts at improving Afghan society.
(The same applies to the overall “War on Terror”, by the way.)
Disorganization, lack of a coherent strategy and cynical motives cost us the support of the Afghan population.
Canada’s General Hillier delighted in calling the Taliban “scumbags”. By doing that, he showed his ignorance and lack of understanding of matters that were outside his sphere of knowledge.
He received no rebuke from his political masters, who were and remain equally misguided.
NATO leaders relied on a military solution, which was sure to fail, as it has almost always failed in the past.
The United Nations Security Council went along with the nonsensical approach and its reputation has been blackened along with the reputation of Canada and the rest of the western world.
Now a highly respected analyst and historian, who teaches at an American Military School, has laid it out in blunt terms.
His assessment is a confirmation that those of us who have for many years opposed the American-U.N.-NATO approach have been right and the warmongers have been wrong.
The following article is condensed from today’s Miami Herald.
No reason for optimism about war in Afghanistan
Thomas H. Johnson is a professor at the Department of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif.
He says that after the United States turned its attention to Iraq, Taliban operatives resurfaced in Afghan villages and took strong roles, filling a vacuum left by the corrupt, mistrusted Afghan government. The Taliban have also taken advantage of local disenchantment with the American and foregn troop presence and that includes Canada.
“The Afghan people, the average people, have lost patience with us. They expected a lot of us,” Johnson said. “After eight years in this country, we still haven’t been able to supply security and justice.”
Johnson says that today it’s not the same Taliban it used to be. “
“There isn’t the slightest possibility that the course laid out by Barack Obama in his Dec. 1 speech will halt or even slow the downward spiral of defeat in Afghanistan. None.”
He goes even further to say that Obama knows this war is unwinnable, and that the surge is meant to provide political cover in advance of a full U.S. withdrawal before the 2012 election.
Johnson sees it as the same “cynical exit strategy” devised by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger to get American forces out of Vietnam.
Obama wouldn’t be the first U.S. president to let domestic political concerns affect his military moves abroad, but he certainly campaigned as a different kind of leader.
According to Professor Johnson, the cost of the surge in American lives and dollars will be high, even if we stay only 18 months. And the mission of banishing al Qaeda forever from that region seems far-fetched, relying as heavily as it does on cooperation from Pakistan and competence from Afghanistan’s armed forces.
___________________________________________________________
Considering the loss of life, the vast expenditures and the further destruction of Afghan society…being right is very very cold comfort.
CBC tells us…..
All allegations of mistreatment of Afghan prisoners by Canadian troops investigated so far have been unfounded, the Canadian Forces Military Police said Monday night.
And a blogger comments, that’s like your mom telling the principal what kind of a kid you are when she’s been called to the office on account of your misbehaviour, what else would she say.
Let me guess. MoD pays CFMP salaries…?
Talk about just-in-time delivery!
This stinks of political interference. Something else to look into.
Now for the real investigation.
Amnesty Int. would be a fitting sponsor.
I felt that was a confusing report.
Canadian soldiers have not been accused of mistreating, beating or torturing any Afghans…at least not publicly.
However 6 complaints of mistreatment -not torture- were made against soldiers and the military police have been investigating…clearing all but one, which is still ongoing.
On the other hand…a number of soldiers including a couple of military policemen have complained to the Military Police Complaints Commission, which is a quasi-judicial body, but not a military body.
That’s the one that Harper shut down in the middle of things, firing the chairman by not extending his term and effectively terminating those hearings.
This Harper fellow is crafty one.
I found that the CBC report was a bit confused.
If Canadian troops have not abused the locals they will be a historical first.
Can any one point to an example of armed occupation of someone else’s country that was not followed by resentment and resistance to it leading inexorably to repressive actions by the occupying troops .
Indeed Hillier’s ‘scumbags’ characterisation of the resisting Afghans would seemm to have pre-determined the developement of a bad attitude by his soldiers.
Yes my pink friend, I agree.