Looking at the world through imperialist glasses transforms a complex, chaotic and exotic planet into a well-ordered simple and uniform place where the sun shines and the birds sing and global harmony prevails.  The imperialist mindset is elegantly simplistic, as most religions are, to provide mass appeal for the “simple-minded” laity required to carry out the day-to-day business of Empire.  This is easily accomplished because imperialism is a “feel-good” philosophy that rewards its subscribers for being the smartest, hippest, savviest, fairest, most successful, highly evolved and righteous inhabitants of the planet – ergo, the fittest to make the rules and bring the rest of humanity up to snuff.

And so it is that we Americans find ourselves totally engaged in Afghanistan (which most Americans still cannot locate on a world map) teaching its “backward” denizens to appreciate the finer points of democratization by making bad things happen to good people, thus proving that there is a “Better Way.”   Unfortunately, while we may be world-class social engineering theoreticians, we Americans are no great shakes at doing actual business — witness the current pickle we find ourselves in.  Also, unfortunately (for the rest of the world), since we are such totally awesome imperialists, most of the world gets to share our pain when our business deals go south.

It is not really all that mind-bendingly difficult to parse out where the problems apt to plague Empire lie, but imperialists tend not to trouble themselves with the nuts and bolts of a situation because they are busy being Big Thinkers and leave execution to less gifted (and motivated) appointees to the Rear Guard — and Time and the Empire march on.  Imperialists are also not big on Lessons Learned, of which there are a boatload, both ancient and contemporary. 

Here’s a good example of how Empire operates:

One of the first rules of Highly Successful Imperialists is to leave giant footprints wherever you tread.  It’s not enough to insert one’s imperial self in foreign politics or military adventures; once on the scene it is necessary to build permanent edifices commemorating the fact that the Empire passed this way and has made a lasting impression on your little nation – thus, military bases and embassies are the first order of business off the boat.  Last count Americans have built 700 military bases in Afghanistan (which is a touch larger than Texas).

As we speak, there is a huge expansion of the United States Embassy in Kabul.  According to a report in Tuesday’s Washington Post:

“ . . . the unprecedented expansion of the embassy’s staff from 320 U.S. federal civilian employees early last year to more than 1,000 this spring had further strained the housing, food, security and transportation support services. Total staff strength is projected to reach 1,300 by the end of 2010.

“The jump in civilian staff numbers is designed to match a rapid increase in military deployments to Afghanistan and to create a ‘vibrant civ-mil partnership.’ But “new staff is arriving in Afghanistan before the Embassy can prepare position descriptions, ready housing, and office space, or adequate onsite supervision for the subject matter experts” hired under a special program for temporary Foreign Service officers, “many of whom have never worked in the government,” the report said.”

“When inspectors visited in September and October, the report said, no officer in the embassy’s political section had been on the job more than two months: ‘Almost all except the counselor and deputy were on their first political reporting tour. Many had not received a handover memo from their predecessor, and most did not receive an orientation to the section’s work.’”

“The ongoing demand for more personnel has meant that hiring orders are sometimes approved without designated jobs. In one case the inspectors cited, an agency had requested authorization ‘to create up to ten full-time positions in Afghanistan but had not yet decided what those positions would do when the employees actually arrived in country.’”

“Inspectors also noted “a lack of planning on how to link new, generously funded programs with an appropriate number of implementing officers and with sufficient officers to provide the requisite oversight.”

Somewhere in the Empire someone is proudly proclaiming the creation of 1,000 new jobs in the “civ-mil partnership” business . . .

But here’s my favorite tidbit, by far, from the WaPo report”

“The report described overall morale at the embassy as “challenged” by routine 80-hour workweeks that left many sleep-deprived. A constant stream of visitors — on trips described as “war tourism” by unnamed embassy staffers — included dozens of congressional delegations that made difficult, last-minute demands and required extensive arrangements. [My emphasis]  Although it noted that such trips are important to build support for administration policy, the report said ‘it is not unusual for the Embassy to host multiple groups of Congressional visitors in one week replete with individual tours of the war zone, separate representational events, and sequential meetings with the same Afghan Government representatives.’” [My emphasis, again]

Deja Vu All Over Again

Stuart Bowen, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, told the Huffington Post Investigative Fund about waste of reconstruction funds in Afghanistan similar to that in Iraq–some $51 billion has been allocated to rebuild and stabilize, but tracking those funds proves next to impossible.

” . . . tracking that money sometimes seems as challenging as finding the leaders of the Taliban.”

“No one keeps an exact count of the number of private contractors working in Afghanistan — even though Congress ordered that be done more than two years ago. There’s no central list of all the contracts now in force. Government auditors cannot determine with confidence if the reconstruction money is being properly spent or meets the stated objectives. And efforts to improve coordination among the key U.S. agencies managing the money — the Pentagon, the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development — have lagged at best.”

In 2003, the official plan included $2 billion to rebuild Iraq (after we blew it up).  Taxpayers were told, at that time, that Iraq would pay them back from proceeds of oil revenues.

Well, now it’s 2010 and, so far, the bill for Iraqi reconstruction stands at $52 billion and a conservative estimate of what has been wasted or stolen comes in around $5 billion or 10%.

We’re still waiting for the Payback to start rolling in but, don’t hold your breath, most of the oil contracts these days are going to China, which holds the notes on much of the $1 trillion the United States spent on the Iraq war.

Anyone who’s ever had a hand in running a business knows that if you operated like this, you’d be bankrupt in no time.  Fortunately these “businesses” are hooked up to a big fat pipeline delivering a  never-ending flood of American taxpayers’ money. 

The Loyal Opposition: Or Crying in the Wilderness

Oddly enough there are a few throwbacks still in government who question the Imperial Business Model and a bunch of them, led by Dennis Kucinich, were actually permitted to air their challenges this week.  Kucinich introduced a Resolution, to carry out immediate troop withdrawals from Afghanistan, which was debated on Wednesday.

It’s not likely that you’ve heard much about it since the press corps seems to think that Eric Massa’s tickle-fights with aides are more important to the American public than how much longer they need to keep supplying cannon fodder for the Empire.

You might well not have heard anything at all if it were not for the political savvy of Patrick Kennedy who, coming from a long line of smooth operators, knew that the only way to get any press attention for Kucinich’s anti-war resolution would be to throw a tantrum, on the floor, that couldn’t be ignored.

Here’s what he had to say:

“There’s one, two press people in this gallery,” he thundered. “We’re talking about Eric Massa 24/7 on the TV. We’re talking about war and peace; $3 billion; 1,000 lives and no press! No press!”

“You want to know why the American public is fit (to be tied)? They’re fit because they’re not seeing their Congress do the work that they’re sent to do.  It’s because the press, the press of the United States, is not covering the most significant issue of national importance and that’s the laying of lives down in the nation for the service of our country. It’s despicable, the national press corps right now.”

Patrick’s performance notwithstanding, the resolution was defeated, as expected, by a vote of 356-65; with 60 Democrats and five Republicans voting to end the war.   Here’s a link to theroll-call in case you’re interested in who’s naughty and who’s nice.  And my hat’s off to Kennedy for stepping up and throwing a fit for a good cause.

One important outcome, noted by Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim is this:

“Several powerful chairmen — David Obey (D-WI), Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and George Miller (D-CA) — voted to end the war, and Obey’s opposition will be particularly noted by war proponents, given that he controls the purse strings through the Appropriations Committee.”

Those of us who are of a less “imperial bent” might well ask “Why Now”? after the deliberations are over and the decision on the troop increase has been made.  The answer to that one is that House Leadership would not permit such nay-saying pre-decisionmaking.  I guess that would be un-patriotic . . .

Meanwhile Back at the Front

Just as an exercise, let’s think about what is the American mission underlying our military actions in Afghanistan.  What eventual outcome there would American taxpayers deem “worth it”?  By “it” I’m referring to some basics like money spent, lives lost and the impact of those decisions on our domestic well-being and national security.

At first it was to eliminate Al Qaeda where it had taken up residence.  Once embarked on that mission, we quickly discovered that AQ had friends in high Afghan places – and we called them “Taliban” –for ease of identification — to cover all of the princelings, drug lords, gun runners, separatists and Imperial Infidel Haters of a hundred tribal regions.  We learned that AQ and the Taliban were everywhere and nowhere and fighting them was like playing Whack-a-Mole or Vietnam War Anniversary Edition.

At least in Iraq the mission had a catchy name – “Liberate and Leave” (but then Iraq was always the Empire’s favorite).  Seven years later some will argue that the Liberation was a success, the Leaving not so much.  Even though the “Mission Accomplished” was issued ages ago . . .

I have to admit, I’m a little clearer on the redefined Afghanistan mission.  It has been made clear from Imperial Headquarters that the new mission is to protect the Afghan people from harm and thereby win their everlasting affection and support who will someday make stand-up citizens of the Imperium.  No less than Gen. McClueless, himself, spends much of his time reining in the dogs of war and publicly apologizing when they get loose.

If I had to give the new operation a letter grade, it would be about a D+.

The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) would undoubtedly give it a lower grade.  The AIHRC put out a bulletin on February 23, 2010 stating that:

“The PGF (Pro-Government Forces – that’s us) Operation ‘Mushtarak’ in Marjah, Helmand province has been touted as a new type of operation, with greater planning and cooperation with Afghan National Security Forces and greater care toward preventing civilian harm. While such efforts are welcome, AIHRC is concerned at the loss of life and civilian harm already caused by this operation. AIHRC found that in the first 12 days of Operation Mushtarak 28 civilians, including 13  children, were killed and approximately 70 civilians, including 30 children, were injured.  Witnesses suggested the majority of the casualties were caused by PGF artillery and rocket-fire.”

“AIHRC is also concerned about the level of displacement caused by this operation.  Approximately 3461 families have been displaced as a result of Operation Mushtarak.  Crowded into Lashkargah city or other surrounding areas with little access to humanitarian support, these IDPs face serious shelter and food problems. The Commission calls on government authorities and their international partners to address these critical humanitarian needs immediately.”

“The recent surge in violence has not been limited to Marjah. On 21 February 2010, international military forces ordered an air strike on three civilian vehicles in Chobzar region of Kejran district of Daikondi province. Twenty-one Afghan civilians were killed and 16 other civilians were injured including children and women. There is so far little evidence justifying such an attack on what appears to have been a clearly civilian target.”

“This strike appears to violate ISAF’s own tactical restrictions on airstrikes, and raises questions of distinction and proportionality under international law. The AIHRC calls upon international forces to publish the results of their investigation regarding this incident as soon as possible. In addition, they should provide appropriate compensation for the casualties and losses sustained by the civilians. Those responsible for executing this attack, and for providing the misinformation that led to it, should be appropriately investigated and disciplined.”

 That’s quite unsettling since Marjah was just the dress rehearsal for the Big Show in Kandahar this summer.  Here’s an under-reported nugget from  Army Times published in January, 2010, clueing us in on what to expect later this year

 “Americans should prepare to accept hundreds of U.S. casualties each month in Afghanistan during spring offensives with enemy forces.”

 “The dire forecast was made by retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, an adjunct professor of international affairs at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, in a periodic assessment of political and security issues he has conducted in the war zone since 2003.”

“’What I want to do is signal that this thing is going to be $5 billion to $10 billion a month and 300 to 500 killed and wounded a month by next summer. That’s what we probably should expect. And that’s light casualties,’ said McCaffrey, who is also president of his own consulting firm in Arlington, Va., and has conducted numerous trips to the war zones to assess the political and military challenges at hand.”

 “His reports are compiled with information gathered in theater and from research conducted beforehand. McCaffrey traveled to the war zone for this report as an academic from West Point at the invitation of theater commander Gen. David Petraeus, commander of Central Command, and Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the operational commander in Afghanistan, he said.”

 “Building a viable Afghan state with its own security force, he said, is a three- to 10-year commitment, as it is unlikely the U.S. will achieve the political and military goals set forth by President Barack Obama in his Dec. 1 speech announcing a 30,000-troop increase.”

Who gets to decide what a “viable Afghan state” looks like, I wonder?  I seriously doubt that it involves a capital city with 40% unemployment. 

The LA Times (which has been doing a great job on the human story of the conflict) reports that:

“Since 2001, Congress has authorized more than $39 billion in humanitarian and reconstruction aid for Afghanistan. But hundreds of millions of dollars that would lead to new factories and dams have been eroded by power shortages, wasteful contractors, security dangers and corruption.”

“What has emerged across the provinces and throughout Kabul is a cruel economic pecking order of an unfinished war. Afghan businessmen dealing in imports are thriving, their new marble and tinted-glass houses rise like jewels on rough streets. Those working with foreign governments and international organizations are also prospering. But the rest, the majority, barely survive and wait for jobs that pay more than peddling oranges or washing cars.”

“ . . . in their experience, jobs vanish as quickly as they appear, many filled as a result of bribes or family connections.  ‘I don’t know what to do,’ said Mohammad Yaqub, who studied agriculture in Russia, but has no money for a kickback. ‘I can’t leave Afghanistan for work. Who would feed my family?’”

“Kabul is a place of desperate men searching to little avail. They wander through traffic past firewood sellers and boys hawking balloons; the war often seems distant, echoes in faraway mountains. But the unemployed are occasionally reminded that bloodshed can strike the capital with unnerving abandon. Suicide bombers and militants recently attacked two guesthouses, killing 16 people, mostly foreigners, near the circle where the laborers gather.”

Where Have All the Allies Gone?

Meanwhile some of the Empire Boosters from Abroad are rethinking their Afghanistan cost-benefit analysis.  Yesterday’s Washington Post carried the news that:

 “British Foreign Secretary David Miliband called Wednesday for early and substantive political negotiations between the Afghanistan government and the Taliban and other insurgent groups, saying that military successes will never be enough to end the war.”

“The idea of political engagement with those who would directly or indirectly attack our troops is difficult,” Miliband said. ‘But dialogue is not appeasement, and political space is not the same as veto power or domination.’”

“’Now is the time for the Afghans to pursue a political settlement with as much vigor and energy as we are pursuing the military and civilian effort,’ he said.”

The US, of course, has a different approach, as stated by Sec. of Defense Gates in Kabul on Monday. He said:

“ . . .  the timing of political reconciliation ‘depends on the conditions on the ground in terms of when people, particularly the more senior commanders, realize that the odds against their success are no longer in their favor.’”

Miliband, knowing the US would say that, suggested that talks could proceed even while fighting takes place.  Apparently, Miliband agrees with Afghan President Karzai that although “preconditions should set the terms of any eventual agreement, they should not prevent a dialogue from developing.”

The Dutch are certainly over it and don’t figure it’s worth continuing given the divisiveness the Afghan war has created in their government.

And Karzai – who’d have guessed? — is all of a sudden acting quite presidential and lining up in-region support with Iran and Pakistan and setting up peace jirga’s on his own.  Looks like the whole good governance thing has gone to his head . . . definitely a “be careful what you wish for” moment.

Clearly most of the world is weary of the cock-up that the US has made of the Middle East and it might be a good time to withdraw in the name of national security, which, in my opinion, seems a whole lot more threatened today, than it was on September 10, 2001.  Evidently it’s one thing to support a lusty, thriving global go-getter of an Empire Builder and quite another to follow a financially anemic, over-extended, tottering, trouble-making juggernaut over a cliff.

What did YOUR tax dollars buy today?

Technorati Tags: Afghanistan, AIHRC, Kabul, American Embassy, Patrick Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, David Obey, Stuart Bowen

{ 0 comments }