Greece Legislative Election – 2009

October 5, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

On October 4, 2009, the people of the Hellenic Republic went to the polls and unanimously elected the Panhellenic Socialist Movement leader, George Papandreou as the next Prime Minister for a four-year term office.

The Prime Minister-elect initially disregarded as a non-viable candidate in the electoral race, despite the candidate’s strong political lineage. Nevertheless, the republic decided to offer the Socialist Party an overwhelming victory against the center-right political party – New Democracy, represented by the incumbent Prime Minister Kostas Karamanlis in the recent election.

Greece is no exception to the political and economic woes of the contemporary world. The electoral mandate is clearly a rejection of the common elements dominant in every national system i.e. corruption, lack of trust and accountability, incompetence contributing to the rising unemployment, stagnant economy and the last but not the least,

The persisting political tensions on the Cyprus dispute involving the Greek and the Turkish Cypriots is yet another unresolved political dilemma for the United Nations Security Council.

With the dynamic shift in the legislative power moving from the center-right to the center-left, the newly elected Socialist government resolve would be subject to scrutiny by the Greek electorate as well as the center-right EU leadership.

As a member of the European Union, OECD and NATO, the contribution by Greece is significant and the new government policy could possibly expedite the positive outcome on many global issues ranging from the economy, energy, environment and the contentious war in Afghanistan.

Congratulations! to the Prime Minister-elect George Papandreou and the people of the culturally enriched Greece on their investment towards more progressive, democratic and prosperous future.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

Afghan War, the Additional Troops Request and the Election – Analysis

September 29, 2009

Analysis: By Padmini Arhant

From the earlier data, it is conclusive that since the inception of the Afghan war, the constant flow of funding and the troops surge has remained the routine build up in the ill-conceived ‘so-called’ war on terror. The long fought war in the past eight years and previously against the Soviets should provide the U.S. defense a concise idea about the Afghan terrains, terrorists’ hideouts and other relevant operational tactics by the Talibans and the Al-Qaida forces.

Considering the earlier Taliban generation were trained as the Mujahedeens by the CIA against the Soviets and instrumental in driving the Soviet Army from the Afghan land, it’s reasonable to ask the question,

When success was then possible with the limited financial and military contingency, why is it not feasible now with the exceptional assets at the defense forces disposal?

The Congressional approval of excess funding via discretionary channel to circumvent the constitutional limitations and the increasing troop deployment at the highest military hierarchy behest with no accountability for the monetary or combat forces investment in the evolved operation raises a serious credibility issue leading to an appropriate investigation.

Oddly, the Afghan situation possesses an uncanny resemblance to the financial sector bailout in the absence of checks and balances against the oligarchs responsible for the world economic crisis.

The irony is, the U.S. and NATO resources are superfluous against the insurgents’ outdated and conventional stockpiles purchased from the tribal warlords in control of the narcotic industry. Despite the United States extensive prior knowledge of the mountainous regions and enhanced weaponry including the state of the art technology, the U.S. and NATO command continue to claim the insurgency by the Taliban and Al-Qaida operatives as ‘uncontainable.’ Somehow, it doesn’t fit in with the rationality.

Then the trio forces represented by Afghanistan, Pakistan and the United States declare the combatants, ‘a force to reckon with,’ when Pakistan and Afghanistan must be familiar with the respective demography in the northwestern Pakistan, the eastern Afghanistan apart from the southern provinces of the Kandahar district. Again, the status acknowledged by the U.S. and NATO highest command in a statement that “Talibans are emboldened more than ever and dangerously widespread making Afghanistan a possible failed state.”

Is it a real concern or a proposition for a permanent military base evidenced in the topic’s prequel?

Another poignant matter is Pakistan’s role in aiding and abetting the Talibans following the U.S abandonment and the Soviet departure. During the Bush administration, the Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf received substantial financial aid and arms supply as an “important” ally of the apparent war on terror.

Evidently, the disclosed $10 billion dollars and more was not spent for the desired purpose, instead Pakistan ventured into replenishing stocks targeting the eternal rival and neighbor India.

In spite of the U.S. royal treatment of the former military regime under President Musharraf, the nuclear technology trader A.Q. Khan was protected and the U.S. intelligence forces were denied access to the entity by the regime. Today’s nuclear proliferation among North Korea and Iran stem from A.Q. Khan’s illicit dealings in trading WMD secret programs.

The trend continues with the financial aid being tripled combined with more arsenal supply ‘supposedly’ to extinguish the fire set by the Pakistani ISI and the military in cohort with the Talibans and the Al-Qaida elements in Waziristan and other parts of the north western region up until recently. It’s not a concocted theory when the independent Pakistani and other international journalists reported that the world’s most wanted terror leader Osama Bin Laden received medical treatment in Pakistan during the Musharraf Presidency.

The military agents actively promote the Kashmir issue between the two nuclear neighbors to see the snoring lion turn into a roaring beast. Meanwhile, distracting the world from the compounded problems within Pakistan – the people of Pakistan deprived of the genuine freedom and democracy not to mention the chaos and mayhem caused with frequent suicide bombings and explosions.

In fact, the situation in the two Islamic nations has been perpetually meddled with excessive foreign policy interventions doing more harm than any good until date. The constant turmoil and warfare has crippled the economies leaving the populations at the mercy of the oil rich Saudi Arabia and the Western control.

The bright and the educated middle class to the poorest of the Pakistani population are subject to the dynasty rule disguised as democracy with the Pakistani military having an upper hand in the major governance.

Diverting attention homeward;

The legitimate question for the American taxpayers engaged in the health care battle of the century is –
How do the so-called fiscal conservatives from both sides of the aisle justify the enrage at the hypothetical costs of providing universal health care, while seemingly comfortable with the Fiscal Year 2009, defense spending amount to 4.7% of GDP?

The military industrial complex dominance with strong hawkish representations in the Defense and the State Departments in the current administration is conspicuous with the irrational winning streak calculations in the misguided missions in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The tragic truth revealed in the casualties endured by the families of the U.S. military and the ally forces along with the scores of civilian deaths callously dismissed as the ‘collateral’ damages in the warfare.

Regarding the permanent military base in Afghanistan, the published reports confirm the former Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s complicity to the occupation of his homeland by foreign forces, questioning the President’s loyalty to the nation, he is expected to govern.

Then the subsequent crowning of the controversial ex-President Hamid Karzai amidst election fraud and widely exposed scandals by the secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton and other NATO diplomats clearly indicates the entities following specific directions of the military industrial complex defining the role for the executive members in the sprawling scheme.

Since when the Secretary of State and other NATO foreign ministers overtly assigned the duty to select the head of the foreign government smeared with corruption charges and voter fraud allegations, against the will of the population yearning for real democracy?

Isn’t the role of the U.S. military and NATO in Afghanistan restricted to eliminating terror, and refrain from any intervention in the electoral decisions?

When the U.S and NATO forces indulge in the appointments of the heads of the foreign governments, they not only threaten the democratic opportunities for the subject nations but also undermine the democracy they represent.

The Defense Forces’ high commands testify to the elected representatives in a democracy, the Congress, by repeatedly urging that “the troops and discretionary funding requirement is essential to succeed in the escalating war on terror” with the reality being otherwise.

But not anymore. This time, it’s incumbent on the Pentagon to face the nation and lay the facts as the permanent military base in Afghanistan or elsewhere is an act of treason against the nation, not barring the crime against humanity with the notion to enslave the innocent population trusting the organization to protect and liberate them from the tyranny and oppression.

When the defense budget funds are misappropriated for destructive reasons of the never ending warfare, illegal arms race i.e. both conventional and nuclear arsenal in the open markets, then the military institution loses the trust and respect of the national population. It’s equivalent to the betrayal of the parents declining to protect the children and instead endanger their lives.

If the military institutions confine to the honorable duty to defend the sovereignty of the nation, safeguard the pledge of allegiance to the flag and regard the life of another like their own, then the battle grounds would no longer be the killing fields.

Those who engage in invasion, occupation, pillage, ruin of other nations have engulfed in the self ignited flames, while others eventually come to the realization that in the laws of nature, there is no state of permanence. History witnessed the emperors like Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great and the likes succumb to the crumbling of their greatness, regarding themselves once as invincible.

The wisdom serves that mortals brought nothing into the world and hence take nothing back with them and no one is a permanent resident on the planet irrespective of status. Life is a journey and travelers leave when their travel ends with their activities evaluated and judged accordingly.

Wars can’t go on forever and must eventually ceasefire.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics, United States | Leave a Comment 

Afghanistan War, the Additional Troops Request and the Election

September 28, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

There has been additional troops request from the U.S. and NATO Commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal accompanied by the endorsements of the other highest commands. The request made with a sense of urgency within the military ranks based on variable assessments and conflicting reports from different sources that if the troops request delayed or denied; “it could perhaps lead to the mission failure” in the prolonged war that had continued to deploy troops on that strategy.

According to reputable news sources, the U.S. force in Afghanistan estimated to reach 68,000 by the year’s end. Now, the fact remains to be carefully examined on the U.S. and NATO defense policy implemented in the Afghanistan war prompting the current administration to inflate the defense budget disproportionately to $651.2 billion excluding the various non-itemized expenditures by the other departments in the nucleus.

The following materials are extremely important in ascertaining the real purpose of the persistent war nearing almost a decade with incessant violence, lawlessness and horrendous loss of lives on all sides that could have been contained considering the interjection of enormous resources in terms of funding and troops supply possibly restoring a democratic rule in Afghanistan conforming with the metaphor –

“Where there is a will, there is a way.”

The sequel with a detailed analysis will follow in due course of time.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant
————————————————————————————————–
Advisers split over Afghan troop request:

Military divided over force levels required for plan

By Peter Baker and Elisabeth Bumiller – New York Times

Provided through The San Jose Mercury News, Sunday September 27, 2009 – Thank you.

“Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal’s troop request, which was submitted to the Pentagon on Friday, has reignited a longstanding debate within the military about the virtues of the counterinsurgency strategy popularized by Gen. David H. Petraeus in Iraq and embraced by McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan.

McChrystal is expected to ask for as many as 40,000 additional troops for the eight-year old war, a number that has generated concern among top officers like Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, who worry about the capacity to provide more soldiers at a time of stress on the force, officials said.

While Obama is hearing from more hawkish voices, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, the secretary of state, and Richard C. Holbrooke, the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, some outside advisers relied on by Obama have voiced doubts.

But other officers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan and say they admire McChrystal nonetheless have privately expressed doubt that additional troops will make a difference.
“If a request for more forces comes to the Army, we’ll have to assess what that will do in terms of stress on the force,” said a senior Army officer, who asked not to be identified speaking before McChrystal’s troop request became public.”

Casey, whose institutional role as Army chief is to protect his force, has a stated goal by 2012 to increase a soldier’s time at home from the current one year for every year of duty in Iraq or Afghanistan to two years at home for every year served.”

——————————————————————————————

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States – Thank you.

U.S. Defense Budget for the Fiscal Year 2009:

For the 2009 fiscal year, the base budget rose to $515.4 billion. Adding emergency discretionary spending and supplemental spending brings the sum to $651.2 billion. Not included in the DoD budget is $23.4 billion to be spent by the Department of Energy to develop and maintain nuclear warheads.

NON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DEFENSE RELATED EXPENDITURES

This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance, cleanup, and production (about $16.4 billion, which is in the Department of Energy budget), Veterans Affairs (about $53.0 billion), defense spending by the Department of Homeland Security (about $41.4 billion),

Interest on debt incurred in past wars, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (about $83.4 billion in 2009, funded through extra-budgetary supplemental bills), or State Department financing of foreign arms sales (about $5.3 billion) and militarily-related development assistance.

The U.S. Department of Defense budget accounted in fiscal year 2008 for about 21% of the United States federal budgeted expenditures. Including spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Homeland Security, and Veteran’s Affairs, defense spending was approximately $800 billion, or 32% of 2008 tax receipts of $2.5 trillion.[5]

Because of constitutional limitations, military funding is appropriated in a discretionary spending account. (Such accounts permit government planners to have more flexibility to change spending each year, as opposed to mandatory spending accounts that mandate spending on programs outside of the budgetary process.) In recent years, discretionary spending as a whole has amounted to about one-third of total federal outlays. Military funding’s share of discretionary funding was 50.5% in 2003, and has risen steadily ever since.

The 2005 U.S. military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world’s defense spending combined and is over eight times larger than the military budget of China (compared at the nominal US dollar / Renminbi rate, not the PPP rate). The United States and its close allies are responsible for about two-thirds of the world’s military spending (of which, in turn, the U.S. is responsible for the majority). In 2007, US military spending was above 1/4 of combined industrial and agricultural production in the USA.

————————————————————————————————–
Focus on the Afghanistan war and the Operational Deficiency:

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)

TOTAL CASUALTIES FOR THE YEAR:

By January 2009, the Taliban claimed that they had killed 5,220 foreign troops, downed 31 aircraft, destroyed 2,818 NATO and Afghan vehicles and killed 7,552 Afghan soldiers and police in 2008 alone. The Associated Press estimated that a total of 286 foreign military personnel were killed in Afghanistan in 2008.[130] Icasualties puts the total number of coalition soldiers killed in 2008 at 294.

——————————————————————————————
2009: U.S. Surge :

Main article: Coalition combat operations in Afghanistan in 2009

JOINT INTELLIGENCE CENTER –

The Khyber Border Coordination Center between the U.S., Pakistan, and Afghanistan, at Torkham on the Afghan side of the Khyber Pass, has been in operation for nine months. But U.S. officials at the Khyber Center say language barriers, border disputes between Pakistani and Afghan field officers, and longstanding mistrust among all three militaries have impeded progress.

In January, about 3,000 U.S. soldiers from the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 10th Mountain Division moved into the provinces of Logar and Wardak. The troops were the first wave of an expected surge of reinforcements originally ordered by George W. Bush and increased by Barack Obama.

In mid-February, it was announced that 17,000 additional troops would be deployed to the country in two brigades and additional support troops; the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade of about 3,500 from the 7,000 Marines, and the 5th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, a Stryker Brigade with about 4,000 of the 7,000 US Army soldiers. The U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General McKiernan, had called for as many as 30,000 additional troops, effectively doubling the number of troops currently in the country.

—————————————————————————————–
TALIBAN’S GAINS

On August 10, 2009, Stanley McChrystal, the newly appointed U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said that the Taliban has presently gained the upper hand and that the ISAF is not winning in the 8 year-old war.
————————————————————————————————
Possible long-term U.S. role & military presence:

Many of the thousands of U.S. troops in Afghanistan are positioned in what experts say are large, permanent bases.

In February 2005, U.S. Senator John McCain called for the establishment of permanent U.S. military bases in Afghanistan, saying such bases would be “for the good of the American people, because of the long-term security interests we have in the region”.

He made the remarks while visiting Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Kabul as part of a five-member, bi-partisan Senate delegation travelling through the region for talks on security issues.

The same delegation also included then-Senator Hillary Clinton, now U.S. Secretary of State.

In mid-March, 2005, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Richard Myers told reporters in Kabul that the U.S. Defense Department was studying the feasibility of such permanent military bases. At the end of March, the U.S. military announced that it was spending $83-million on its two main air bases in Afghanistan, Bagram Air Base north of Kabul and Kandahar Air Field in the south of the country.

A few weeks after this series of U.S. statements, in April 2005, during a surprise visit to Kabul by U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Afghan President Hamid Karzai hinted at a possible permanent U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, saying he had also discussed the matter with President Bush. Rumsfeld refused to say whether or not the U.S. wanted permanent American military bases in Afghanistan, saying the final decision would come from the White House.

As of July 2008, hundreds of millions of dollars were being spent on permanent infrastructure for foreign military bases in Afghanistan, including a budget of $780-million to further develop the infrastructure at just the Kandahar Air Field base, described as “a walled, multicultural military city that houses some 13,000 troops from 17 different countries – the kind of place where you can eat at a Dutch chain restaurant alongside soldiers from the Royal Netherlands Army.” The Bagram Air Base, run by the U.S. military, was also expanding according to military officials, with the U.S military buying land from Afghan locals in different places for further expansion of the base.

As of January 2009, the U.S. had begun work on $1.6 billion of new, permanent military installations at Kandahar.

In February 2009, The Times reported that the U.S. will build two huge new military bases in southern Afghanistan. One will be built in Kandahar province near the Helmand border, at Maiwand – a place famous as the site of the destruction of a British army during the Second Anglo-Afghan War. The other new U.S. military base will be built in Zabul, a province now largely controlled by the Taliban and criminal gangs.
————————————————————————————————–
AFGHAN RESISTANCE TO PERMANENT U.S. MILITARY BASES

The idea of permanent U.S. military bases vexes many people in Afghanistan, which has a long history of resisting foreign invaders.

In May 2005, riots and protests that had started over a false report in Newsweek of U.S. interrogators desecrating the Koran and turned into the biggest anti-U.S. protests in Afghanistan since the 2001 invasion included demands that the Kabul government reject U.S. intentions to create a permanent military presence in Afghanistan.
——————————————————————————————–
Public opinion

Main article: International public opinion on the war in Afghanistan

Although the war was supported by most Americans, most people in the world oppose the war.
In a 47-nation June 2007 survey of global public opinion, the Pew Global Attitudes Project found considerable opposition to war.

In 41 of the 47 countries, pluralities want U.S. and NATO troops out of Afghanistan as soon as possible. In 32 out of 47 countries, clear majorities want this war over as soon as possible.

Majorities in 7 out of 12 NATO member countries say troops should be withdrawn as soon as possible.

————————————————————————————————–
Afghan Election:

After Karzai’s alleged win of 54 per cent, which would prevent a run off with his rival, Abdullah Abdullah, over 400,000 votes had to be discounted for Karzai, and many more with hundreds of thousands of votes and polling ballots being accused of fraud.

Making the real turnout of the elections much lower than the official numbers, many nations criticizing the elections as Free but not fair.

Coalition in Afghanistan backs Karzai’s Strategy:

By Karen DeYoung, Washington Post , provided by San Jose Mercury News, Monday September 28, 2009.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other NATO foreign ministers, meeting Friday in New York with their Afghan counterpart, reached “consensus” that Karzai would probably “continue to be president,” whether through a runoff or as the legitimate winner of more than 50 percent of votes cast in disputed Aug.20 elections, an Obama administration official said.”

————————————————————————————————–

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics, United States | Leave a Comment 

Federal Republic of Germany – Bundestag Election

September 28, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Congratulations! to the Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel and the FDP leader Guido Westerwelle on the re-election of CDU-CSU (Christian Democratic Union and Christian Social Union) in grand coalition with the Free Democratic Party in the 17th German Federal election on September 27, 2009.

As a major economic power and the largest exporter as well as the second largest importer of goods, Germany is significant to the global economy and the international progress. The export-oriented nation has been drastically affected from the global economic crisis. It experiences the common woes like the financial market failure leading to the government bailouts; massive job loss in the manufacturing sector especially the automobiles and heavy industrial equipments…having a ripple effect on other sectors in the economy.

However, Germany has contained the crisis from further deterioration due to the various government run programs viz.

The comprehensive system of social security, universal health care established in 1883 – now comprising 77% government funded and 23% privately funded health care system, public or affordable housing in suburban settings providing decent dwelling for the lower income originally created in the early twentieth century by the Social Democrats to curtail visible poverty.

The recent victory by the conservative coalition attributed to the poor voter turnout with the sizable electorate not having confidence in the major or minor political parties, although the ‘Green’ party focused on vigorous environmental policies gained impressive margin against others.

It would be interesting to monitor the measures adopted by the winning coalition in the economic recovery, given the FDP’s economic policy subscribed to the government involvement ‘as extensive as necessary’ and ‘as limited as possible.’ Otherwise, the party embraces the free market structure with privatizations, deregulations, restraining public subsidies – the predominant source of the present global economic meltdown, while maintaining the strong unionized work force and the vast government social infrastructure. Perhaps, the platform contributed to the surprise emergence of the once minority party successfully eliminating the Socialist Democrats that took a severe blow in the latest election.

With the rising unemployment causing much frustration among the population, the coalition has a tough balancing act to leverage the situation in the four-year term offered by the German electorate as a second chance to transform the campaign promise into a reality.

Regarding other issues of national concern, the electorate appears to be less enthusiastic in their country’s involvement as a NATO member in the eight-year old Afghanistan war. This is despite the relatively minimal troops’ presence in the region proving the unpopularity of the Afghanistan war.

Germany like the rest of the world is confronted with the economic, social and environmental issues and the industrialized nation’s rapid revival is crucial for the global economy as a member of OECD, G8 that is appropriately the present G20, besides being the biggest development aid in the world.

I take the opportunity to wish the leaderships and the people of Germany lasting peace and prosperity to share with the rest of the humanity.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

Afghanistan War and Election

August 21, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The nation ravaged with decades of wars, terrorism, militant rule and occupation goes to the polls to exercise the basic human right, a privilege in this part of the world , while taken for granted in the U.S.of A as reflected in the health care battle.

Afghanistan known for the ruggedness and terrains with the Khyber Pass enabling invaders to move across the foreign territories in a manner as the ‘no-man’s land’ ignoring the inhabitants scattered around the vast mountainous regions.

Afghan demography is complex and beyond the grasp of understanding for Western powers and even its Central Asian neighbors. The Imperial powers from the British, Russian and now the American & NATO forces have struggled to enforce any form of stability, political or otherwise.

The tribal laws conforming to the medieval times view the progress desired by the mainstream population from the rural to the urban areas, a threat to the ancient culture and the tribal archaic ascribed to the Western influence through occupations.

Further, the abandonment of the Afghan nation by the Western forces after brutal Soviet decimation solidified the anti-trust against the Western power. Unfortunately, the desolate population then sought the support of the groups earlier recognized as the mujahedeen (combatants against struggle) trained by the CIA and fostered by the Reagan administration core foreign policy titled Reagan doctrine to challenge the Soviet rule.

Ironically, the trade tricks related to weaponry and military retaliation imparted by the sophisticated U.S. armed forces in the late 1970’s to combat Soviet presence tactfully demonstrated in the on-going war on terror between the Taliban insurgents and the U.S & NATO alliance.

Mujahedeen were nurtured through the neighbor Pakistani ISI and military aid essentially representing various multinational forces like the United States CIA, Saudi Arabia, People’s Republic of China, several Western European countries and the military regimes in Pakistan.

When the U.S. departure followed the end of Soviet occupation, the country engaged in a civil war in the late 1980’s forcing the orphans of the Mujahedeen evolve into today’s menace the Talibans. The outcome – the tiny lizard morphed into a tyrannosaurus…wreaking havoc in the Islamic Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan apart from becoming the terrorists’ haven for the terror organization Al-Qaeda and the world’s most wanted Osama Bin Laden.

Now when democracy appears to work its way through, the country riddled with bureaucracy, corruption and the ever-lucrative production of poppy fields.

What could the people of Afghanistan possibly live for and aspire in the twenty first century?

After prolonged tyranny and drudgery, the people are tired and worn out from the perpetual cycle of violence that has paralyzed progress leaving the nation behind in stone age, when the rest of the world zoomed past them reminding that Afghanistan frozen in time.

The Afghani people as part of the human race seek simple life. A life guaranteed with freedom, human rights allowing every human being to live with respect, honor and dignity. Above all, the people of Afghanistan deserve peace like their fellow citizens in Palestine, Africa and other war torn regions of the world. Women as victims of extreme hostility and abuse imploring for their release from the ideological shackles and inhumane practices shockingly happening in both the developed as well as the ‘backwaters’ of the nation.

Children, the future of any country and the world dream of normal existence such as attending schools for both girls and boys, raised by their parents and the family unit if they are lucky to survive the Western aerial bombardments via drones and the Taliban insurgency. These innocent souls, even in that environment of despair and hopelessness don’t forget to smile or pose…momentarily floating in their fantasy to be the center of the universe for the international press and media.

When they grow up, the men have the options to either become a terror network recruit or hired by the tribal warlords to toil in the poppy fields contributing to the flourishing narcotic industry. The alternative for young women is to become the obedient slave in the male chauvinistic society regardless of the Western backed and financed political leaderships in Kabul.

It’s relevant to analyze the objective and achievements by the U.S. led war against terror mission in this region. After consuming millions of Afghani lives as well as American/NATO casualties and billions of American taxpayer dollars the status quo is –

There is no information on Osama Bin Laden, Talibanization of Afghanistan and northwestern Pakistan leading to Pakistani military action in Waziristan and the Swat Valley, fragmented Al-Qaeda temporarily relocating to Somalia while controlling operation in Pakistan.

In terms of the U.S. national security, the war in Afghanistan claimed to be justified.

How long is the war in Afghanistan long enough for the U.S. and allied forces?

Has continued U.S. aggression eliminated terror forces from the region?

One might argue that there have been no attacks against U.S. interests since 9/11 as a result of the continuous drone and ground attacks in Afghanistan. It could serve as a legitimate argument,

However, the fact of the matter is the terrorists believe that they gain nothing from repeating September 11 attacks. The motive behind September 11 was to inflict economic chaos and constrict the once booming U.S. economy, which the terror network accomplished with the catastrophic terrorist activity. The economic turmoil further exacerbated with the previous administrations’ Machiavellian Iraq adventure exceeding Al-Qaeda’s expectations to reign in on the U.S. economic progress.

Instead, Al-Qaeda diverted its attention to Iraq’s battleground with their insurgencies to prolong the Iraqi conflict in their aim to continue draining the U.S. treasury.

Meanwhile, the re-emergence of the Taliban in Afghanistan issuing death warrants to the electorate and forbidding them from going to the voting booths confirm the insurgents’ defiance against the U.S. and NATO forces. The Taliban and Al-Qaeda’s primary goal is to re-establish their Sharia law governance and headquarters in Afghanistan. They will fight fiercely until the Western power exhausted of the never-ending guerilla warfare that the West proven weaker at… for e.g. Vietnam, Iraq and in Afghanistan.

The Drones might be successful in reducing the U.S and NATO casualties and seemingly achieving their targets, but the major problem of the entire warfare strategy lies in the massive civilian loss of lives from this operation. Although, the Taliban insurgents counteracting the Western drone attacks by blending in with the civilians in the remote and rural regions, the Afghani government and the people view the incidents as Western negligence given the past track record and remarks by the ex-defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld on the civilian deaths in Kabul in 2001 – “collateral damages in war.”

No populace would like the eternal presence of foreign troops on their soil, whether it’s Afghanistan or Iraq, irrespective of the occupiers’ mission. The hypocrisy is conspicuous when the U.S. conservative agenda vehemently opposes the ‘illegal’ immigrants represented by the unarmed civilians and in the same breath relentlessly supports the ‘illegal military invasion and occupation’ of foreign lands whether it is Iraq or Afghanistan.

How does the U.S and NATO make progress in the rocky Afghanistan?

First, eliminating the arsenal and arms supply to the insurgents would considerably debilitate the militants’ strength. Detecting the providers and enforcing severe international arms control would substantially relieve the U.S. and NATO command from any additional troops requirement. Similar techniques in Iraq would reduce the internal violence over there.

The immediate implementation of such methods would not only protect immense lives from all sides but also greatly help the U.S. economy from the war spending and investing in the life saving “National health care with public option.”

Second, allocating a major segment of the military operation towards nation building like infrastructure, schools and hospitals rather than held responsible for national chaos and killings. This would easily win the hearts and minds of the local population.

Last but not the least, paving way for job creations in both agricultural and industrial sector would gradually lead to the emancipation of the society. Afghanistan believed to be thriving in poppy plants yielding Opium. Likewise, Afghanistan has other valuable cash crops with vast potential to become a leading exporter of dry fruits and nuts, other than woolen products – clothing, shawls, carpets, rugs and silver, mineral ore etc.

Therefore, substituting Opium with healthy life sustenance crops like wheat, nuts, dry fruits and setting up woolen mills and carpet manufacturing guaranteed to revive hope and change that is long overdue in this nation.

The United States, European countries as well as developing nations like India and others should collectively promote the Afghanistan economy by easing the trade tariffs and quotas for these products and facilitate the trade flow from this long battered nation.

With respect to the political system – Unless and until the substantial corruption, bureaucracy and nepotism restrained if not eradicated from the political structure, no western power can succeed in the democratization of this demographically estranged society.

The incumbent administration under President Hamid Karzai, survivor of several assassination plots and attempts by the alleged Pakistani ISI supported Talibans up until early this year, has disappointed the international community on a range of issues.

President Karzai’s inability and lack of interest in housekeeping specifically the Opium production, minimizing government bureaucracy leading to corruptions, alleviating the nation’s poverty and devising any effective plan for job creations and economic growth has undermined regional advancement given the tribal control of the remaining areas.

Moreover, the Karzai government’s endorsement of social injustice towards women slighting women’s rights in the marital relationship is a matter of deep concern and violates the democratic norm in a society represented by the Western sponsored leadership.

According to various news reports, the voter turnout was relatively low as a result of the Taliban’s stern warnings to harm the electorate.

In light of the above perspective, Afghanistan would be better off with a coalition government of the three contenders – President Hamid Karzai, DR. Abdullah Abdullah and DR. Ashraf Ghani exchanging ideas, sharing intellect and experience in a concerted effort to move the war torn nation forward to the twenty first century. In addition, the fractured society would benefit from the collective talent and experience of the consolidated government, besides maintaining checks and balances on activities hindering the democratic functions.

On that note, Best Wishes offered to the new government in Afghanistan with peace, progress and prosperity in the immediate future.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

‘Talibanization’ of Afghanistan and Pakistan

May 13, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan and the northwestern regions of Pakistan, particularly the swat valley have proven deadlier for the ruling powers in Afghanistan, Pakistan and the United Sates due to the inevitable civilian casualties and displacement arising from the incessant shelling supposedly targeting the Taliban militants.

According to the Pakistani government, the military operation has been effective thus far in the attack against the militants, without any confirmation or denial on the humanitarian catastrophe.

Meanwhile, the Taliban’s pervasive retaliation to the military force is evident from the clashes in other districts, Buner and Dir with the Taliban expected to be within 60 miles of the Capital city, Islamabad. Incidentally, the Taliban’s eyes are set on Karachi, the commercial capital and an epicenter for various terror networks readily available to forge alliance with the ideological militant group.

The North -Western Frontier Province appears to be under siege. The heavy bombing has elevated the humanitarian crisis with the internal refugees toll reaching a phenomenal 1.3 million and still rising including the earlier 550,000 from the tribal warfare.

It’s intriguing for those familiar with the Taliban’s rise and fall and their sudden emergence with well-equipped weaponry to challenge the U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, and the Pakistani artillery predominantly supplied by the United States and China.   Most recently, the Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari reportedly blamed the United States i.e. CIA for creating the Taliban and implied that such creation consequently led to the present quagmire.

Origin of Taliban as ‘Mujahideens’ (The Arabic meaning “strugglers” )

As per Wikipedia – The Free Encyclopedia – Thanks

“The best-known mujahideen, various loosely-aligned Afghan opposition groups, initially fought against the incumbent pro-Soviet Afghan government during the late 1970s.

The mujahideen were significantly financed and armed (and are alleged to have been trained) by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during the Carter[5] and Reagan administrations and the governments of Saudi Arabia, the People’s Republic of China, several Western European countries, Iran, and Zia-ul-Haq’s military regime in Pakistan.

The Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was the interagent used in the majority of these activities to disguise the sources of support for the resistance. Under Reagan, U.S. support for the mujahideen evolved into an official U.S. foreign policy, known as the Reagan Doctrine, which included U.S. support for anti-Soviet resistance movements in Afghanistan, Angola, Nicaragua, and elsewhere.”

Reality Check:

Although, the facts support the origin of Taliban (historically the orphans of the former Soviet oppression) as the ‘Mujahideens’ previously funded and trained by the nations vigorously involved in the lucrative arms race up until now,

The contemporary rise of Taliban and their empowerment attributed to the covert support by the Pakistani military and prominently the ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) implicated in various terrorist activities around the world notably the September 11, 2001 and notwithstanding the Mumbai terror attack in November 2008.

The dynamic duo also presumably associated with other national and international conspiracies…

Fostering acrimony between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir dispute,

Coordinating with China and Israel in the arms supply to the island nation Sri Lanka in the ethnic cleansing of the Tamils,

Assassination attempts on the Afghan President Hamid Karzai,

The Indian embassy bombing in Kabul, and

Last but not the least, the possible link in the assassination of the former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto are few of the many contentious issues related to both institutions.

The above information might be controversial and inflammatory however, in Pakistan’s political reality democracy never allowed to blossom by the all-powerful Pakistani military force and the Intelligence Services apparently controlling the nuclear site. The successful coups in the past right down to the former Military Commander and President Pervez Musharraf are testimony to the fact that democracy proven oxy-moron by the ISI and the Pakistan armed forces.

Ironically, the waging of war against Taliban by the Zardari-Gilani administration succeeding a Military regime with a puppet figurehead after having given refuge and diplomatic immunity to the ousted Taliban forces post 9/11 is analogous to a raging forest fire set by the rangers entrusted with safeguarding the habitat’s interest.

It’s noteworthy that the former President Musharraf’s government was the only nation and the Islamic power to extend an open invitation to the Talibans following the U.S. troops led war against Afghanistan in 2001, while simultaneously posing as an important ally to the former U.S. administration under President George W. Bush.

Talibans are the by-product of the historic multinational blunder and botched up conventional stockpiles sale by the military industrial complex in Afghanistan under the guise of prototype for democracy in the lawless region of the world.

How does the scenario play out in Pakistan’s neck of the woods and for the rest of the world?

Taliban and Al-Qaida are formidable in their ideology to destabilize the democratic (more appropriately ‘dynasty’) rule in Pakistan perceived as the “American appointees” with the political cohesion of the Pakistani ISI and the Military hierarchy.

The Congress under Bush administration approved and granted $10 billion U.S. taxpayers aid to the Military power represented by the ex-President Musharraf for FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) in an effort to fight the global war on terror. In return, the Pakistani Military misappropriated the funds(?) and diverted all attention towards the long time rival India in anticipation of a major confrontation on Kashmir by instigating the local militant groups alongside the Kashmiri border.

Evidently, failure on FATA combined with the conciliatory actions by the Pakistani ISI and the Military contributed to a myriad of terror networks within Pakistani soil.  Furthermore, the lack of oversight and accountability on the U.S. taxpayers’ aid to the Pakistan Military rather than the people enabled the precipitous decline of law and order.

As a result of the unconditional foreign aid to the institutions with flawed track record, today Waziristan is a safe haven for the Al-Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden and the North-Western Frontier Province now under Taliban control, thereby comprising a strategic victory for the terror and militant groups.

Interestingly, the Pakistan military has incorporated the incumbent U.S. President Obama’s “Change” philosophy in their traditional political agenda, i.e. toppling the government elected through a muddled electoral process in Pakistan. The difference being the conspicuous departure from the overt military coup launched against the prior democratic governments in the state.

Nothing more potent in fomenting anti-government and anti-American sentiments than a political turmoil from the homegrown insurgency forcing the ruling government to stage air and ground assaults yielding immense civilian casualties and ultimately the refugee status for a sizeable population in the homeland, again the humanitarian disaster unfolding with the blessings of the United States behind the scenes.

The anger and disappointment is visibly widespread among the victims and the families, they are demanding that the international community hold the United States and Zardari government accountable for the greatest human tragedy.

In this particular instance, the Pakistani ISI and the Military score the highest points for being the smooth operators.

Not surprisingly, the moderate, peaceful and pro-democracy population in Karachi and different parts of Pakistan is terrified of the Taliban rule and the Sharia law. The domestic and the international news agencies along with the human rights organizations have released several reports with graphic visuals on the civilian deaths and the exodus of at least 1,000,000 refugees and probably more are fleeing the main town, Mingora in Swat Valley and other war zones.

Accordingly, the Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani seeking international aid to relieve the millions and the President Zardari’s visit to the U.S. requesting Congress for at least $83 billion U.S aid to rescue his nation from tyranny might be justified.

Howsoever, the United States taxpayers and other nations should not fall into the booby trap of funneling funds to the state, since the ordinary citizens in Pakistan and Afghanistan never ever receive a dime and invariably the funds are channeled to the nefarious sources lacking in ethics and defiant of national or international law. Please refer to the alternative recommendations detailed in the ‘remedy’ section of the article.

With respect to Afghanistan, the United States Special Forces’ recent aggression against the Talibans and other terror networks producing the huge civilian casualties is unacceptable. The medical reports from the international aid organizations suggest the use of White Phosphorous bombs in the raid, claiming to be legal in the international wars despite the use of such chemical arsenal considered a humanitarian crime on all accounts.

These are the reasons why war is a terrible choice as there is no winner except for the deaths and destruction of innocent civilians apart from the truth being the other casualty. An independent, international committee should conduct any investigation and not the parties accused of the crime to reflect seriousness and credibility in the matter.

International Crisis Remedy

Civil unrest and internal violence anywhere is a matter of concern. Nevertheless, the situation in Pakistan is precarious not just for the ‘nuclear’ factor and the potential ramifications in the Indian sub-continent, but also the imminent danger of radical elements in control of a highly volatile nation complex in demographic, political and socio-economic structure. In addition, Taliban and Al-Qaida together constitute a tremendous threat to the international security.

Effective immediately, any financial assistance from the United States and other nations must be conditional with a requirement for complete overhauling of the Pakistani ISI and the top Military officials to assure the international community the legitimacy of democratic power in the state.

Under no circumstances, cash payments made directly to the government agents in both countries i.e. Afghanistan and Pakistan in the light of embezzlement and bribery scandals involving the political figures. The economic aid to the people delivered by the credible non-profit humanitarian organizations is appropriate to realize the real gains and progress in the nations affected by corrupt bureaucracy.

Investments in cash and kind must be subject to accountability by an oversight committee of the respective nations.

Given the magnitude of the humanitarian plight in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the United States and NATO should engage more in the relief effort by providing logistic support to the people of these two nations desperately in need of efficient services from evacuation to settlement in peaceful manner.

Henceforth, the United States and allies must shift gear from the offensive military operation towards the relentless Peace Corps projects and rebuild civilizations in Afghanistan, Pakistan and war zones around the world. Such unprecedented action called for image reparation and trust revival lost in the imperialistic desire to invade and occupy nations vulnerable to new age weapons experiment.

The escalating violence and tension in these two countries has generated a severe loss of confidence in the local and foreign governments by the victims caught in the crossfire between the tribal warlords in cahoots with the fundamentalist forces and, the military might of the economic powers in the world.

Therefore, it’s essential for Afghanistan, Pakistan, United States and NATO to prioritize civilian protection and welfare before, during and after the combat period. It would greatly improve relationship with the local civilian population important to prevail in the indomitable task of defeating terror around the world.

In the twentieth and twenty first century, the rich and affluent nations imposing economic sanctions against the economically weak offenders has been the common and popular course of action, regardless of the real victims being the people and not the government authorities in power.

Now is the time to abandon the military action, economic sanctions and concepts that are obsolete, redundant and counterproductive.  Instead, useful and meaningful methods guided by moral principles are the best replacement to deal with any and all crises.

International consensus and action is paramount in the permanent arms embargo to relieve poor/ impoverished nations and developing/developed nations alike from the persisting outbreak of civil wars constantly witnessed in Africa, Latin, Central and South America, and relevantly in Sri Lanka with Pakistan and Afghanistan leading the world trend.

The existing conditions in Afghanistan and Pakistan are not a regional issue but a global calamity.  Similarly, it’s no longer the United States’ unilateral battle and the cooperation from the world over at all levels viz. troops involvement, financial assistance and logistic provision instrumental in maintaining international peace and order.

Finally, the game is over for the military industrial complex raking profits at the expense of innocent blood in the worldwide promotion of senseless carnage and chaos among humanity.

For the world at large, it’s worth remembering that,

“Peace within you helps spreading peace around you.”

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics | Leave a Comment 

« Previous Page

PadminiArhant.com