10) THE AFGHAN
QUAGMIRE: IMPERIALISM STAYS
THE COURSE
(The
following
article is from the March 16-31, 2009, issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the
source is credited. Subscription rates in Canada: $25/year, or $12 low
income rate; for U.S. readers - $25 US per year; other overseas readers
- $25 US or $35 CDN per year. Send to: People's Voice, c/o PV Business
Manager, 133 Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)
By Kimball Cariou
After Canadian taxpayers have paid
more than $11 billion for our military mission, Stephen Harper has
publicly conceded that the NATO war in Afghanistan is "unwinnable." But
despite his admission, Harper is now waffling on recent commitments
that Canadian troops would be withdrawn by 2011. The PM seems to be
hedging his bets as the so-called "surge" of 30,000 more US troops
enters Afghanistan.
The death
toll for Canadian
soldiers in the occupation has now hit 111, after more road attacks
against military vehicles. Public opinion in Canada remains solidly
against extending the occupation, which will enter its second decade by
2011.
But the
decisive factor in this
war will be the Afghan people, who are deeply war-weary and sickened by
the deaths of thousands of civilians. Opposition to the "surge" tactic
is growing stronger inside Afghanistan, where support for a diplomatic
and political end to the fighting is growing.
Most of this
crucial story gets
little coverage in Canada's mass media, which remains utterly focused
on Canadian casualties and "feel good" reports on the noble endeavours
of "our brave troops."
An excellent
source of real news
about Afghanistan is found on the website of StopWar.ca, Vancouver's
broad-based anti-war coalition. A blog compiled by StopWar activist
Dave Markland presents daily news that rarely makes it into the
Canadian media. Here are some recent examples.
Al Jazeera
reported on Feb. 26
that "secret" Taliban talks, taking place in Dubai, London and
Afghanistan since the beginning of the year, have proposed the return
of Gulbaldin Hekmatyar, the former Afghan prime minister, who has been
in hiding for seven years. During the 1980s, Hekmatyar was a prominent
leader of the US-backed feudal forces fighting the progressive
government in Kabul, which had strong Soviet support. He is the leader
of the Hezb‑i‑Islami forces, which fight alongside the Taliban and are
now considered a terrorist organisation by the United States.
James Bays,
Al Jazeera's
correspondent in Kabul, said: "The plan is to widen these talks and to
bring in elements of the Taliban."
This is not
the first time that
such talks have been attempted. Last year, Ahmed Jan, an intermediary
for the Taliban and tribal elders from Helmand province, was sent to
Kabul for talks with the government. Al Jazeera reports that Jan was
arrested after US officials discovered talks were to take place, and is
now being held in US custody at Bagram military base.
What about
public opinion
regarding the "troop surge"? As Markland says "it seems that the
majority of people in Pashtun areas (i.e. the targets of our hearts and
minds campaign) oppose the surge."
A recent
article by Anand Gopal
in The Christian Science Monitor
quotes Afghan MP Shukria Barakzai, who
says she has an "innovative amendment" to Washington's planned surge:
"Send us 30,000 scholars instead. Or 30,000 engineers. But don't send
more troops - it will just bring more violence."
Gopal says
that a growing number of Afghans, especially in the Pashtun south,
oppose a troop increase.
"At least
half the country is
deeply suspicious of the new troops," says Kabul‑based political
analyst Waheed Muzjda. "The US will have to wage an intense
hearts‑and‑minds campaign to turn this situation around."
Much of the
opposition comes
from provinces which seen the most fighting and where the new troops
will be deployed. A group of 50 mostly Pashtun MPs recently formed a
working group aimed at blocking the arrival of new troops and pushing
for a bilateral military agreement between Kabul and Washington, which
currently does not exist.
"I can't
find a single man in
the entire province who is in favor of more troops," Awal Khan, a
tribal leader from Logar province, told the Monitor reporter. "They
don't respect our tradition, culture, or religion."
The Markland
blog gives regular
examples of civilian casualties, a major grievance among the Afghan
people. A recent NATO press release tells of one such tragedy: "On the
morning of 1 March an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)
vehicle rolled over resulting in the death of an Afghan citizen. The
accident occurred in Jalalabad City, Nangarhar province at
approximately 10:30 am, when the ISAF vehicle swerved to prevent a
collision with a local vehicle that had pulled out in front of the
convoy. The Afghan male killed in the accident was riding a bicycle in
the vicinity..."
But far more
often, civilian casualties are the direct product of police and
military action.
Here is the
February death toll compiled by Markland:
* Feb. 5‑6: US‑led coalition forces
in Zabul kill 6 civilians in an attack which targeted insurgents, say
Afghan officials.
* Feb. 6: US‑led coalition forces
shoot and kill one man and wound a woman and child at a checkpoint in
Khost province.
* Feb. 11: A provincial spokesman
says NATO airstrikes kill four civilians in Logar province.
* Feb. 12: Five children are killed
as Australian special forces battle militants while searching a house
in Uruzgan province.
* Feb. 15: Unverified reports say
three civilians are injured (one fatally) when NATO troops and
insurgents clash in Sangin district, Helmand.
* Feb. 16: In Herat US forces kill
12‑16 civilians in air attacks. An American investigation claims that
13 civilians and three militants were killed.
* Feb. 17: Two civilians in a vehicle
are killed by NATO‑led troops on patrol in the Maywand district of
Kandahar.
* Feb. 22: A motorcyclist is shot and
injured by NATO troops in Sangin district of Helmand.
* Feb. 23: Villagers report that
Canadian weaponry killed three children in Panjwai district.
* Feb. 23: A number of civilians are
injured in a clash between NATO forces and insurgents in Sangin
district, Helmand. Reuters later reports that more than one of them
died.
Late last
year, the top Canadian
soldier in Afghanistan, Lt.‑Gen. Michel Gauthier, said "The insurgents
are on their back foot, have been, and that's in part why we went
almost three months without casualties. They did get a couple of ‑ I
would say lucky ‑ attacks on us..."
Since then,
about a dozen more
Canadian soldiers have died. But Gauthier is not the first
over-confident imperialist in Afghanistan. Here are a few more quotes:
"I'm not
making a prediction,
but I think temporarily they're on their back foot, and we need to keep
them there." ‑ Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, Sept. 29,
2004.
"[The
Taliban] have been set on their back foot recently." ‑ Canadian General
Rick Hillier, Sept. 29, 2006.
"[Canadian
soldiers] believe
they need to keep the Taliban on their back foot until they can help
the Afghans build their own army". ‑ Rick Hillier, Dec. 26, 2007.
"[T]he
Taliban are on their back
foot with the recent arrival of aggressively on‑the‑offence U.S.
Marines". ‑ Rosie DiManno, Toronto Star, May 19, 2008.
"It's become
apparent that the Taliban are very much on the backfoot." - British
Brigadier Gordon Messenger, June 1, 2008.
History will
tell who is on the
"back foot". In the meantime, as the Canadian Peace Alliance and Echec
a la Guerre say in their call for April 4 protests against NATO,
after
more than seven years of occupation, there is still no end in sight to
the killing in Afghanistan, and the war is expanding into Pakistan,
threatening to create massive social and political instability.