June 10, 2011 – The results of a two-year congressional investigation were released on Wednesday and called on the Obama Administration to seriously consider from all angles, the future of the Afghanistan nation-building assistance programs in the reality of US troop withdrawal to begin this summer.
Although the report was issued by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Democratic team, bi-partisan feelings for the reduction of American taxpayer money being spent in Afghanistan are stronger than ever, considering that the vote last week in Congress to amend US-Afghanistan spending was only 12 votes short of passing.
Although the report condoned the practice of using aid money to “stabilize” (read: bribe locals into submission & pay families off for dead civilian losses) it also, for the first time, recognized that the addition of large sums of foreign dollars into the local economy, such as the addition of large sums of foreign soldiers into the local communities, has had the effect of de-stabilizing the entire Afghanistan economy and social structure – and it currently accounts for 97% of the country’s gross domestic product.
There is also aid corruption that detracts from any attempts to build an Afghanistan Nation. This is done in the large scale by the foreign aid entities which take their money directly from their taxpayers back home and from international monetary relief funds. Unfortunately, that attitude of the foreign relief workers filters down to the collaborating Afghani locals, leading to local pettiness and in-fighting – as opposed to the attitude of “needing to get the job done to better life for the community” filtering up from the locals to the foreign aid workers who keep tight rein on the resources that are supposedly intended for the community.
There is also a more sinister practice of corruption, which is being continued in Libya today, consisting of aid money being committed to projects that are then the targets of direct military hits so there is no accountability as to whether or not the job was done. This results in a culture of aid corruption based on taking money to complete the project and not even attempting the job, just pocketing the cash.
-Jay Carney, Whitehouse spokesman, was asked on Thursday what President Obama meant when he said earlier in the week that a “big chunk” of objectives in Afghanistan had been met. Carney explained that Bin Laden has been killed, the Taliban’s momentum has been halted and there has been success against preventing an alQaeda “haven” in Afghanistan.
What Carney did not explain was that alQaeda has never been accepted by the Afghani people since alQaeda seems to have the same no-holds-barred policy on civilian casualties that NATO does. As for the Taliban, 90% of Afghani resistance to foreign soldiers in Afghanistan are Afghani civilians doing the same thing me or you would do if a foreign army invaded our homes. Because less than 10% of Afghani resistance to foreign forces is Taliban it has become less important to halt their momentum then to halt civilian and non-combatant casualties. In fact, it is the same disregard for civilian casualties by foreign armies that has actually increased solidarity between Taliban and any other entities that civilian Afghanis see protecting civilian life.
-On Thursday morning, at a closed-door meeting of NATO defence ministers, countries that have so far been allied in support of US actions in Afghanistan discussed the beginnings of a timetable for the withdrawal of US soldiers from the country, a withdrawal that many international defence ministers are hoping will be the cue for their own soldiers to finally be able to stand down.
US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said that although the troops will begin pulling out from Afghanistan next month, the President will “resist a rush to the exits and we expect our allies to do the same”. The current target is a 2014 withdrawal date, but many fat-cat contractors have been joking for years how they will never leave. Hopefully, a staggered pullout this summer culminating in a larger removal of troops in 2012 can be agreed upon.
General David Petraeus was on-hand to brief the 28 foreign ministers in attendance and will be responsible for presenting President Obama with several different options for troop reduction within the next two weeks.
-Meanwhile, Pakistan and Afghanistan heads of state and communities met this past week to declare unity of struggle and purpose to co-ordinate efforts for a collaberative peace committee comprised of members from both nations who will be meeting for the first time officially tommorrow. The first purpose of the committee will be to arrange for official peace talks to begin with the Taliban and to try to make NATO understand that wanton disregard for civilian and non-combatant casualties and victims makes the job of maintaining the peace harder in the respective governing states and provinces.
“The struggle (to fight terror) is the struggle of all and the victory will be in the interests of all,” said Afghanistan President Hamid Karzi.
Canada’s Role in Afghanistan – June 10, 2011
-Despite a ridiculously costly effort (charged to the Canadian taxpayer) by the Canadian Military and the meanstream media to prolong the occupation of Afghanistan, the fat-cat contractors in this country are going to have to face the reality that their “golden goose” contract cover in Afghanistan is coming to an end.
No matter how many articles get written in the media applauding Canada’s efforts in Afghanistan – Pamela Wallin in the Vancouver Sun this week went so far as to call it “worthwhile” – the famous excuse of having to win Afghani “hearts and minds” has never had any hope of being achieved by any foreign armies, Canada’s included, that show no respect or heed to the value of Afghani civilian life. In fact, there are analysts suggesting that the lack of concern for civilian casualties by NATO and foreign forces is a direct result of their awareness that they are incapable of winning Afghani “hearts and minds” because they are unwilling to share the reconstruction effort and resources with the Afghani people – this would defeat the purpose for what the fat-cat contractors are using Afghanistan for in the first place.
The only battle for “hearts and minds” that the Canadian Establishment truly feel they have to win is the PR battle at home, for Canadian “hearts and minds”, which will allow the Afghanistan disaster capitalism scheme to continue profiting Canadian contractors at the expense of Afghani civilian and non-combant lives and Canadian taxpayer dollars.
Unfortunately, it is not just contractors who are milking the life out of Afghanistan, the country is also being milked dry by the “intelligence” cells of Western agents who view the segregated Green Zones, setup throughout the Middle East from Iraq to Afghanistan, as their own personal, private resort and night clubs –the time of their lives funded by the lives of Afghani civilians and a vacation charged to the taxpayers at home. Pakistan shut down three Western “intelligence” fusion cells last week for various reasons, and Afghani President Hamid Karzai has been calling for a more inclusive and honest collaboration between Afghani and Western representatives for the last five years.
It has become so painfully obvious that foreign forces are just holding in Afghanistan to prolong the cash cow from their taxpayers at home that the reality of a withdrawal from Afghanistan has finally been recognized. This reality has not only been recognized by the world community but even by those “intelligence” agents and crews who have no clue as to the needs of Afghani civilians. Maybe the needs of Afghani civilians weren’t listed in the briefing at the courtesy tent in the Green Zone – Kabul. I don’t know, I was never invited.
-Murray Brewster, in the Canadian Press this week tried to define the Canadian “legacy” in Afghanistan – what will remain after we have left. Clearly, the 155 dead Canadian soldiers were not mentioned, but Canada’s relationship with Improvised Explosionary Devices (IEDs) was the gist. Most important for Canadians to understand, perhaps the very reason for our upcoming withdrawal, is the fact that the Canadian “legacy” in Afghanistan will not be what’s left behind in that country after we leave as what remains in Afghanistan will have remained despite our efforts.
The Canadian “legacy” from Afghanistan will be what we have failed to accomplish in this country, in Canada, with the 7 million dollars a day of public tax money that has been spent for eight years in the sandbox on Green Zone nightclubs, extraneous military hardware and fluffer expense accounts. Meanwhile, at home, Canada’s Health Act will have to be re-evaluated in 2014 and the Conservatives are planning to cut Canada’s social Medicare programs heavily – they will claim the Afghanistan drain of public monies as their reason for needing to privatize health care.
Basically, the same fat-cats and government contract hogs will try to start keeping their troughs full at the expense of Canadian social services, since they will no longer be able to skim off Afghani social programs once Canada leaves Afghanistan.
It is most ironic and most telling how the transgressions that Canadian citizens let pass in other countries, even when it is our very own Canadian companies and multi-nationals responsible, will always come home to infect our operational systems if Canadians citizens are complacent long enough.
For years Canadians stood by, watched and said nothing, other than token face-saving gestures, while Canadian mining companies and other resource “developers” pillaged resources and communities from Africa to Latin America and the Middle East. What happened? If Canadians were willing to allow resource extraction to destroy environmental sustainability and continuity in other countries then it was only a matter of time before Canada would be subjected to the same land-rape; hence the Tar Sands. After all, why wouldn’t Canadian companies continue at home what they have been doing abroad for years? Especially if Canadians didn’t raise a condemning fuss when the damage was being done in Mexico or Guatemala.
Now we return to the Canadian “legacy” from Afghanistan. Even though a majority of Canadians oppose what Canada is doing in Afghanistan, the Canadian public has simply allowed “business-as-usual” to continue for the last eight years at the cost of seven million dollars a day of taxpayer money. What has Canada been doing in Afghanistan? Absolutely nothing but holding.
All the money accumulated in the name of creating an Afghani infustructure and social service has gone into preventing Afghanis from developing their own social structures, destroying all the existing community networks and creating Afghani dependency on foreign aid funding. It’s almost as if Canadian Forces are stationed in Afghanistan to prevent Afghanistan from developing itself, just so the Canadian military and industrial overlords can continue taking from the Canadian public purse in the name of developing Afghanistan.
When Canada is finally forced to leave Afghanistan, although it will be at least five years too late, where do you suppose all those military and industrial cash cows will turn to maintain their profit margins? The Canadian Establishment has spent the last ten years perfecting the techniques of privatizing social infustructure development in Afghanistan and is only too eager to try out those methods at home starting in 2014 with a rewriting of Canada’s Medicare system. If Canadian citizens just shake our heads and look down when we see Canadian actions that we know are wrong happening to citizens in other countries then it will only be a matter of time before Canada gets what it deserves. Remember the Tar Sands, but if you plan on forgetting then there is a little problem of Afghani-detainee torture abuse that Canadian officials still have to answer for that may refresh our collective cultural consiousness.