Afghanistan Opinion: It's Victory Day But Afghans Are Still Voiceless Decades Later (Mull)

Josh Mull, the Afghanistan Blogging Fellow for The Seminal and Brave New Foundation. also writes for Rethink Afghanistan:

Happy Mujahideen Victory Day! This is the national holiday when Afghans celebrate their victory over the communists in the 1980's. We remember the Mujahideen of course, they're the folks to whom we gave all that CIA training and Stinger missiles so they could kill Soviets. We all at least saw the film version of Charlie Wilson's War, right?

Afghanistan: How Many Soldiers Does it Take to Screw in a Light Bulb? (Mull)

The basic historical narrative is that the Soviet superpower bad guys  (who incidentally invaded in the name of democracy and development) are defeated by the heroic good-guyAmericans, who saved the hapless, incoherent hillbillies, the Afghans, by giving them lots of weapons. Yay for freedom fighters!


The danger, our story warns, is that we abandoned Afghanistan after Mujahideen Victory Day, causing America to become the victims. Blowback! Poor, foolish America should have interfered more with Afghanistan I suppose. But we're ignoring the Afghan version of history and completely missing the point of Mujahideen Victory Day.


Let's take a look at their celebration, via Pajhwok Afghan News [subscription]:

[Deputy President Qasim Fahim] urged Afghan citizens to join together to find a solution to the problems faced by the country.

He said there were some people, both inside and outside the country, who were trying to destabilise Afghanistan.

A strong army, a vigilant fight against corruption and smuggling and respect for good government and the rule of law were some ways in which Afghanistan could retain its strength. Corruption, he said, was the fifth pillar of terrorism.

Fahim delivered a warning to unnamed countries who he said were meddling in Afghanistan's affairs, saying they would find themselves mired in similar problems if they did not leave.

Oh yeah, he's got our number all right. We are definitely "meddling," which is a nice way of saying occupation. And boy are we ever having similar problems! Indeed our meddling mires us in corruption, what with the billions lost to waste, fraud, and abuse by war profiteers. And rule of law is sure out the window since the President can now lock you up forever because he calls you a terrorist or just assassinate you. But notice that the Afghans don't think of the holiday as a time to pine for American intervention: Mujahideen Victory Day is about throwing off any foreign occupation, be it Soviet or American.

And the dirty secret here is that nobody abandoned Afghanistan. We like to take Afghanistan's decades of war and blame it on the Afghans being xenophobic, or "tribal," or some other backhanded way of saying they're all backwards idiots. If only they would just let us manipulate them, they'd have peace. But the history of Afghanistan's "war-torn" decades is a history of nothing but foreign meddling. Take a look at these snippets from the Washington Post:

Already, efforts to jockey for future control of Afghanistan have been seen among Pakistan, India, Iran and even Russia. [...]

Karzai and most Afghans fear that if Washington waits too long to decide about talking to the Taliban, control will fall to the ISI as happened in the 1980s and 1990s -- when Washington abandoned Afghanistan to Russia and Pakistan but the ISI played favorites and was unable to end the civil war among Afghan factions.[...]

Pakistan's maneuvers have prompted India to try reactivating its 1990s alliance with Iran, Russia and Central Asia, which supported the former Northern Alliance in a civil war against the Pakistan-backed Taliban regime.

See all the meddling? Iran, India, Pakistan, Russia, all of "Central Asia" apparently, plus all of our meddling. Everybody had a hand in it. And check out that bias: "ISI played favorites and was unable to end the civil war". Gee whiz, I wonder why they were "unable" to end it when, a few sentences later, we see that a lot of other folks seemed to have been around as well.

Afghans don't need more of us, they need more of themselves. Everyone but Afghans has a say in their affairs. Remember the outrage over President Hamid Karzai appointing Afghans (scandalous!) instead of foreigners to the election commission? Guess how many foreigners regulate the elections in Montana? Zero.

Now, don't misconstrue this as a defense of Karzai's fraud, it's simply illustrative of our rejection of Afghans at every step of the process. We whine about abandoning the women of Afghanistan, instead of letting them do it themselves. We complain that Afghan electricity isn't sufficiently dependent on our puppet in Kabul, instead of helping them develop their own energy capacity. And rather than allow Afghans to develop their own security, we support child molesters and drug addicts who ravage the population.

Just take a look at this movie showing in Afghanistan, keeping in mind that this is only one anecdote, from an American no less:

Last weekend, at the university where I teach, the new documentary film Addicted in Afghanistan by director Jawed Taiman, a British-Afghan, was shown. At point, one of the young boys in the family of opium and heroin addicts the film follows shouts to the camera that his addiction was produced by the U.S.-led occupation. The overwhelmingly student audience erupted into applause. I later heard that some shocked faculty members walked out in disgust with students. One, an American, reportedly said the incident has her reconsidering whether she will return after this semester.

I was stunned that my colleagues were surprised. Our students are not going to speak up in a well-lit classroom in an “American university” and tell their instructor what they honestly think about the United States. Some of the older students lived under Taliban rule. All of the students were directly impacted by the chaos of civil war and the latest bloody foreign occupation. Every Afghan understands that what you say in public can earn your execution.

But in the anonymity of a darkened gymnasium, with abundant peer support, they can exercise their frustration, disappointment, anger or disgust in a collective manner that affords both plausible deniability and little likelihood of reprisals. Popular resistance always finds, or creates, opportunities to express itself.

That's how battered and beat down by foreign interference they are. They can only express themselves anonymously in the dark. They're completely voiceless in the fate of their own country. Then there's that Pajhwok article I noted. They have to hide their exclusively Afghan voices behind loads of ads and a paywall just to keep the lights on.

But there's good news here. You are not behind a paywall, your voice is not confined to the darkness. Listen to what Representative James McGovern said on a recent conference call about Afghanistan:

I have to tell you as a former staffer and as a member of Congress-- pressure works, grassroots pressure works. It really makes a difference here," he said. "And when many people do it it's a movement. And what we need to create here in a very short period of time is a movement to try to change course on Afghanistan.

I was on that call, and I can tell you he very strongly emphasized that point over and over again. Pressure works. Calling your member of congress works. Writing your member of Congress works. Hell, even shutting down their office works. They have to listen to you, they desperately need you to tell them what to do. Unlike the Afghans, your voice still counts for a lot, and you can demand that the US stop interfering in Afghanistan, primarily by ending our bloody and expensive military occupation. Tell them the Afghans need to solve their own problems, they don't need us there manipulating them.

It's super easy, too. Take Peace Action West, for example. They've got a form all ready for you to tell congress to end the war, you just have to fill out your personal details. Click "send" and, poof, it goes straight to your specific members of congress. There are dozens more organizations out there just like that one, too. And of course it's always effective to just straight up call them at their office and speak your mind. And you won't be alone in doing this. Contact your representative, then join us on Rethink Afghanistan’s Facebook page and collaborate with the tens of thousands of others around the country working to bring this war to an end.

The Latest from Iran (18 April): Strike A Pose

2030 GMT: A Swap --- But Inside or Outside Iran? Amidst all the posturing at disarmament summits, here's the key Iranian statement on talks:

Iran plans to hold talks with all members of the United Nations Security Council over a nuclear fuel swap deal, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has said.

"We plan to hold direct talks on nuclear swap with 14 member states of the UN Security Council and indirect talks with the 15th member [the United States]," Mottaki told reporters in a Sunday press conference in Tehran.

And here's the question which, after weeks, still remains: when Iran refers to a willingness for discussions, does that include consideration of the exchange of uranium stock outside the country?

2025 GMT: Irony Alert (Because Hypocrisy is a Not-Very-Nice Word). Press TV reports with a straight face and no reference to recent pronouncement of Iranian authorities on the fighting of "soft war":

Schools in the US State of Pennsylvania have used lent-out laptop computers with spy cameras and "buggy" software to "monitor' students, reports say.

US investigators are probing spying cases of the Lower Merion School District in Pennsylvanian, where school officials have been implicated in receiving unauthorized images of students that borrowed "doctored" laptops from their schools, US media reported on Saturday.

2015 GMT: Picture of Day. It comes from the most recent meeting of women's activists in the Green Movement.

NEW Iran Document: The Supreme Leader on Nuclear Weapons (17 April)
NEW Iran Analysis: And The Nuclear Sideshow Goes On…And On…And On
Iran: Former Tehran Chancellor Maleki on Detention & Green Movement’s “Forgotten Children”
The Latest from Iran (17 April): Remember

2000 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Iranian Students News Agency reports that three prominent reformists --- Mohsen Mirdamadi, head of the Islamic Iran Participation Front, former Deputy Minister of Interior Mostafa Tajzadeh, and Davoud Soleimani have been found guilty of harming national security and propaganda against the regime. Each has been sentenced to six years in jail and barred from involvement in politics or journalism for 10 years.



1730 GMT: Iran's Women Are Needed. Zahra Rahnavard, the wife of Mir Hossein Mousavi, has declared that Iran's "unfinished democracy project" must be fulfilled through the significant presence of women in political movements.

1725 GMT: Attacking the Clerics. A group of plainclothes men have again attacked the offices of Ayatollah Ali Mohammad Dastgheib in Shiraz, vandalising the site by spraying paint.

In December, pro-regime crowds laid siege to the offices in a Shiraz mosque, temporarily forcing Dastgheib, a vocal critic of the Government, and his staff to leave.

1700 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. Khabar Online repeats the claim, which we heard a few days ago, that Hashemi Rafsanjani has met judiciary head Sadegh Larijani to discuss the criminal case against Rafsanjani's son, Mehdi Hashemi.

1615 GMT: Laying Down the Law. The head of Iran's judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, has issued a wide-ranging statement. Like his brother, he has seized the nuclear line of criticising the US and "West" for lies.

At the same time, Larijani tried to position himself as the guardian of the law, emphasising his will to persecute corruption. And he took time to warn people of wearing inappropriate outfits.

1515 GMT: The Subsidy Battle. Is the economic feud between Parliament and the President over?

Yes. And No.

Rah-e-Sabz repeats the news that Parliament, in a secret meeting, has accepted the Government's demands for extra revenues from subsidy cuts.

Gholam-Reza Mesbahi Moghaddam, the Majlis Economic Committee member who was critical of Ahmadinejad, said laws were not violated in the agreement. However, he continued to blame the President for insulting MPs as "economic nuts", declaring to Ahmadinejad, "I was the teacher of your ministers and advisors."

1220 GMT: More on the Mousavi Statement. Speaking to the student committee of the reformist Mojahedin of Islamic Revolution, Mousavi called on supporters of the Green Movement to find “ways to expand the media and spread information". They should counter the attacks on the freedom of the press by replacing every banned weblog with “tens of weblogs for defending the people’s rights”.

Declaring that the Green Movement is “limitless” and can “open numerous new windows” for every blocked “opening”, Mousavi said that the opposition should “include every one of the 70 million people of the country, even our opponents".

1130 GMT: Mir Hossein Mousavi has issued a new statement reiterating his long-declared theme, "We All Must Be Media". We will be looking for an English translation.

1120 GMT: Parliamentary Sniping. Gholam-Reza Mesbahi-Moghaddam, who has been a leading actor in the battle with the President over subsidy and spending proposals, has attacked on a new front. He has derided Ahmadinejad's suggestion of paying $1000 to parents for every new child. Mesbahi-Moghaddam said, "[The] president is not the system's strategist. Rather he [is tasked] to implement laws and macroeconomic policies."

1110 GMT: The "Realist" Solution. Kayhan Barzegar of Harvard University captures the spirit of the movement in Washington amongst some Government officials and analysts for a grand settlement with Iran not only on the nuclear programme but on regional issues:

Obama's attempts to convince actors like Russia, China, or Saudi Arabia to impose new sanctions or political pressure are all short-term solutions and will not change Iran's nuclear policy. The United States needs to find a sustainable solution in dealing with Iran, based on a genuine change that can resolve existing strategic issues and in which zero-sum game solutions are finally put to bed.

What is striking is not Barzegar's specific argument but the fact that it has been picked up and featured in Tehran by Iran Review.

1105 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Journalist and filmmaker Mohammad Nourizad has been sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison for "spreading propaganda" and insulting the country's leaders.

Nourizad was arrested in November after writing the Supreme Leader, urging him to apologize to the nation for the post-election suppression of dissent.

(Given my grumpiness about the "Western" media this morning, credit to the Associated Press for picking up and disseminating the news.)

1055 GMT: The Corruption Story. Arshama3's Blog has an invaluable summary, in German, of the dramatic claims in the Iranian press of the "Fatemi Street" insurance fraud, linking the accused to First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi.

1045 GMT: Soft Power Corner. Want a useful alternative to all the nuclear news? Try this from Reuters' Golnar Motevalli:

The television in the corner of the port-a-cabin reception room where Ali Tavakoli Khomeini receives guests outside the Afghan city of Herat is tuned to Iran's state 24-hour news channel.

Large maps of Iran and Afghanistan adorn the walls, and a portrait of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hangs alongside one of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. An Afghan cook arranges a spread of Persian cuisine.

While the United States will soon have 100,000 troops in Afghanistan waging war against the Taliban, Iran is quietly exerting influence on its neighbor in a subtler way: through bricks and mortar, railways and road.

Tavakoli, an Iranian engineer, has built some 400 km (250 miles) of highway and railroad in western Afghanistan over the last six years, paving the ancient trade routes of the Silk Road.

His firm is building a dam in rural Herat, and has just finished laying foundations for a railway that could one day link south and east Asia to the Middle East and Europe, reviving some of the most important ancient overland trade routes in the world.

1030 GMT: We're Great, You Suck. Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani scales the nuclear high ground (can't let his rival Mr. Ahmadinejad steal all the applause, can he?) with a statement to the Majlis:

The [Washington] conference not only eluded the issue of disarmament but audaciously prescribed the use of atomic weapons. In fact, all the nuclear conference in the US did was weaken the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty]. The use of other weapons of mass destruction was permitted under the pretext of concerns about 'nuclear terrorism'."

1015 GMT: OK, as we need after an extended break to catch up with news inside Iran, let's get the chest-puffing diversions out of the way.

We've got a special analysis on the latest sideshow of Tehran's disarmament conference complemented by US Government spin, put out through The New York Times, on the threat of Iran's nuclear programme. And this morning, the poses just keep a-comin':

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Sunday Iran had the military might to deter attacks, his comments coming as Western pressure mounts on the Islamic state to dispel fears it is developing nuclear arms.

Speaking at a military parade that marked Iran's armed forces' day, Ahmadinejad said the "unrivalled" power of Iranian military secured stability in the Middle East....

"Iran's armed forces are so strong today that the enemies will not even think about violating our territorial integrity," Ahmadinejad said in a low-key speech at the parade.

Low-key in comparison to his Saturday opening salvo at the Tehran disarmament conference, I guess --- let Iran lead the global way for an end to nuclear weapons, chuck the US out of the International Atomic Energy Agency --- but obviously not low-key enough to avoid being splashed as Breaking News by Reuters.

Iran: A View From Tehran "The New Year Challenges"

Analysis from inside Iran can often be as interesting for what lies behind the words on the page as for the claims on the surface. Consider, for example, the latest perspective in Iran Review from Firouzeh Mirrazavi:

About one month after the beginning of the new Iranian calendar year (March 21, 2010) and following international registration of Norouz by the United Nations General Assembly, Iran is facing new challenges: part of this is domestic while another part emanates from Iran’s international and regional policies as well as international pressures it is bearing. Some Iran experts maintain that social unrests following presidential polls in 2009 have led to the isolation of certain parts of the Iranian society, political circles, media crew, and political parties and activists. Post-election events have deepened the gaps and put the country on a wrong track which cannot help to solve any of the existing problems.

The Latest from Iran (15 April): Accepting Authority?

As history has proven in past several thousands of years, enemies usually hit the country in such junctures by fanning the flames of differences. Ambiguities in international relations, especially where Iran’s national security is at stake, have further complicated the situation. Examples to the point include:


1. Iran’s nuclear case and plans by the Security Council and 5+1 to impose tougher sanctions on Iran as the country is getting ready to host an international conference on disarmament and nonproliferation and a similar conference on nuclear security is forthcoming in the United States;

2. Elections in Iraq and persistence of political challenges over the composition of the next Iraqi government;

3. The ongoing situation in Afghanistan and prospects of possible reconciliation between [President Hamid] Karzai and NATO alliance and Taliban forces;

4. Iran’s relations with Saudi Arabia which have been marred by an ongoing crisis of distrust between the two states in addition to territorial and strategic pressures from other Persian Gulf states which are in line with the regional interests of western countries;

5. Israel’s continued threats to use military force against Iran;

6. Tension between Iran and its northern neighbors over the country’s share of the Caspian Sea’s energy resources; and

7. Insecurity of the Iranian borders due to widespread presence of foreign troops in neighboring countries and activities of terrorist and insurgent groups in border areas.

Having a healthy, happy and progressive society by taking advantage of knowledge, expertise and efficiency of all social classes and political groups is the best way to overcome the above-mentioned difficulties. Problems can be successfully solved only when the majority of the Iranian nation, regardless of their political tendencies, lends its support to the government. National unity is an inevitable necessity under existing circumstances and to secure Iran’s rights and interests, there is no better option than strengthening national unity and fostering peace and tranquility in the country.

The Latest from Iran (14 April): Ahmadinejad's Struggle

1720 GMT: Ahmadinjead Brings Culture to the World; Students Aren't Sure. The President's adivsor, Somreh Hashemin, has told university students that "world discourse" has changed because of Ahmadinejad's statements --- therefore it now has culture, science, and ethics.

Students at Allameh Tabatabei University may not have been convinced, however, as both reports and video indicate:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKuNhRZsJQA[/youtube]

Iran’s Nukes: Can Tehran and the US Make A Deal?
The Latest from Iran (14 April): Ahmadinejad’s Struggle

1715 GMT: Out of Jail and On-Line. Former Vice President Mohammad Ali Abtahi, jailed for several months after the election and selected for a high-profile "confession" in August, has resumed blogging.


1710 GMT: Economy Watch. MP Alireza Mahjoub has predicted a continuation of the poor situation, with 40% inflation, poverty, and economic "suffocation".

1700 GMT: Absence or Protest? Khabar Online reports that one-third of MPs were missing from the Majlis today.

1555 GMT: The Corruption Case. MP Elyas Naderan, the leading Parliamentary critic of First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi, has sarcastically thanked the Government for accusing him of making false charges. Naderan assured that he will continue to press the corruption case.

1545 GMT: The Row Over the 15 June Demonstration. Morteza Tamaddon, the Governor of Tehran Province, may have denied his reported statement that the large 15 June protests were authorised. Kalemeh, the website of Mir Hossein Mousavi, however, is persisting with the claim. The website documents Tamaddon's apparent approval of 15 June rally.

1525 GMT: The "Other" Khamenei. Continuing his show of support for reformist leaders, Seyed Hadi Khamenei, the brother of the Supreme Leader, has visited Mohsen Mirdamadi, the chairman of the Islamic Iran Participation Front. Mirdamadi is on temporary release from his prison sentence.

1510 GMT: But China Eases the Pressure? And while there is the ongoing public show over Beijing's will-it-won't-it join international sanctions, this news --- coming as other oil firms stop imports to Iran --- is striking:

State-run Chinaoil has sold two gasoline cargoes for April delivery to Iran, industry sources said on Wednesday, stepping into a void left by fuel suppliers halting shipments under threat of U.S. sanctions....

While others back out, Chinaoil has sold a total of about 600,000 barrels worth around $55 million to the Islamic Republic.

The cargoes were Chinaoil’s first direct sales to Iran since at least January 2009, according to Reuters data. Chinese firms have previously sold through intermediaries, traders said.

1445 GMT: Is Third-Party Enrichment Back On? Reading President Ahmadinejad's bluster in recent days, we asked (1040 GMT), "Is the President actually holding the door open for another push at a deal on uranium enrichment?"

Well, have a look at Iranian state media's presentation of the latest words from the head of Iran's atomic energy organisation, Ali Akbar Salehi, in an interview with a Russian newspaper:

The head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) says Tehran would accept a nuclear fuel swap, should the West manage to win back its trust.

The US-proposed UN-backed deal requires Iran to send most of its low-enriched uranium abroad for further processing and conversion into fuel rods for Tehran's research reactor....

Salehi said that Iran had agreed to the IAEA-backed proposal [for third once it was proffered but needed guarantees from the West that it would deliver the fuel in a timely manner — a demand shrugged off by the West.

"We did not refuse. We agreed at once and we agree now. The only problem is guarantees. They suggested that we hand over a thousand pounds of our 3.5% low-enriched uranium. And wait until the entire amount of uranium has been enriched to a level of 20%," he said. 'Suppose we have given all our uranium. But where is the assurance [that we receive the fuel in a timely manner]?"

1430 GMT: The German Squeeze. The German carmaker Daimler has announced that it will
almost entirely cease business in Iran.

Daimler's chief executive Dieter Zetsche  told shareholders, The policies of the current Iranian leadership have compelled us to put our business relationship with that country on a new footing. In general, our business activities with Iran will now be limited to meeting our existing contractual obligations and continuing our cooperation with established customers."

Daimler will relinquish its 30 percent stake in Iranian Diesel Engine
Manufacturing, a subsidiary of Iranian Khodro Diesel.

The move is further testimony that behind the public rhetoric of leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, for state-based sanctions on Iran, the real pressure is coming from the disinvestment of private companies. Daimler's move following the pullout from Iran of two of Germany's largest insurance companies.

1110 GMT: And, cutting through the Presidential rhetoric and posturing, we've posted an analysis by Julien Mercille on the possibility of a US-Iran deal on enriched uranium for Tehran's medical research reactor.

1040 GMT: Blowing Smoke. How many dramatic foreign policy pronouncements do we get to enjoy from President Ahmadinejad this week?

Following his assessment of foreign leaders as "retarded" and his letter to the United Nations implying that the US Government set up 9-11 for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the President has said that "[US President Barack] Obama cannot do anything in Palestine, they won't let him do anything and he has no chance" and there is no possibility of success in Iraq and Afghanistan: "What can he do in Iraq? Nothing. And Afghanistan is too complicated."

So Ahmadinejad concludes, "Mr. Obama has only one chance and that is Iran. This is not an emotional comment, it's scientific."

Which only leaves the question, success with Iran through what? Is the President actually holding the door open for another push at a deal on uranium enrichment?

1000 GMT: The 15 June March. Still some confusion over whether Iranian authorities --- specifically, Morteza Tamaddon, the Governor of Tehran Province --- said they had authorised the mass demonstration three days after the election.

The Green Voice of Freedom repeated the claim of Parleman News, itself taken from an alleged Tamaddon interview with a magazine, that the march "was actually held with legal authorisation". It appears, however, that GVF has not noted Tamaddon's subsequent denial, which we reported yesterday, of the supposed statement. His line remains that the protest, which brought hundreds of thousands and possibly millions on the streets, was illegal.

0245 GMT. Rafsanjani Watch. Make of this what you will: Hashemi Rafsanjani has made a well-publicised visit this week to Seyed Hassan Khomeini, the grandson of the late Ayatollah Khomeini.

Hassan Khomeini has been under sustained pressure from the Government throughout the post-election crisis over his apparent support for opposition demands,

0240 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Ashura protester Hossein Vahed has received a two-year prison sentence.

0230 GMT: Economy Watch. Khabar Online reports that Iran has "lost" $2 billion on oil fields.

0215 GMT: You Can't Keep A President Down (Or Can't You?).

The President-Parliament battle over economic plans escalates. Ahmadinejad has insisted that all changes will be implemented this year.

Key legislators and Ahmadinejad critics are not being so positive, Ahmad Tavakoli has declared that an agreement between two or three MPs and the President doesn't mean an agreement between the Majlis and the Government. That line is also taken by Elyas Naderan.

How serious is the dispute? Vice President Fatemeh Badaghi has threatened MPs by asserting that immunity for their actions exists only in Parliament.

Afghanistan: Death And The Prices We Pay for Intervention

Stephen Walt ,  writing on Foreign Policy about the recent Wikileaks release on the killing of civilians in Iraq in 2007 by US forces, touches on the idea that massacres like the one in the Wikileaks video are to be expected as part of the price of our interventionist policies:

Notice that I am not suggesting that the personnel involved failed to observe the proper "rules of engagement," or did not genuinely think that the individuals they were attacking were in fact armed. Rather, what bothers me is that they were clearly trying to operate within the rules, and still made a tragic error. It reminds us that this sort of mistake is inevitable in this sort of war, especially when we rely on overwhelming firepower to wage it. When we intervene in other countries, this is what we should expect.

Afghanistan: The Humanity Missing From Our Debate

It's an excellent point, but unfortunately it's too easily dismissed with the old "war is hell" cliche, as in this piece from Bouhammer:

Soldiers cannot get wrapped around every single life they are forced to take by virtue of being in combat. Soldiers (and I use soldiers generally describing all service-members), use dark humor and take it all in stride when they have to take lives. They can’t be effective by getting wrapped around the axle over taking human lives. So what you hear in this video is soldiers being soldiers. Nobody likes killing innocents, especially children and that is evident when the soldiers on the ground immediately start calling for a MEDEVAC to come get the wounded children.

Clearly not everyone sees killing people as an unacceptable price of war, particularly when it's soldiers doing it. Bouhammer simply took Walt's adviceand expected the horrible deaths as a natural result of the policy.

But there is a bit more to the price of war than just the loss of lives. So let's get a little cold-hearted for a moment and just accept that we need to murder these people as part of our strategy. Even if we're OK with that, the price of this strategy is still astronomically expensive.

Let's start just with the cost of transporting supplies to our troops. Not the supplies themselves, just the cost of transporting them. Tom Engelhardt explains:

Believe it or not, according to the Washington Post, the Defense Department has awarded a contract worth up to $360 million to the son of an Afghan cabinet minister to transport U.S. military supplies through some of the most dangerous parts of Afghanistan – and his company has no trucks. (He hires subcontractors who evidently pay off the Taliban as part of a large-scale protection racket that allows the supplies through unharmed.) This contract is, in turn, part of a $2.1 billion Host Nation Trucking contract whose recipients may be deeply involved in extortion and smuggling rackets, and over which the Pentagon reportedly exercises little oversight.

That'sthe US taxpayer, paying $2 billion just for trucks run by corrupt warlords and Taliban interlopers who will use them to smuggle  God knows what, possibly drugs or guns used to kill our soldiers. Lovely. But we have to pay that, because in order for our war strategy to work we've got to have soldiers in "some of the most dangerous parts of Afghanistan".

That's just for the trucks. How do we get the supplies on to those trucks? Well, they come through an airbase in Kyrgyzstan. The price for that is the usual support for a police state dictator and paying rent with US taxpayers' money. And that price is about to go up:

The news of ongoing unrest in the central Asian republic has been received with concern by Washington. The U.S. embassy in Bishkek said it was "deeply concerned" about "civil disturbances" in the country, in a statement released on Wednesday.

Saying that the situation in Kyrgyzstan was "still very fluid", John Kerry, the chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, expressed "regret for the loss of life" in the country and called on all sides to be "calm and refrain from violence". He called upon Kyrgyz parties to address the "underlying political, economic and social issues" in a "transparent process that brings stability and fundamental rights to all."

The U.S. State Department said that transport operations at the Manas military installation outside Bishkek have been "functioning normally." The U.S. military has used the base over the past several years as a staging post for its operations in Afghanistan. Despite the call for the base’s closure by opposition leaders reportedly in charge now, it remains to be seen whether the new government will take practical steps toward that end.

There are worries in the U.S. that the new opposition-led government may increase the rent for Manas base by renegotiating the terms of its agreement with the U.S., according to Foreign Policy’s Cable blog. Such a renegotiation, Cable said, may offer Russia an opportunity to influence an agreement over the base.

So our pet dictator was ousted in a violent uprising (I won't get into the awful stuff he did to deserve that here), and now the new opposition government is going to be raising the rent, if not evicting us completely. This also apparently gives Russia, who we desperately need in other matters like the Iranian nuclear file, a bargaining chip to play against the US.

But the cost goes beyond rent or trucks or anything you can put a dollar sign on. We're also actively working to subvert European democracies as part of the cost of our war:

A newly leaked CIA report prepared earlier this month analyzes how the U.S. Government can best manipulate public opinion in Germany and France -- in order to ensure that those countries continue to fight in Afghanistan. The Report celebrates the fact that the governments of those two nations continue to fight the war in defiance of overwhelming public opinion which opposes it -- so much for all the recent veneration of "consent of the governed" -- and it notes that this is possible due to lack of interest among their citizenry: "Public Apathy Enables Leaders to Ignore Voters," proclaims the title of one section.

We're paying the CIA to figure out how to screw over the voters of France and Germany, and I wouldn't be surprised if the same chicanery was happening in American politics. We're way past blowing taxpayer funds and into the territory of destroying our own national values. And for what? Who actually stands to benefit from all of these prices that we're paying?

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has slammed Western backers for the second time in a week, accusing the United States of interference, The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday.

In a private meeting with up to 70 Afghan lawmakers Saturday, Karzai also warned that the Taliban insurgency could become a legitimate resistance movement if foreign meddling in Afghan affairs continues, the Journal said, citing participants in the talks.

During the talks, Karzai, whose government is supported by billions of dollars of Western aid and 126,000 foreign troops fighting the Taliban, said he would be compelled to join the insurgency himself if the parliament does not back his bid to take over Afghanistan's electoral watchdog

That's right, we're paying a couple billion to Taliban warlords over here, propping up a police state over there, subverting democracies all over the place, and all for a corrupt mountebank like Karzai who wants to join the Taliban. And remember, I'm just picking examples out of thin air here; the cost of trucks, the Kyrgyz airbase, the CIA memos. These aren't even the total cost of the war which will wind up costing in the trillions.

Let's go back to Walt's piece:

It reminds us that this sort of mistake is inevitable in this sort of war, especially when we rely on overwhelming firepower to wage it. When we intervene in other countries, this is what we should expect.

See, Americans do expect these costs. They understand the cliches that "war is hell" and, indeed, expensive. But Americans do question why they're paying these costs only to prop up criminals like Karzai. Why are we paying billions to Taliban smugglers and police states and anti-democratic intelligence operations just to build a country for a guy who wants to join the Taliban? And he's the best thing we've got over there, we've been there for over 9 years, there is no one else.

Americans aren't opposing the cost of this war because they magically turned into pacifist hippies, they oppose the cost because we're paying for nothing over there. The best case scenario for the current price we're paying is we shell out trillions in deficit money, leave our soldiers to keep dying and killing innocent civilians for the next few years, subvert democracies worldwide, and destroy our own national values. All so Karzai will maybe not join the Taliban. Whatever goals we have in Afghanistan are simply not worth the price we're paying.

Josh Mull also writes for The Seminal and Rethink Afghanistan.