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.

The Latest from Iran (3 April): Celebration

2000 GMT: Rahnavard's Message of Celebration "Release the Political Prisoners". As Iranians celebrated nature on 13 Bedar, Zahra Rahnavard wrote a public letter to Iranian authorities:

[As] the spring is the beginning of the new cycle of life in nature and freedom and blossoming are the titles of this new chapter, I ask the authorities to give the nation the freedom it deserves and free all political prisoners in this new chapter of life.

NEW Iran: 4 Ways the US Can Help the Green Movement (Shahryar)
Iran: The Clerical Challenge Continues (Shahryar)
The Great Nuclear Race: Google v. Iran (Arrington)
The Latest from Iran (2 April): Slipping By

....Seeking freedom, demanding democracy, and following law are the three main branches of Iranian society over the past hundred years, which still shine as part of Iranian demands. Even if we only focus on these three-branched demands between the constitutional revolution [of 1905-1911] and the 1978 revolution, we see that both of these revolutions are unfinished projects.

1830 GMT: We've posted a new analysis from Josh Shahryar, "4 Ways the US Can Help the Green Movement".

1825 GMT: Nuclear Self-Sufficiency: Posture or Plan? Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran's nuclear energy programme, has maintained the line that the Atomic Energy Organization has already taken steps to commission "one or two" new sites, pending the approval of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Salehi told the Iranian Labor News Agency, "These installations will be spread across the country and will be built in certain points based on Mr. Ahmadinejad's discretion. Potential locations have been selected for the construction of new nuclear installations which will be announced once a feasibility study has been carried out."

In late 2009 Ahmadinejad, putting out declarations amidst the manoeuvres over sanctions and the Iranian nuclear programme, promised from 10 to 20 new sites.

1730 GMT: Poverty, What Poverty? BBC Persian reports: In an interview with the Iranian Labor News Agency about the lack of a minimum wage, the Iranian Minister of Labor, Abdol-Reza Sheikholeslami, did not know what the poverty line was in the country.

1715 GMT: 13 Bedar from Inside Iran. An EA reader passes on a direct report from a correspondent in rural Iran: "I've never seen a Sisdeh (Bedar) like it in my life, it's always big but this year it was the biggest it could be, because of the situation."

1700 GMT: International Intrigues. Back from a journey to the wilds of northwest Britain to find EA readers chasing up stories. For example, there is the Wall Street Journal's report that the International Atomic Energy Agency and Western intelligence agencies are investigating how an Iranian firm obtained critical valves and vacuum gauges to enrich uranium, allegedly through an intermediary representing a Chinese company based near Shanghai.

Beyond the necessary caution for this story, given the Journal's anti-Iran inclinations and the obvious spinning by IAEA officials and Western intelligence (part of a pattern reflected in the "coverage" of The New York Times), here's the political question: is this tale a component in political pressure against China to break links with Tehran and accept the push for tougher sanctions?

And if that's not enough for you, try out the ongoing drama of Italian court documents pointing to "a ring of Italian arms dealers and Iranian spies who were illegally selling ammunition, helicopters and other military hardware to Iran".

1045 GMT: Reformist Show. On the first day after the two-week Nowruz celebrations, hundreds of reformists have appeared at the office of former President Mohammad Khatami.

1015 GMT: Where's Mahmoud? Well, the President's giving it a bit of this-and-that tough guy talk as he opened an iron ore pellet factory today.

Ahmadinejad insisted new international sanctions over Iran's nuclear program would only strengthen the country by helping it become self-sufficient. Meanwhile, US pressure on Iran had backfired and isolated Washington in the world.

Ahmadinejad also warned Israel not to start another war with Gaza.

0945 GMT: The Women's Movement and the Green Movement. Green Voice of Freedom reports on Wednesday's meeting of Zanane Noandish (Forward Thinking Women) and women journalists, students and lawyers with Zahra Rahnavard, the wife of Mir Hossein Mousavi.

Rahnavard welcomed the increasing role of women’s groups and organisations in political activities, saying, “Without the presence of women, there would be no great points in the history of our country and the Green Movement could never reach such heights without women.”

Addressing the emerging question of the relationship between the women's movement and the Greens, Rahnavard asserted, “A number of great movements such as women’s movements, worker’s movements, student movements, teachers’ movements are within the enormous Green Movement and their demands are common slogans such as freedom, removing discrimination, respect for law, seeking democracy. The resistance of these movements will help in the victory of the Green Movement."

Rahnavard added that the current interpretation of Islam of women’s rights was not at all "Islamic", “Throughout these years, certain people have attempted to misrepresent their own backward theories as Islam. Islam is a progressive religion and has the capacity to interact with the modern world.”

Rahnavard called for all discriminatory laws against women to be repealed. She said, “All segments of [women's society] in our country, especially women from deprived sectors suffer from a great deal of discriminatory laws and I am certain that even the free spirited men of our country suffer from these discriminations and are ashamed of them.”

0925 GMT: A Twist in the Friday Prayer? Parleman News has an interesting reading of Ayatollah Emami Kashani's speech yesterday in Tehran. The website takes his reference to the Supreme Leader's Nowruz invocation to "wake up and look around" as a call to the Government and even Khamenei to consider their actions.

0915 GMT: More Subsidy Fun. Politicians Mohammad Reza Farhangi and Akbar Oulia have weighed in on the dispute with the President over subsidies and spending. Farhangi said that Amadinejad's call for a referendum
after Parliament confirmed the subsidy law is "illogical".

Oulia insisted that the Majlis will not offer a "blank cheque" for subsidies.

0845 GMT: I'm in northwest Britain for much of the day so updates will be limited. As usual, input from readers will be much appreciated....

0755 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Robert Mackey of The New York Times offers a summary of the background and developments in the case of detained film director Jafar Panahi.

0730 GMT: When Nuclear "Spin" Goes Wrong. So here's the headline from Press TV: "FM: Iran strongly supports nukes annihilation".

And I think, "Oh my goodness, Iran's Foreign Minister is calling for the nuclear annihilation of whom?".

Fortunately --- both for world peace and for Iran's public image --- Manouchehr Mottaki, meeting the Gabonese President was not proposing nuclear bombs on Tel Aviv, Washington, or London: "Iran and Gabon strongly support the destruction and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons as well as the legal rights of NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty] members to use peaceful nuclear technology."

0600 GMT: Cutting Off the News. France 24, the international French service, has complained over the blocking of its website by Iranian authorities.

0555 GMT: There's Always One to Spoil the Party. Iranian security official Saeed Esmaili wasn't in a celebrating mood for 13 Bedar. He declared that "driving with sabzeh (grass) on top of a car will be punished". We have no confirmation if the warning was enforced.

0550 GMT: Subsidy Battle. The former deputy head of the National Security Council in the Ahmadinejad Government, Abdolreza Rahmani Fazli, has added his voice to the chorus that the Government must implement the subsidy reduction and spending plan as approved by Parliament. Fazli added that the plan should be monitored by an audit board.

However, an even more important intervention came from Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani, who has repeated that the Majlis will not reconsider the plan it approved, granting Ahmadinejad control over an extra $20 billion.

0545 GMT: Another Clerical Appeal. Hojatoleslam Ali Younessi has asked for the release of political prisoners, saying that Islamic mercy would solve society's problems. Like Ayatollah Safi Golpaygani earlier this week, Younessi, criticised the intervention of security forces in the affairs of the judiciary.

0540 GMT: Economy Watch. Another success for the strategy of persuading companies to disinvest from Iran.  KPMG, one of the Big Four accountancy firms, has severed its links with its Iranian member, citing “serious and escalating concerns” about the conduct of the Iranian Government.

On the surface, the move is being attributed to pressure from the activist group United Against Nuclear Iran, which had targeted KPMG three weeks ago for "supporting this brutal regime and its illegal actions". It is unclear if there was any discussion between KPMG and US Government officials before the decision.

A significant number of large international companies have withdrawn from Iran since the start of 2010.

0530 GMT: The big news in Iran on Friday was away from the political arena, distant from the nuclear controversy, the posturing on sanctions, the Friday Prayer address in Iran, the ongoing manoeuvres between Parliament and President over the Ahmadinejad budget proposals.

The big news was simply that Iranians celebrated the day.

There was beautiful weather in much of the country for 13 Bedar, the day for seeing out --- as in going outside with family and friends and enjoying nature --- the New Year festivities.

The Los Angeles Times has a summary, with some videos and photographs.