Politics

...now browsing by category

 

A Reponse to Cold War Thinking in Today’s Afghanistan

Wednesday, April 7th, 2010

Pretext
A former USAID director from 1950s Afghanistan insists that the Taliban were and are a good option for Afghanistan, and Afghans can’t govern themselves.

My Response
Really? So it was a good thing to imprison women, conduct ethnic cleansing, destroy the cultural heritage of Afghanistan and rewind the clock back to 4th century Arabia in the name of “Pashtunwali” and a “united” Afghanistan by force?

From the latest polls, less than 10% of the country wants the Taliban back because they were a cruel regime.

Simple fact, Afghanistan was never seen as a partner in the eyes of the US, and it dates back to the first diplomatic encounter between the two countries.

Reading your passé viewpoints, you must have been a young man during the Harding administration and should remember the Secretary of State, Charles E. Hughes.

He encouraged President Harding to reject diplomatic ties with the visiting Afghan diplomatic mission in July 1921:

“The commercial opportunities for our people in Afghanistan indicates that they are extremely limited; in fact, so far as our present information goes, there is little or no opportunity for trade.” –Charles E. Hughes, The Secretary of State to President Harding

Forward to today’s “progressive” Obama politics, where Sen. John Kerry comments on the war criminal infested culture that has polluted Afghanistan, ”Not all warlords are bad.

If Karzai doesn’t work for the US, then we can always turn to a military dictatorship as the old Reaganite’s Bing West writes in today’s NY Times.

Outdated, Cold War thinking has created this bloody mess.

Why can’t the US do the right thing?

Karzai is one branch of the Afghan government. There are two other branches that can also partner with the US. And there are plenty of young professionals and politicians that don’t have blood on their hands.

Yet, these and other progressive options aren’t considered.

Commonly heard is bring back the Taliban, keep the war-criminals/lords as clients and consult with regional powers (i.e Pakistan).

In the sea of barking pundits, no one asks what the normal people throughout Afghanistan want.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

The Mullah and The Activist: Two New Autobiographies

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010

Here are a pair of autobiographies that represent two ends of the Afghan political spectrum.

The Activist

A Woman Among Warlords: The Extraordinary Story of an Afghan Who Dared to Raise Her Voice

Women’s rights and anti-fundamentals activities Malalai Joya’s has written her account in A Woman Among Warlords: The Extraordinary Story of an Afghan Who Dared to Raise Her Voice.

Publisher’s excerpt:

While many have talked about the serious plight of women in Afghanistan, Malalai Joya takes us inside the country and shows us the desperate day to-day situations these remarkable people face at every turn. She recounts some of the many acts of rebellion that are helping to change the country — the women who bravely take to the streets in peaceful protest against their oppression; the men who step forward and claim I am her mahram, so the fundamentalists won’t punish a woman for walking alone; and the families that give their basements as classrooms for female students.

A controversial political figure in one of the most dangerous places on earth, Malalai Joya is a hero for our times, a young woman who refused to be silent, a young woman committed to making a difference in the world, no matter the cost.

Find it on Amazon

The Mullah

My Life with the Taliban

Abdul Salam Zaeef, a senior former member of the Taliban, has written about his life in My Life with the Taliban.

Publisher’s except:

His memoirs, translated from Pashto, are more than just a personal account of his extraordinary life. “My Life with the Taliban” offers a counter-narrative to the standard accounts of Afghanistan since 1979. Zaeef describes growing up in rural poverty in Kandahar province. Both of his parents died at an early age, and the Russian invasion of 1979 forced him to flee to Pakistan. He started fighting the jihad in 1983, during which time he was associated with many major figures in the anti-Soviet resistance, including the current Taliban head Mullah Mohammad Omar. After the war Zaeef returned to a quiet life in a small village in Kandahar, but chaos soon overwhelmed Afghanistan as factional fighting erupted after the Russians pulled out. Disgusted by the lawlessness that ensued, Zaeef was one among the former mujahidin who were closely involved in the discussions that led to the emergence of the Taliban, in 1994. Zaeef then details his Taliban career as civil servant and minister who negotiated with foreign oil companies as well as with Afghanistan’s own resistance leader, Ahmed Shah Massoud.

Zaeef was ambassador to Pakistan at the time of the 9/11 attacks, and his account discusses the strange ‘phoney war’ period before the US-led intervention toppled the Taliban. In early 2002 Zaeef was handed over to American forces in Pakistan, notwithstanding his diplomatic status, and spent four and a half years in prison (including several years in Guantanamo) before being released without having been tried or charged with any offence. “My Life with the Taliban” offers a personal and privileged insight into the rural Pashtun village communities that are the Taliban’s bedrock. It helps to explain what drives men like Zaeef to take up arms against the foreigners who are foolish enough to invade his homeland.

Find it on Amazon

Now, we are waiting for an autobiography from a centrist political figure.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Why Did I Vote?

Sunday, August 23rd, 2009

Kabul — I knew I would regret voting.

First off, I have no identity issues about my hyphenated nationality. I was recently called a “foreign Afghan” (khariji afghan-ul-‘asl) by the Ministry of Information and Culture — it was a pithy effort to undermine me, and therefore the credibility of an electoral media monitoring project that I manage that has been critical of the state media.

Yesterday, a colleague who noticed my ink-stained finger asked why I don’t respond to the minister and prove him wrong. I have nothing to prove. I am an Afghan. I was born here. My mother, my grandmothers and great-grandmothers were born here. Apart from my mother, these women did not learn to read and write, and they gave birth to generations in their homes, placing their faith in God and the women around them. So I don’t lose sleep over the minister’s lackeys trying to define who I am.

I registered for a voter card in 2004, before the first presidential election when I worked as a journalism trainer and freelance reporter during a summer break from graduate school. I dug it out months ago just to see if I still had it, and then I misplaced it in a stack of books. I didn’t plan on voting. I was going to be tied up in the office with the media monitoring, and all the paranoia about polling station security made voting a non-issue.

At the last moment, in a surge of my own ever-present naivety and optimism, I voted. Part of it was the reporter in me. How can I not see a polling station during a historical election? Part of it was the woman in me. What if my children ask me where I was during the 2009 presidential election? And part of it was my sense of civic responsibility. After all, I even voted in California county and state elections.

I went to Lycee Zarghoona, an all-girl’s high school around the corner from my rented home. The polling station was nearly empty. When I entered the women’s voting area, there was only one other voter in the room, a middle-aged woman who bravely took a provincial council ballot as well (there were more than 300 candidates in Kabul, and the ballot was stapled together like an oversized booklet).

A teenage poll worker dipped my finger into the disputed indelible ink and another handed me a folded presidential ballot. Once inside the booth, I didn’t linger. Candidate, check.

Today, two days after the election, I’m asking myself, why did I vote? I don’t believe in national myths, even if those myths are necessary. I don’t believe that people power rests in voting. In fact, I believe that after the armed revolution or peaceful resistance, the dream dies and reality, that is to say corruption and compromise, follow. And that’s not pessimistic. The struggle and conflict is the romance and the rest is human nature.

Plus, this is no organic democracy, thought that’s irrelevant, as the International Community claims. It’s an imperfect vote in an obviously imperfect country, and free and fair is relative. One could write an entire book about Orientalism & the Afghan elections.

Meanwhile, many Afghans will just continue to call democracy, “da-mor-kussy,” which is not a quaint Afghan pronunciation. It means, literally, your mom’s (blank) in Pashto.

So while I don’t have an identity issue, I have contradiction issues. I don’t believe that voting will bring change to Afghanistan, or at least the kind of changes that are absolutely necessary now. Afghans are keen politicians, but the political machinations taking place now are sad, like a baser version of a Shakespearean play. To be unorthodox is impossible in Afghanistan. To be, God forbid, independent is foolish. To be conniving and clever, in contrast, is smart.

So in an election where voter cards were bought, traded and fabricated (Britney Jamilah Spears’ voter card, resident of Kandahar, comes to mind), and where ballot stuffing existed, and where the only plausible rival wears Armani suits that cost more than an average Afghan’s annual income, what was the point? Did I participate in a farce, or did I participate in an event that in the long term will be (mis)labeled as revolutionary? Both prospects depress me.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post