« Uncle Sam's Second Girlfriend | Rutabaga Ridgepole's Blog | Nobel Cartoons »

Afghanistan is the Taliban is Afghanistan is the Taliban


It's wonderful to have a loud-mouth liberal like Alan Grayson in Washington, along with all the loud-mouth neo-cons and mush-mouth Democrats, but whoever increases knowledge increases sorrow, and Alan Grayson's grim analysis of Afghanistan is even grimmer than he thinks.

It's not a country; it's not even a place. It's just an empty place on the map. It's terra incognita. People who live there are a welter of different tribes, different language groups, different religious beliefs.

All over the country you find different people who have nothing to do with each other except for the fact that we call them Afghans, and they don't even call themselves Afghans. They're Tajiks or they're Pashtuns, or they're Hazzaras or someone else. The things that hold them together are simply the things that we try to create artificially.

With all due respect, which is actually a lot, I have to say that Rep. Grayson has been addled by world-tourism, and when you spend just a few days or weeks or even a few months in very foreign countries like Afghanistan, it's easy to avoid understanding that you don't understand anything at all, and only if you're very, very lucky will you ever experience even one or two epiphanies of the obvious like a sudden realization that...

Afghanistan is the Taliban is Afghanistan is the Taliban.

Although the eternal tourist Alan Grayson ("I've been to 175 countries...") was probably right about Afghanistan in that blessed era when the Durrani and Barakzai dynasties were still enthroned in Kabul, and only an occasional coronation united so many feudal war-lords at the very same place and time, that happy isolation and mutual ignorance ended after the Soviet invasion in 1979, and hundreds of thousands of refugees from tribes which had never even heard of each other were suddenly united in refugee camps in Pakistan.

There was a melting pot like no other in the history of "Afghanistan," just a name on a map, or a series of names on a series of maps for thousands of years, but now a nation united for the first time in exile, Afghans and only Afghans, an enormous and almost undifferentiated mass deprived of all other identity except Afghanistan and Islam.

Afghanistan

So the Russians went down under suicide insurgents with nothing to lose and American SAM's, and for a while the old war-lords reimposed the old isolated order in their obsolescent fiefdoms, but now and only now Afghanistan existed, at first only as a national consciousness, an emergent property of enormous refugee camps in Pakistan, but in the pure and simple light of that primitive consciousness, the old war-lord order was only a charade, a community-theatre costume drama mercilessly exposed the morning after, and when the first and only national army of Afghanistan, the Taliban appeared, the old feudal order evaporated.

Bourgeois democracy wasn't born in those stinking camps! If we wanted a bourgeois democracy in those stinking camps in Pakistan we could have bought them a bourgeois democracy with all the trimmings for half the price of a week of war!

But we wanted to pig out instead, in our great Reagan-era pig-out, and those same pigs are still running our country, and our senseless war in Afghanistan, which exists as a nation nowhere except where it began, in the minds of those miserable refugees in Pakistani camps, in the primitive Islam and primitive human connections of refugees, expressed with a blinding clarity by the Taliban.

Drive the Taliban out of Afghanistan?

You might just as well say...

Drive Afghanistan out of Afghanistan!

American pundits and generals will posture and predict for another few months or years, but our future in Afghanistan is exactly the same as Joan of Arc predicted for the English in France...

Tous les anglais seront chassés de la France, sauf ceux qui y mourront!

And mutatis mutandis my up-to-date translation is...

Every American will be driven out of Afghanistan, except those who die there.

37 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

I remember watching the Taliban ride into Kabul on tanks, waving AK-47's and wearing neat and proper uniforms, and I asked my local experts, Afghan agricultural workers in the Central Valley, now constantly harassed by the FBI after peacefully sending their meager paychecks home to distant relations in Afghanistan for 40 years...

"Sayed, descendant of the Prophet, may peace be upon him, where did the Taliban get those tanks?"

"Scavenged from war-lords."

"And the guns and uniforms?"

"Scavenged from war-lords."

Sometimes an idea is more powerful than everything else, however much it may look like a very, very bad idea, from very, very far away.

user-pic
In their presence we first required the said Jeanne to take an oath to speak the truth on whatever concerned the trial. To which she replied that she would willingly swear to answer truly everything that concerned her trial, but not everything she knew. Then we required her to swear to answer truthfully everything she should be asked. She replied as before, saying: "You ought to be satisfied, for I have sworn enough."
user-pic

According to the official but magical thinking in Washington, the Pakistan ISI chose the Taliban as its Islamic militia in Afghanistan, and a few months later that same militia rode into Kabul with weapons mostly scavenged from local war-lords on the way.

That would be a very good trick, if anyone could do it, but the ISI and similar bogey-men never showed any signs of such a cosmic power before or after, and all sorts of organizations are always "choosing militias," but almost none of those militias ever arrive at the appropriate capital, and Western "observers" who only observe their own fantasy images of faraway nations have no idea why Taliban triumphed almost alone among so many militias which went nowhere.

user-pic

You can read most of the real story of Obama's empty promises about Afghanistan in a current article on the NYTimes website...

Even as President Obama leads an intense debate over whether to send more troops to Afghanistan, administration officials say the United States is falling far short of his goals to fight the country’s endemic corruption, create a functioning government and legal system and train a police force currently riddled with incompetence.

Afghanistan is now so dangerous, administration officials said, that many aid workers cannot travel outside the capital, Kabul, to advise farmers on crops, a key part of Mr. Obama’s announcement in March that he was deploying hundreds of additional civilians to work in the country. The judiciary is so weak that Afghans increasingly turn to a shadow Taliban court system because, a senior military official said, “a lot of the rural people see the Taliban justice as at least something.”

And yes, Buckwheat, nine months in office is plenty of time for Obama to accomplish something.

user-pic

Meanwhile more and more observers around the world slowly realize that "Hope and Change" meant instead "Bullshit and More Bullshit."

From Malta today...

Obama has now transcended his human form, and now exists in the popular imagination as almost an embodiment of the Divine. He inspires hope and confidence not on the strength of what he actually does, but only on the vague prophecy of a “future peace” which I, for one, will only believe is possible when I see it materialising. '

But like all articles of faith, the cult of Obama despises sceptics such as myself. To the believer – in God as in Obama – it is the hope alone that counts, not whether this same hope is founded upon fact or merely wishful thinking.

user-pic

But while the chicken-hawk Obama prances around Washington making bullshit speechs, good people with a real commitment to Afghanistan beyond empty rhetoric continue to die on back roads in the middle of nowhere...

Capt. Benjamin Sklaver, 32, of Hamden, Conn., died Friday in southeastern Afghanistan when his unit was ambushed by a homicide bomber, cutting short his dream of providing clean water to 250,000 needy people within 10 years.
user-pic

And now I officially re-open comments so the usual Obamabots can post bullshit excuses for the stinking con-man they adore.

user-pic

fascinating how you made the two comments i saw earlier disagreeing with you magically disappear.

user-pic

I think this is called "selective posting", and I fear it may become a new trend. My guess is the original post has been deleted (along with all the comments) and a new post put up in its stead, but with comments closed until 10:02 PM.

user-pic

not cool

user-pic

Removed comment #1 copied from google's cache of the October 12, 2009, 3:44PM version of this post:

We were warned. We were reminded that throughout history, every foreign power attempting to defeat indigenous forces in Afghanistan, including most recently the Soviets, failed miserably and at great cost.

We ignored the warning. Instead, in 2001 following 9/11, we engaged the Taliban as though we had never been warned. The result? We scored a quick, easy, and decisive victory at minimal cost - one of the remarkable triumphs of the past decade. The Taliban were routed.

The problem now is not historical precedent, but a Bush era policy of neglecting Afghanistan to go off and blunder in Iraq, allowing the Taliban to regain momentum despite the warnings of numerous observers, including then candidate Obama. As a consequence, our task now will no longer be easy, and the outcome will no longer be decisive. In fact, it will no longer be possible to drive the Taliban from Afghanistan, but only to contain them. Regardless, the task is necessary for two reasons.

The most compelling is national security. As Obama and others have consistently recognized, our obsession with Iraq blinded us to the security risk emanating from Pakistan/Afghanistan, where insurgent domination in either country threatens the stability of both, including the security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons, which are coveted by the terrorists. They are currently secure, but an Afghanistan under uncontested Taliban domination would make it far more difficult to maintain that security. Rather, it will be necessary to pressure Al Qaeda and the Taliban on both sides of that border to ensure that they cannot simply cross the border to find sanctuary from which they can continue to promote their destabilization and terrorist efforts.

How best to do this is under review, and will not necessarily entail an increase in U.S./NATO troop strength, although it might - at least until a combination of training for indigenous forces as well as negotiations with various factions, even including some Taliban elements beyond the hard core, permits reasonable stability to be maintained without our presence. There's no guarantee, but not to try would be a grievous error.

The second reason is a moral obligation. When we routed the Taliban in 2001, we bestowed on the Afghans a brief respite from Taliban oppression that they have not forgotten and still treasure, but which we would betray if we leave prematurely. They have not forgotten that at last, girls could go to school, everyone could listen to music, and men could walk the streets without fear of death or injury because their beards weren't proper. We should not forget either.

Among Afghans, the Taliban are almost uniformly feared and hated. At least according to good information from those who know the Afghans, we are not similarly despised. Rather, the Afghans are ambivalent - they value our efforts to spare them from the Taliban, but fear the dangers from the crossfire of bombs from our side and suicide bombings from the insurgents. They welcome security we can provide, but only if we stay long enough to allow the security to persiste when we leave. Otherwise, they fear Taliban revenge. There are no reliable public opinion polls to support these conclusions, but rather some individual reports that deserve respect. Among the most compelling is the report on NPR recently from Ahmed Rashid, a native to the entire region (he's Pakistani) who over the course of thirty years, has become an expert on the Talibsn, has actually lived with them for a while, and knows the Afghan population very well from his long experience. He reports that the main fear regarding us is not that we will stay too long, but that we will leave too early - very unlike other, more misguided efforts we've undertaken elsewhere.

(For other historical information from Rashid, see his recent WaPo article at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/04/AR2009090402277.html )

There are no certainties here, either regarding the best strategy or the likelihood of success, even when defined in limited fashion as containment rather than victory. There are reasonable grounds to fear the failure that would ensue if we simply packed up and left. Fortunately, as I see the discussions now taking place among the various analysts, none advocates precipitous withdrawal, and I don't believe the president is going to pursue that path. Whatever his ultimate decision on a specific strategy, I think we must hope that it's based on a wise, objective, unsparingly realistic assesment of current circumstances rather than an overarching philosphy in which ideology dominates over facts as best as they can be ascertained.

Posted by Fred Moolten
October 12, 2009 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink

user-pic

Here is Fred Moolten's post reporting the disappearance of his comment.

I don't see any difference at all in Ridgepole's post itself between the google cache version and this second version, either in text or format. I can only think of two reasons why he did what he did--to get a second chance at being visible, and not caring about the comments, or to intentionally delete the comments? He added a ton of comments of his own to the second version before anyone else commented, which tends to suggest the former (lots of comments on a thread might make someone click on it to check it out.)

user-pic

Removed comment #2 copied from google's cache of the October 12, 2009, 3:44PM version of this post:

This is a ridiculous argument. The Taliban, who didn't really exist until the early 1990's are virtually all Pashtun but no way do all Pashtun (about 50% of Afghanistan) sympathize with them. (A notable example: no love lost between Hamid Karzai and the Taliban, and he's a Pashtun.) Furthermore, if everyone within that artificially-created country was happy with the Taliban, there would not have been a Northern Alliance. And currently, the chief challenger to Karzai, Abdullah Abdullah, was once chief assistant to commander Masood, arch foe of the Taliban.

Posted by artappraiser
October 12, 2009 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink

The first of 3 comments on the earlier version was by Rutabaga Ridgepole himself (@3:53), and he reproduced it exactly on this version @ 9:18, after inserting another comment @ 9:16, so it's clear he knows how to copy comments if he wants to.

user-pic

Once you give people a shared history, they start building a nation. Often, when the external threat is removed, power struggles result. The Taliban overplayed their hand after the Russians were tossed out and were tossed out with external help in their turn. Karzai is busy overplaying his own hand. We shall see.

As far as the women in Afghanistan are concerned tossing out the Taliban may be more like tossing the KKK out of the defeated South.

user-pic

"With all due respect, which is actually a lot, I have to say that Rep. Grayson has been addled by world-tourism,"; I wonder rootie, does your neck ever snap with the switches that you make from one schizoid outlook to another? You can't show respect to an individual and then call that selfsame individual addled in the same sentence and expect anyone to take you seriously. See how that works?

And loads of fawning comments from yourself to yourself? It's a bad sign when you hear voices in your head, rootie; it's an even worse sign when you feel obliged to answer them.

user-pic

For brantlamb, everything is always black or white, and the beautiful rainbow of reality that the rest of us see is invisible.

user-pic

It's amazing how many minds you think you can read rootie, isn't it? A shame that the evidence doesn't bare that out.

user-pic
A shame that the evidence doesn't bare that out.

You probably meant "...bear that out." The dictionary is your friend.

You can't show respect to an individual and then call that selfsame individual addled in the same sentence...

That's what I meant by your black-or-white world-view, and I didn't have to read your mind, which is probably written in pidgin-English anyway.

user-pic

If you removed comments, that's BS, bub.

This is a crazed rant, btw.

user-pic

It wasn't written for you.

user-pic

Here's one thing, though, Rutabaga. After I read some of your comments, I wonder who you are and how old you are and whatnot. I know you are plenty smart, and creative, but there is some reason that you antagonize people purposefully, even those who sometimes reach out a hand to you. Like you will spit on someone, receive a bad reaction, and it just PROVES something to you. I wonder what the payoff is sometimes. Is there something satisfying about mean reactions to your meanness? We have a daughter with attachment disorder, and it is said that unnattached kids provoke negative reactions because a) that's what they're used to and b) at least shitstorms are predictably familiar.
The other thing I think about when I read some of the word-battles at the Cafe is how astounded I am by so much anger or rage, I always forget the difference in meanings. I used to get angrier than I do now; I think some of it has to do with experiencing Pain of the sort they say the Chinese have a word for: Pain that is so deep that no tears can come; pain that won't even let your body move, or a thought to come. Coming out of those times is a moment by moment experience; you pretend you have a life by doing some normal things until gradually you find tiny bits of meaning and comfort and solace somewhere. But for me, anyway, it burned out some of my rage.
I can't offer you any sunny scenarios of welcome or anything if you find it in you to change your way of communicating, but I for one will try. And those life-changing events are always potentially on our horizons. I send my goodwill to you. Today. Ain't guaranteeing about tomorrow. :-}

user-pic

You seem sincere about wanting to stop the killing and to persuade people to seeing the issue from your perspective. So, and I ask this sincerely, do you really believe that you are more likely to persuade people about the bullshit being bullshit if you consistently insult them? Because if you really want to save lives and stop the killing, wouldn't you want to use the best possible approach of persuasion?

user-pic

Ruta, I've come full circle on you. I once called you "evil." which was, in hindsight, nothing more than a defensive, facile way of saying that you scared the Bejesus out of me.
So let's talk on less hyperbolic terms.
Ruta, you are supersmart. AS you are genuinely insightful, and that combination is rarer than vegetables perfectly steamed, yet not overdone.
And so it is that overdone quality that I, and other admirers of you, wish to address.
Ruta, the pressure cooker had its day -- in an era in which the economy and the hopes of the people were on the upswing. The pressure cooker is diminished, now, found only in garage sales everywhere, because the possibility of explosion is just too alarming in the kitchens of now ubiquitously stressed-out, fraught persons. In consequence, we now nuke or saute, rather than pressure-cook, because one more melt-down, splattered on the ceiling, is more than we can currently bear.
Which is not to say that the subjects you raise, and the points you make about them are without merit.
Au contraire. Your merit is obvious. You are an idealist, Ruta, despite your cynicism, and many of us admire you for it.
Whisper and we will strain to hear every word you say. Really.

user-pic

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0416/p06s10-wosc.html?page=1

There is most certainly an Afghan identity.

There is most certainly an Muslim identity.

There is most certainly not a uniform Taliban identity. This older article, which is more militant than the truth, bears out the rather shifting nature of what we erroneously label the Taliban.

In the average American Idol saturated mind, the following equation holds:

Taliban = Al Qaeda = Enemy

This equation was stretched to include Saddam and the Baathists, then the attempt was made to stretch this even further to include Persian Shia.

Of course, the endgame of the equation is all brown people must either prove their loyalty to the US of A in a Kafkaesque game enjoyed only by the perpetrators... or be declared an enemy combatant.

My gut reaction from my own research and my points of contact in Afghanistan (local and third country translators along with OEF veterans) is that Afghanistan is unified in proportion to the energy expended by its invaders. Even the popular myth that we should have taken the fight all the way into the caves and finished off AQ does not indicate that we would still not be facing a motley popular uprising funded by propaganda and opium.

There is no way to put the wrapper back on the pack of cigarettes. That is why I have stressed that as long as we are going to be there, we ought to transitioning away from what is truly creating the unstable nitro-basket in that region:

The Great Game of Drugs, Oil, and other Sundry Resources.

We either need to stop being stupid, or they're going to stop us.

Given what I have seen from Obama, expect a mild holding pattern that will drain the treasury enough to placate DiFi's husband until the inevitable breakdown forces him or his successor to either enact the next ur-fascist wave of GRUNCH government.

user-pic

I just realized that I used either in my last sentence without establishing the dichotomy. Oops. I guess I should say that we either go ur-fascist GRUNCH (even further into the Platonic cave of hungry delusion) or wrench our heads from our collective asses and implement a sustainable, liberal, isolationist position.

I mean, look at the awesome alternative: California. A state that is a nation unto itself, with enough agriculture and resources to feed most of this nation, starving for lack of sane policy. How can we be transforming this cornucopia into the new third world? It blows my mind. Sheer unmitigated stupidity mixed with predator cunning. And patient zero is Ronald Reagan.

user-pic

Thanks for the interesting comments, Zipper.

user-pic

I thought about you, Zipperupus, when I was reading the Times article also linked above.

My own minute by minute scorecard for Af-Pak is based on Milt Bearden's remark, "Kill one insurgent, create six more." The obvious way out of that sort of exponential insurgency is "Kill six more," and then 36, 216, 1296...

This was the Russian strategy in Afghanistan, and without Charlie Wilson's Stingers, they probably could have extinguished the chain reaction of revenge by exterminating clans down to the last infant, more or less like we won the "Indian Wars."

Meanwhile an awful lot of cousins and uncles and brothers and fathers and sons have a blood-grudge against us, and I can't imagine how creating alternative revenue for opium farmers is possible now, or any other large-scale re-organization of the whole mess, or any significant part of it, when nobody can travel anywhere without a big convoy.

And I don't rule out a relatively rapid deterioration of our situation in Afghanistan, and that's without deprecating the amazing quality of our combat personnel. Unit by unit, how the heck can we lose? But every unit is embedded somewhere in 30,000,000 Afghans, and there's a limit to what skill can accomplish against numbers, unless we go over to the Russian and Custer style of exponential extermination.

user-pic

I know that McChrystal used a variation of Bearden's remark when he discussed "COIN Math." It is pretty much a guarantee that unless the locals are on your side (which means they identify and parse the enemy FOR YOU), then the anger and frustration that comes from any insurgent death pretty much creates several more insurgents.

Hercules solved the hydra problem by cauterising the heads. In modern terms, that would mean genocide. Turn the region into glass. Of course, this turns an entire people with a history into a monster that needs to be cauterised.

My primary attitude is that we need to get the hell out of there and clean up our own house. The US reminds me of an alcoholic "Sunday Dad," who beats his kids Monday-Saturday but sings and claps the loudest in church.

But Sunday Dad can't quit cold turkey. So, I have resigned myself to promoting the least caustic strategy, one designed around the Afghan nation and peoples, while emphasizing that we have to put Sunday Dad into rehab.

user-pic

Reading that NYT article is an exercise in discernment. I know what the writer WANTS to say, and I can see where the editor curtailed the ambition. It is pretty obvious that whatever aid we send for the civilians is going to be swallowed by one or more friends or relatives of Karzai.

In Iraq, a lot of problems with maintaining a sizeable and law-abiding police force (such as it was) was paying the officers on a regular basis. The government only intermittently paid them... once we were done training and equipping them (which involved a regular paycheck) and they were released to the government, the money dried up. I can only imagine this problem metastasizing under a shitbrick like Karzai.

The cynic in me wants to increase troop levels for two years, then speedily withdraw them and let the locals fill the power vacuum and put Karzai's head on a pike. This would present the fig leaf of national security credentials that would allow the Dems to cynically rebut the even more cynical GOP.

Bottom line: we have to pull the plug on the military monster who, like the banks, is too big to fail. I just don't see that happening.

user-pic
California. A state that is a nation unto itself, with enough agriculture and resources to feed most of this nation, starving for lack of sane policy. How can we be transforming this cornucopia into the new third world? It blows my mind. Sheer unmitigated stupidity mixed with predator cunning. And patient zero is Ronald Reagan.

That's an outstanding paragraph!

user-pic

Thanks for your tireless efforts to bring Afghanistan into the TPM discussion in a hard-core way, Rootie. It is a hard-core subject. I think you need to work this material into something much more extended (essay? book with artwork? I don't know).

Have you ever seen Tony Kushner's play Homebody/Kabul? It's difficult (he rewrote it 17 times, last I heard), grueling (the entire first act is a half-hour-long monologue by the "homebody" character), and not for everyone, but you could handle it, no problem. :-)

That play is sort of what I mean when I say you need to extend this material about Afghanistan into something longer and creative. Blogging is too restrictive a medium for what you have to say.

user-pic

17 rewrites? I rewrite comments on the blogs more than that!

My old-media aspirations are zero, gasket. It's all just a bunch of stuffy little closets, compared to the infinite cyberspace in which we now cavort.

user-pic

I should have said a cyberspace version of a "book with artwork." I honestly didn't mean old-media would be an appropriate format for you, Rootie, although I still think a "blog" format is too cramped for what you want to say. It's up to you to invent the format that combines your written and artistic material.

What I'm saying is sort of related to what wendy davis above is saying too, although she is looking at what you do from a psychological (and possibly spiritual) perspective, while I'm looking at it from a purely creative perspective. For example, I used to follow this guy's work, but he didn't succeed in transforming his blog into anything and appears to have abandoned it. (He is now a published author, however.)

Anyway, you should check out Kushner if you ever get the chance. He's a genius in his medium, and therefore not at all a waste of time.

user-pic

The only job we have in Afghanistan is to get out.

user-pic

Rudabaga, Incredibly, the American people are coming around to understanding that there is no real real solution to the war in Afghanistan other than to just leave. Although, the Republicans still hold to their principles of sticking it out until an eventual victory. We all remember GW Bush's "event-horizon" theme for ending the war in Iraq. The silliest thing history has ever recorded.

We need to review history to know that many other would-be empires crossed the same mountains of Afghanistan and as the locals say: their mountain passes are the cememtery for foreign armies, and how can we not notice.

It all seems so stupid; we went into Afghanistan to put our boot in their ass, but it seems that our boots got stuck in the quicksand.

The only honorable exit from the war in both, Iraq and Afghanistan, is to leave quitely without any fanfare - less the world notices our historic and moronic mistake.

user-pic

Thanks for commenting, Joseph Chez.

I obviously agree with your main contention about a speedy withdrawal from our senseless wars, but I also believe that we still have time to leave behind a little something besides destruction, even though so many civilian projects have broken down because of deteriorating security.

In both Iraq and Afghanistan, I favor projects at the village level, which don't have much juice behind them in Washington. No big contracts for big contributors!

My idea of a really useful American in Afghanistanwas Capt. Benjamin Sklaver, whom I mentioned above.

Before Capt Sklaver was killed on the road, his local water-purification projects had an excellent chance of leaving behind some real benefits for civilians now depending on polluted wells way out in the boonies.

What happens with those projects now? I don't know. It isn't a given that the army can find anybody to replace Capt. Sklaver, with his very special set of skills and commitment.

Leave a comment

Rutabaga Ridgepole

user-pic

Following: 23
Followers: 31

Posts
Comments & Recommends


  • Location Malibu, California

Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address