The Pak-Afghan Front
June 19, 2008
Will Pakistan fight a US war?
Aijaz Ahmad: US bombing has disrupted negotiations between Pakistan gov and tribal leaders. More here
Does the Afghan war matter to the US?
Ahmad: Permanent bases and strategy towards China long term US objectives in Afghanistan. More here.
Obama and Afghanistan
What should Obama’s policy be for Afghanistan?
Aijaz Ahmad: There is no military solution to the war in Afghanistan
Kandahar braces for Taliban offensive
Taliban and NATO forces both assert that they are in control. More here.
Nato’s Lost Cause
June 12, 2008
‘The west’s ‘good war’ in Afghanistan has turned bad,’ writes Tariq Ali. ‘A local solution, rather than a neocolonial one, is what’s needed’.
In the latest clashes on the Pakistan-Afghan border, Nato troops have killed 11 Pakistani soldiers and injured many more, creating a serious crisis in the country and angering the Pakistan military high command, already split on the question.
US failure in Afghanistan is now evident and Nato desperation only too visible. Spreading the war to Pakistan would be a disaster for all sides. The Bush-Cheney era is drawing to a close, but it is unlikely that their replacements, despite the debacle in Iraq, will settle the American giant back to a digestive sleep.
The temporary cleavage that opened up between some EU states and Washington on Iraq was resolved after the occupation. They could all unite in Afghanistan and fight the good fight. This view has been strongly supported by every US presidential candidate in the run up to the 2008 elections, with Senator Barack Obama pressuring the White House to violate Pakistani sovereignty whenever necessary. He must be pleased.
Be All the Cannon Fodder You Can Be
May 11, 2008
First there was the RAND report on US soldiers nearly one-third of who return from Afghanistan and Iraq suffering brain injuries or stress disorders or both. Only 43 percent of them ever get to see a doctor. Now comes this exclusive in the Independent: ‘Soldiers need loans to eat, report reveals‘. Following is the Independent investigation followed by Alexander Cockburn’s analysis of the RAND report.
Senior figures react angrily to damning indictment of life inside the Army. Jonathan Owen and Brian Brady investigate
A highly sensitive internal report into the state of the British Army has revealed that many soldiers are living in poverty. Some are so poor that they are unable to eat and are forced to rely on emergency food voucher schemes set up by the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
Some of Britain’s most senior military figures reacted angrily yesterday to the revelations in the report, criticising the Government’s treatment of its fighting forces.
The disturbing findings outlined in the briefing team report written for Sir Richard Dannatt, the Chief of the General Staff, include an admission that many junior officers are being forced to leave the Army because they simply cannot afford to stay on.
Talking to ‘Terrorists’
April 29, 2008
A counterproductive Washington policy in recent years has been to boycott and punish political factions or governments that refuse to accept U.S. domination. This policy deters the ability of revolutionary or uncooperative leaders to moderate their attitude and demands.
A notable example is Nepal. About twelve years ago, Maoist guerillas launched an effort to modify or overthrow the monarchy and force changes in the nation’s political and social life. Although the United States declared the revolutionaries to be terrorists, The Carter Center agreed to help mediate the dispute among the three major factions: royal family, old-line political parties and Maoists.
Six months after the oppressive monarch was removed from power, a cease-fire agreement was consummated. Maoist combatants lay down their arms and the Nepalese Army agreed to remain in barracks.
Slave Revolt…of Sorts
April 28, 2008
End of the empire is nigh. Prior to the invasion of Iraq, US planners were hoping to find an Iraqi Karzai. Things have turned out so poorly, that even the prototype is hinting defection. ‘Afghan Leader Criticizes U.S. on Conduct of War‘, Carlotta Gall of the New York Times reports. (thanks Jairo)
KABUL, Afghanistan — President Hamid Karzai strongly criticized the British and American conduct of the war here on Friday, insisting in an interview that his government be given the lead in policy decisions.
Mr. Karzai said that he wanted American forces to stop arresting suspected Taliban and their sympathizers, and that the continued threat of arrest and past mistreatment were discouraging Taliban from coming forward to lay down their arms.
He criticized the American-led coalition as prosecuting the war on terrorism in Afghan villages, saying the real terrorist threat lay in sanctuaries of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
2065: The Beginning of a New Nepal
April 22, 2008
Todays guest editorial from Alberto Cruz of Centro de Estudios Políticos para las Relaciones Internacionales y el Desarollo (CEPRID) on Nepal’s transition away from monarchy. (Also check Democracy Now’s coverage of the issue)
Nepal has entered the year 2065 of its calendar and (after two postponements) has now held elections for the Constituent Assembly that may end the monarchy and open the way to the proclamation of a republic. This is an aspiration of a majority of the Nepali people and has been symbolized by the political and military struggle of the Maoist Communist Party of Nepal (CPN-M) since 1996.
Nepal thus enters a new era following the popular rebellion that defeated the coup d’etat of the feudal monarchy and forced King Gyanendra to leave public life while maintaining the institution of the monarchy. Now, the principal task of the Constituent Assembly is to proclaim a Republic, assuming that the 23 point Agreement between the Seven Party Alliance and the Maoists is honoured. That agreement followed the Maoists’ abandonment of the interim government when previous agreements were not kept.
No Shangri-La
April 19, 2008
In a letter to the London Review of Books Slavoj Žižek dispels media myths about Tibet.
The media imposes certain stories on us, and the one about Tibet goes like this. The People’s Republic of China, which, back in 1949, illegally occupied Tibet, has for decades engaged in the brutal and systematic destruction not only of the Tibetan religion, but of the Tibetans themselves. Recently, the Tibetans’ protests against Chinese occupation were again crushed by military force. Since China is hosting the 2008 Olympics, it is the duty of all of us who love democracy and freedom to put pressure on China to give back to the Tibetans what it stole from them. A country with such a dismal human rights record cannot be allowed to use the noble Olympic spectacle to whitewash its image. What will our governments do? Will they, as usual, cede to economic pragmatism, or will they summon the strength to put ethical and political values above short-term economic interests?
There are complications in this story of ‘good guys versus bad guys’. It is not the case that Tibet was an independent country until 1949, when it was suddenly occupied by China. The history of relations between Tibet and China is a long and complex one, in which China has often played the role of a protective overlord: the anti-Communist Kuomintang also insisted on Chinese sovereignty over Tibet. Before 1949, Tibet was no Shangri-la, but an extremely harsh feudal society, poor (life expectancy was barely over 30), corrupt and fractured by civil wars (the most recent one, between two monastic factions, took place in 1948, when the Red Army was already knocking at the door). Fearing social unrest and disintegration, the ruling elite prohibited industrial development, so that metal, for example, had to be imported from India.
Livingstone for Peace
April 16, 2008
‘He has consistently and loudly opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,’ writes Tariq Ali. ‘For that reason, Ken has my vote’.
Given the way that politics has gone to the dogs in so many parts of the democratic world, its hardly surprising that celebrity status and wealth have taken centre stage. Whether political atomisation is a transient phase remains to be seen. Meanwhile it is worth remembering that this country is involved in two wars and occupations.
The leaders of both the mainstream parties in Britain continue to support involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. And apart from the valiant but small group of antiwar campaigners, the country seems to have forgotten that a million Iraqis have died since the occupation of their country, three million have become refugees and millions in the country face the most horrendous conditions in their everyday lives. If a country considered hostile to the west had behaved in this fashion, the outcry would have been deafening.
Taxi to the Dark Side
April 4, 2008
Taxi to the Dark Side is an excellent documentary charting the recent history of the US Governments use of torture. I hadn’t realised that a high level legal adviser to the President, John Yoo, went as far as publicly arguing that “there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering the torture of a child of a suspect in custody – including by crushing that child’s testicles.” Rationality gone mad - his name has gone on my list of people whose testicles do need crushing.
As a side note, I enjoyed Stephen Kings recent comments on the debate as to whether waterboarding is torture or not “if the Bush administration didn’t think it was torture, they ought to do some personal investigation. Someone in the Bush family should actually be waterboarded so they could report on it to George. I said, I didn’t think he would do it, but I suggested Jenna be waterboarded and then she could talk about whether or not she thought it was torture.”
“This is dedicated to two people who are no longer with us, Dilawar, the young Afghan taxi driver, and my father, a navy interrogator who urged me to make this film because of his fury about what was being done to the rule of law. Let’s hope we can turn this country around, move away from the dark side and back to the light.” Alex Gibney, Director, Academy Award acceptance speech.
Hey Ma
March 24, 2008
I thought this James song was relevant considering the 4,000 dead soldiers toll circulating in the press. I can’t say I like the video given that it suggests soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are somehow ‘heroes’ rather than criminals. I should point out that this isn’t the official video but another good example of remix culture.
James Unveil Highly Controversial Album Cover
Indie veterans James have unveiled the controversial artwork to their new album ‘Hey Ma’ which features an image of a baby about to pick up a handgun.
The hard-hitting image has apparently seen advertising execs give the album a wide berth, meaning that it is very unlikely to feature on major PR campaigns.
