Afghanistan or the United States? What must it be like to live in such a corrupt country that doesn't observe the rule of law?

glenn comments on the utter irony of today's nyt article decrying corruption in afghanistan...

It’s simply shocking to find a country which would allow its political class to be dominated by those who “have profited from the crony capitalism that has come to define its economic order” and who “nearly brought down” its banking system. What must it be like to live in such a country? But even more bewildering still is that the Afghans simply refuse to prosecute their high-levels financial criminals, even though the U.S. is providing advice and oversight! Maybe it’s unsurprising to see a country treat its powerful criminals with impunity, but not when they have the United States of America providing guidance and wise counsel. What could possibly explain this? Are they simply ignoring the important lessons we’re teaching and the shining example we’ve set?

i just finished talking on skype with an afghan-american friend and colleague who, with me and several other colleagues, have spent the past few years trying in vain to jump start an honest-to-god development program for an industry sector that would actually provide jobs, income and improved infrastructure for ordinary afghans... needless to say, we haven't been able to get it off the ground... neither afghans in government or business or our esteemed u.s. government officials give a shit for ordinary afghans...there's simply no money to be made helping ordinary folks...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Graphically, why the situation in Afghanistan is so dire

if this doesn't tell the story, i don't know what does...


USAID and Department of Defense Overall Spending in Afghanistan

you wanna talk about an imbalance...? this visual representation of u.s. development vs. defense spending in afghanistan, to me at least, makes it staggeringly clear why afghanistan is such a goddam mess... of all the money that goes for defense in that country, you can be 100% sure that virtually none of it ends up in the pockets of those in most desperate need... it goes primarily to the u.s., afghanistan and third-country defense contractors whose lips are firmly attached to the u.s. money tit... meanwhile, the "just folks" afghans continue to scramble for even the tiniest crust of bread and soiled rags to feed and clothe their families...

however, hillary does make a point...

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, during last week's marathon set of hearings on President Obama's new strategy in that war, gave two examples of forthrightness that are worth further examination: a discussion of trouble with expanding the workforce of the U.S. Agency for International Development in Afghanistan, and a tough look at how U.S. aid money is being slipped into the hands of the Taliban.

yes, hillary, i'm well aware that even the pathetically small amount that gets spent on development often doesn't go where it's most needed either, but you can bet that if more were spent on development and less on defense, it would increase the odds that at least SOME of it would get where it needs to go...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

'There hasn't been two seconds of intelligent discussion about living standards in Afghanistan'

this guy is talking about the afghanistan i have personally experienced...

The poverty in Afghanistan is almost beyond imagining. Thirty Afghans die from TB every day; life expectancy is 43 years; per capita income is $426; only 13% have access to sanitary drinking water; fewer than one in four are literate; access to electricity is among the lowest in the world. Conditions for women are brutal. If Obama plans to address these issues, he's pretty much keeping it secret, points out world poverty expert Jeffrey Sachs. But without addressing them, can stepped-up American military involvement succeed? Or is it bound to fail?

and he makes the same point i've been making ever since my feet first hit the ground in kabul back in march 2008...

Columbia University economist Jeffrey D. Sachs, one of the foremost experts on extreme poverty in underdeveloped nations, says it is past time for the United States to end its war in Afghanistan, the world’s fifth poorest nation. In an interview with Nieman Watchdog in November, Sachs said the United States should reverse its priorities and fund major sustainable development programs, which would not only help reduce Afghanistan’s overwhelming poverty but would be a surer way to help achieve greater U.S. security.

As Sachs wrote last May in The Guardian newspaper of London, U.S. foreign policy “has failed in recent years mainly because the U.S. has relied on military force to address problems that demand development assistance and diplomacy. Young men become fighters in places such as Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan because they lack gainful employment. Extreme ideologies influence people when they can’t feed their families, and when lack of access to family planning leads to an unwanted population explosion.”

This applies particularly to Afghanistan and the neighboring provinces of Pakistan, which “are impoverished regions, with vast unemployment, bulging youth populations, prolonged droughts, widespread hunger and pervasive economic deprivation. It is easy for the Taliban and al-Qaida to mobilize fighters under such conditions.” With improved economic conditions, a major recruiting tool for the Taliban and al-Qaida – as well as extremists’ threats to the United States – would be substantially weakened.

i've said it repeatedly - desperate people will do desperate things... why can't we see that and do something to break the cycle...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments