David Marks, Trinity 1994, responded online to my column "United States losing war for public opinion abroad" referring to it as a "polemic" and without facts. His ardent opposition to my column is admirable, but horribly incompetent.
In his feedback, Marks largely overlooked the main theme of the piece (the title couldn't have led him astray), and rather focused on my statement that "Afghanistan is in shambles," calling it unfair and unsubstantiated. Nevertheless, I will defend my curt statement in full and also recapitulate the main theme of the column that Marks missed.
Marks wrote, "If Afghanistan is such a basket case, why have over a million refugees returned to their homes? Why has GDP surged since the fall of the Taliban?" Well, put down your conservative propaganda (that is, turn off Fox News) and pick up a newspaper that describes the situation in Afghanistan from more than one angle. Let us discuss the situation in Afghanistan from all sides.
Let's start with the positives. It is true that many steps have been taken since the war to help establish Hamid Karzai's control of the country and reconstruct it. In fact, a constitution to set up an Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (excluding Sharia law) should be ratified next month, the economy of Kabul is slowly reforming and the fortunes of many have been greatly improved.
Now, the negatives. The NATO peacekeeping force only operates in Kabul. So despite the improvement of Kabul, the rest of the country has been predominantly untouched, and Karzai is struggling to impose his rule among feuding warlords. Violent skirmishes between warlords in northern Afghanistan continue, prohibiting stability, and resulting in dozens being killed among the three warring factions over the last few months. In early October, for example, clashes between factions led by warlords Atta Mohammad and Abdul Dostam left 75 dead. If only there were troops to disarm these factions, then there would be a chance for peace. And in the south, almost daily attacks by al Qaeda and Taliban remnants make it a no-go region for relief agencies, let alone reconstruction efforts.
Furthermore, the roads and irrigation systems destroyed during the war have still not been repaired. Opium production has subsequently increased far greater than under the Taliban regime that banned the crop. In all, despite what Marks seems to think, much of the country lingers in turmoil and is edging toward the anarchy of the mid-1990s (which provided a breeding ground for terrorists). More needs to be done and quick. But the U.S. Congress has only allocated $1.2 billion to Afghanistan (compared to tens of billions in Iraq) despite the fact that Afghanistan has more needs, a higher population and fewer natural resources than Iraq.
Anyone knowledgeable about Afghanistan knows that U.S. and international aid (summing to around $5 billion) is far too little to rebuild the country. So the statement that America has left Afghanistan in shambles might be pessimistic and critical, but not outlandish.
I will now return to the main theme of the column, which Marks overlooked. He foolishly stated that "national security is not a popularity contest." Marks and gun-toting Bush cronies might see me as a softy, but the last time I checked the world's economy is highly globalized, much of our economic health is dependent on safe, welcoming foreign markets and that political cooperation is a necessary component to fighting the war against terror. If you think that planes and bombs create peace through a balance of terror, then you will be largely disappointed when those bombs and planes create more terrorists, more attacks, and a world unsafe for Americans and our companies. If the Nov. 19 posters in London during President George W. Bush's state visit which read "A Killer Comes To Town" are any indication, we are moving in the wrong direction.
No matter how many bombs we use, the terrorist network will still grow if anti-Americanism spreads like the plague. Last Saturday alone, 17 American troops were killed when gun shots from the ground caused a helicopter to swerve into another, and in Turkey terrorists killed 20 at a synagogue in Istanbul. In Iraq, attacks on coalition forces are becoming bolder and better coordinated. In the last month, Saddam loyalists killed Baghdad's deputy mayor and two judges, mortared Kurdish sites in Kirkuk, set off a car bomb in Karbala killing three, shot down an American helicopter killing 15 troops and killed 19 Italian servicemen in an anti-coalition attack. Kofi Annan recently explained, "As long as there is an occupation, the resistance will grow."
It's time that we stop having a tin ear to dissenting voices and realize that the "us versus them," gun-toting cowboy unilateralist mentality is leading us towards our own demise.
We cannot let our military ventures in Afghanistan and Iraq lead to unformed anarchic states. The longer it takes for reconstruction, the harder it becomes and the more anti-Americanism (and then terrorism) becomes popular and out-of-control.
Amir Mokari is a Trinity junior. His column usually appears every third Friday.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.