-
The Biggest Fool of All
June 17, 2013 | 119 comments
-
Intervention Temptation
June 13, 2013 | 45 comments
-
Korean Déjà Vu
June 11, 2013 | 24 comments
-
Turkey Is Different
June 10, 2013 | 18 comments
-
Religion Living Dangerously
June 6, 2013 | 22 comments
At Large
Why Are We Still in Afghanistan?
The violent response to accidental Koran burning once again drives home the perils of nation-building.
(Page 2 of 2)
In fact, there are reasons why Afghans might hate Americans. Even then U.S. commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal admitted that at checkpoints “We’ve shot an amazing number of people and killed a number and, to my knowledge, none has proven to have been a real threat to the force.” Tens of thousands of Afghans have fled to Pakistan and more than 300,000 have been displaced within their own nation. While the Taliban is primarily responsible for the human carnage, Americans and Europeans are outsiders, who rarely have been welcomed fondly by people determined to govern themselves.
However, the latest round of violence was just another instance of hateful intolerance. Six years ago Kabul sentenced to death a Christian convert. Under Western pressure the Karzai government released the man on a technicality and allowed him to emigrate. Christians and other religious minorities receive none of the respect that Afghan Muslims demand for themselves. Indeed, there is no freedom of religious conscience even for Afghans in Afghanistan.
The situation was worse under the Taliban, but that is scant comfort today. In its latest assessment Freedom House reported: “Religious freedom has improved since the fall of the Taliban government in late 2001, but it is still hampered by violence and harassment aimed at religious minorities and reformist Muslims.”
The group Open Doors ranked Afghanistan number 2 on its latest “World Watch List,” up a spot from last year. Afghanistan outranked even Saudi Arabia and Iran in persecution. Explained Open Doors: “the situation remains desolate, especially for minority groups, including the small Christian community. Despite having signed all international agreements designed to protect the freedom of religion, the government in the current setting is not even able to guarantee the most basic tenants of this right. On the contrary, being recognized as a Christian immediately places any believer in a very difficult position.”
In its most recent report the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom concluded simply: “Conditions for religious freedom remain exceedingly poor for minority religious communities and dissenting members of the majority faith, despite the presence of U.S. armed forces in Afghanistan for almost 10 years and the substantial investment of lives, resources, and expertise by the United States and the international community.” Recently “the small and vulnerable Christian community experienced a spike in government arrests, with Christians being detained and some jailed for the ‘crime’ of apostasy.”
Last year’s State Department assessment of international religious liberty offered a similarly negative assessment. Noted State: “The constitution and other laws and policies restrict religious freedom and, in practice, the government enforced these restrictions.” Respect for religious liberty is on the decline, “particularly for Christian groups and individuals.” Moreover, “Negative societal opinion and suspicion of Christian activities led to targeting of Christian groups and individuals, including Muslim converts to Christianity. The lack of government responsiveness and protection for these groups and individuals contributed to the deterioration of religious freedom.”
Members of this society are lecturing Americans about the latter’s lack of “respect” for the former’s religious beliefs.
THE LATEST ROUND of violence should cause Americans to reflect on what Afghanistan is and is likely to become. U.S. foreign policy cannot be based solely on the perceived worthiness of those being defended, but presidential contender Newt Gingrich made an important point when he declared that Washington shouldn’t risk “the life of a single American… in a country whose religious fanatics are trying to kill us and whose government seems to be on the side of the fanatics.”
The U.S. and its allies entered Afghanistan to fight terrorism. That job has been completed. Al Qaeda is a wreck and its remnant operates elsewhere, including next door in Pakistan. Afghanistan has become irrelevant to protecting Americans from terrorist attack.
It still would be best if possible to leave an Afghan government capable of protecting its people from the worst depredations of the Taliban. To that end the U.S. and NATO have constructed at great cost Afghan security forces that are more capable than in the past, but which continue to suffer from debilitating deficiencies — many privately admitted by allied personnel on the ground.
The biggest problem remains the Afghan government, however. Even allied officials who have increasing confidence in the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police express frustration with the Karzai government. However impressive the official façade, the reality behind looks very different — rather like in South Vietnam decades ago. Will even well-trained Afghan security personnel be willing to die for the regime in Kabul when the allies depart?
Remaking Afghan society is a hopeless task. Social engineering is hard enough at home. Doing so abroad is far more difficult, especially when many Afghans are ready to kill when offended by those who believe differently than them. The problem runs far deeper than the loss of mutual trust between Afghans and allies, as some observers suggest. Afghan society may — and hopefully will — eventually evolve in a more humane direction, but it will do so on Afghanistan’s, not America’s, schedule.
Indeed, violent intolerance pervades the Muslim world. Not all Islamic states persecute — Turkey and some of the small Gulf kingdoms are more tolerant places — but Islam joins Communism as the two most accurate predictors that a government will suppress religious liberty. And Muslim nations like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan top any list of religious persecutors.
American foreign policy cannot be focused on promoting religious liberty abroad. However, to the extent that promoting human rights remains a basic U.S. goal, Washington should advance respect for freedom of religion. Moreover, the lack of a shared commitment to the value of the life, dignity, and conscience of the human person makes some partnerships difficult if not impossible. As perhaps in Afghanistan.
Americans should wish the Afghan people well. But Washington cannot turn Afghans into Americans. The latest round of Islamic violence in Afghanistan alone is not enough to pronounce the U.S. counter-insurgency mission to be a failure. However, the killings highlight the perils of nation-building. And they entitle the American people to ask: Why are we still in Afghanistan?
About the Author
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is the author and editor of several books, including The Politics of Plunder: Misgovernment in Washington (Transaction).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (38) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Doug Bandow
More Articles From At Large
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/06/why-are-we-still-in-afghanista
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 4:12PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Kenny| 3.6.12 @ 6:22AM
The US shoud get out of Afghanistan. Neither that place nor its people is worth a single American life.
And when the troops do come home, no Afghans should come with them as so-called 'friends' of America.
Afghan Muslims
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel | 3.6.12 @ 8:52PM
Kenny - Yes. I agree. America has no more business being in Afghanistan, than the man in the moon.
This whole idea of "nation building," was ill-contrived. To think that our Western Constitutional Republic, or anything "democratically" constitutional would survive in a Muslim culture, is purely insane. American strategists never did their homework and understood history, else they wouldn't have pushed so hard to wage war in this country and stay there 10 years. This war can be, legitimately blamed on Bush. Furthermore, I think that Obama, is personally, loving every minute of our involvement there, as it is just another tool used by him to bog America down......
Peter Piper| 3.7.12 @ 9:06AM
Not a single additional American or allied life should be lost or maimed in the AfPak toilet. Every single one of them should be home, now.
Darin| 3.6.12 @ 6:34AM
Evendential item number 8,327 on why Islam is a violent religion. Add to the list of examples to be cited when someone says Islam is a "religion of peace."
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.6.12 @ 6:34AM
Thank God no one called any of those people sluts.
Al Adab| 3.6.12 @ 1:52PM
LOL I would have replied earlier but the site access was crazy again this morning. I'm beginning to wonder if the Obama campaign has hacked into the system.
jppc| 3.6.12 @ 6:53AM
Another good question: Why has Moooooslim immigration into the US gone up drastically, since 9/11?
That is the sign of a pathetic country folks. We have lost so much self-confidence that when we were attacked, we immediately flung into apology mode, desperately trying to placate Islam and Mooooslims. Mosques are being raised on every corner in Anytown, USA.
Pathetic.
Brian Mc| 3.6.12 @ 7:31AM
As I clicked on the article I found myself asking a question: Why did 'nation building' work in Germany and Japan? One would assume that such work requires a particular moral certitude from the beneficiaries in order for it to work.
Bruce| 3.6.12 @ 8:16AM
Brian;
The reason "nation building" worked in Germany and Japan is because their countries had literally been destroyed by the US and its allies. They also saw this as a goodwill act on the part of the US (and others) to make up for what had been done. You must remember that the U.S. is the only country that fights a war, wins, and doesn't demand reparations from the defeated.
Trinacria| 3.6.12 @ 3:32PM
Quite simple, really. The fundamental prerequisite for the building of a nation is the existence of a civilized people. Germany, check; Japan, check. Afghanastan - er, negative.
You don't build a nation from a scattered mixture of tribes populated by illiterate inbred camel herders and poppy farmers for whom the profound philosophical question of the day is whether to eat with the right hand and wipe with the left or vice versa.
Seek| 3.6.12 @ 7:01PM
Precisely. An excellent Nietzschean reason to withdraw our troops. As the old adage goes, "You can't fix stupid."
Bob K.| 3.6.12 @ 8:01PM
Because they already were Nations. "Nation:" It is the root of the word "nationalism." This was the prime moving force of those countries in the 20th century. Japan had to learn democracy. Germany already knew it and practiced it. The "Nazis" (from the German word Nationalsozialistiche deutsche Arbeiter-Partei) were elected democratically.
davelnaf| 3.6.12 @ 7:48AM
Afghanistan is an accident of the real countries around it defining its border, and even these countries have serious long term stability issues. Afghanistan’s are just ten times worse.
By all means fortify Bagram and get out of all the FOBs or get out of Afghanistan.
A lot of Koran Crazies are Taliban or their sympathizers. The poor subsistence farmers there will never catch a break from these animals or their government.
Indy| 3.6.12 @ 7:49AM
Our troops are in a bad spot, what are the rules of engagement? The country is tribal, highly illiterate, they will not embrace democracy, we cannot force it on those who don't understand it nor want it. Our Founders were well read, they did their homework before crafting our Constitution. Nation building will never work in Afghanistan.
Al Adab| 3.6.12 @ 1:50PM
Having won the war our policy become one of losing a peace. The attempt to restructure the Afghan government to our liking was misguided at best. It represents a continuation of the Wilsonian policies of attempting to create western style nations out of those, again like Iraq, which do not share the history or culture to allow it. Win the war and leave. Long term occupations, aimed at recreating tribal, national or cultural norms simply will not work.
W| 3.6.12 @ 2:26PM
Al Adab
We should have left Afghan in 2002 and Iraq in 2003 after we captured Saddam.
Iraq kicked us out and we have announced we are leaving Afghan in 2013, so why not leave now?
Where are all our liberal friends demanding we leave Iraq and Afghan when Bush was president? Obama has doubled the war in Afghan with no strategy or purpose, and there is no criticism by the lefties.
Al Adab| 3.6.12 @ 2:55PM
W:
I concur. Does not this new found committment to "nation building" on our part actually violate our own principle of self-determination? Having rid a couple nations of lots of bad guys can we not leave them to find their own best path?
W| 3.6.12 @ 3:33PM
Al Adab
They can have self determinatin as long as they determine according to our standards. This is the Wilsonian "make the world safe for democracy" illusioon adopted by GWB and LBJ in Vietnam.
Al Adab| 3.6.12 @ 5:26PM
W:
Oh I get it. Sorta like everyone in America is free to have their own opinions as long as they don't say anything un-PC of which the powers might disaprove. Makes perfect sense.
Old Soldier| 3.6.12 @ 8:19AM
"Why Are We Still in Afghanistan?"
I haven't been able to answer that question since 2004.
emilio lizardo, phD| 3.6.12 @ 9:58AM
ironically but predictably, the ones pushing hardest for a continued US military presence in Afghanistan, and demanding we stay, are our own military brass and grey lice at the Pentagon who think nothing of sacrificing the enlisted and low level officers to advance their own careers
GW| 3.7.12 @ 1:02AM
Sadly I've come to adopt this view more and more as well. Isn't Admiral Mullen the same guy who has never seen combat? How is he a 4 star general, in charge of the entire military?
Bruce| 3.6.12 @ 8:20AM
I would like to point out that the burning of these Korans was not an "accident". The US forces found messages written in the Korans that were burned. They were unaware of the "proper" way to dispose of the Koran. I found this through an easy search:
"(1) Wrapping them in a piece of cloth or something pure and burying them respectfully in a place where people normally do not walk upon.
(2) Fastening the items to something heavy such as a stone and placing it respectfully in flowing river. "
JimH| 3.6.12 @ 8:31AM
What has been conveniently ignored by those protesting the burning, Is not the writing we found in the Korans a desecration in itself? How come no one no one is calling for the heads of the writers?
jay hoenemeyer| 3.6.12 @ 8:33AM
We are in Afghanistan so that Obama can make good on a campaign promise to fight the right war and not Bush's mistaken campaign in Iraq, per Obama . That he , Obama , has made a hash of both campaigns is ample testimony to the guy's incompetence and/or cowardice . As to nation building , miht I suggest an alternative : the punitive expedition . The British a nd the Romans used this to great effect. No Pommerranian grenediers bones in the balance and the lesson clearly delivered " Don't do it or these are the consequences " If one is dealing with a medieval mindset , use medieval methods.
biomedlives| 3.7.12 @ 2:19PM
Have you read about the 1842 British expedition to Afghanistan? Some members of the expedition survived as prisoners, only one of the others was left after a disastrous retreat from Kabul.
If Bush and Cheney had heeded lessons of the British and Russian experiences in Afghanistan, we might have had more success and a shorter stay there.
emilio lizardo, phD| 3.6.12 @ 10:00AM
ironically but predicatably, the ones calling for a continued US military presence in Afghanistan are the chiefs of staff and the grey lice at the Pentagon who think nothing of sacrificing enlisted and low level officers to perpetuate and advance their own careers.
Jack in Wi.| 3.6.12 @ 10:16AM
Doug Bandow is one great writer and reporter. It is a pleasure to read him here, at this site.
David W| 3.6.12 @ 12:47PM
"Even most rural, tribal peoples are not the "savages" denounced by Sarah Palin, but simply traditionalists who want to be left alone."
Maybe, but when "push comes to a stronger push" these traditionalists will act just like the most fundamentalist muslim. There is absolutely no concept of human rights. They live by violence and repression. It is impossible to get them to change. While I hate for the deaths and injuries to have been for nothing, there is nothing we can really do.
The next time the Taliban build up their government and start exporting violence we just need to go in and kill as many of them as possible (yeah I know, then we are exporting violence), destroy their poppy fields, and pull out.
Conservative Not Republican| 3.6.12 @ 2:42PM
Pentagon report from 2004:
"Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies [the report says]. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the long-standing, even increasing, support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states. Thus, when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy."
Trinacria| 3.6.12 @ 7:47PM
I'm not so sure, brother. Pick any Afghan in the street and ask him to point to Israel or Palestine on a map and I'd wager a tidy sum he wouldn't have the slightest clue. He might say he hates our "pro-Israeli" policies, but that's nothing more than a trained response (much like a dog barking on command); ask him to articulate the policies with which he claims to disagree, and he'll be no more able to do so than the barking dog...
Conservative Not Republican| 3.6.12 @ 9:03PM
You know more than the Pentagon report. Wow. What about bin Laden. He said the same things. You know more than he did too I'll wager
Old Soldier| 3.6.12 @ 2:42PM
Why are we in Afghanistan? The only reason I can see, is to fill body bags! We are accomplishing NOTHING. Since we aren't there to WIN and VICTORY is not in the president's lexicon, WHY ARE WE THERE?
cicero| 3.6.12 @ 4:37PM
The more things change . . . A reading of a few short stories by Kipling shows that nothing has really changed in Afghanistan. We have no chance at nation building, because Afghanistan was never a nation. It is, and always was, a territory peopled by various tribes. The only economy it presently has is the growing of poppies, and the importation of foreign money from foreign armies. If we were to leave, they would still grow poppies. However, the tribes would revert to subsistence farming, and internicine warfare to pass the time, and amuse the menforlk. The government in Kabul would exist until toppled by the next extremist movement to come along. Unless the chief of the Pashtuns can marshall his forces to defeat the movement, he will be strung up to the nearest light pole, and life and death will go on as usual.
Our military should be trained for punitive engagements for the foreseeable future. When these types of actions convince the crazies that their insults to the great satan are not very much fun, we will be left in peace, until they forgegt the lesson. Then we can do it again. But once we have rubbled the transgressors back yards, we have no obligation to replant their gardens. It kind of defeats the purpose.
cfc| 3.6.12 @ 9:27PM
Simple: it's a bit fun.
Norm Klevens| 3.6.12 @ 10:07PM
GTFO.
POST American| 3.7.12 @ 2:57AM
----------------------FINAL WORD----------------------
---Sideshow DIS--tractions!
MEANWHILE, scarcely a week after
the 'uncanny' timeliness of the Breitbart
--er-- 'termination(?) ---there's not so
much as a peep about the NO show of his
Obama video ---least of all from capstone
front media.
Elsewhere, for those who STILL have
money to spare, you might consider making
a generous pledge to the RBN radio network
that's being harassed and is in financial difficulties.
Unlike the Afghanistan coverage ---they
are offering the REAL 'age-enda' ---its aims
and targets and movements.
---------------ESSENTIAL LISTENING---------------
Pje| 3.8.12 @ 9:27PM
American business interests need war to keed their profit margins growing. Pity the poor honest armed forces personel who loose their lives because of "hidden agenda"