Strokes of Kabul
Published in Rossiyskaya Gazeta
(Russia) on 9 December 2009
by Evgeny Shestakov (link to original)
Afghanistan is frozen in anticipation of promised changes. As he assumed the role of president, Hamid Karzai vowed to end corruption, improve the economy, and fight narco-traffic.
It’s been a month, but these pledged actions have not yet been taken. In Washington and European capitals, people have begun to worry: What if the Pashtun chief has tricked them? Is it possible that such doubts also trouble U.S. President Barack Obama, when he made the decision to send additional troops to Afghanistan?
So far, everything has worked out for Karzai. The White House allocated an additional 30,000 troops to the Afghan operation. European members of the alliance were able to scrape together 7,000 soldiers. It has been only after the announcement of this hopeful news that Karzai began proactive moves against corruption. On Monday, the mayor of Kabul was arrested. He was accused of abusing power and accepting bribes. That same day, he was sentenced to four years in prison.
On Tuesday, it became clear that the arrest and speedy trial of the mayor of Kabul were not random decisions. The day after his arrest, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates flew into Kabul. Due to security concerns, his visit was kept secret from the press until the very last minute. It seems, however, that Karzai definitely knew about it. In Kabul, Secretary Gates has made several high-profile statements.
First, Gates reassured ministers of power stability in the Afghan government. He stated that no one considers them bribe-takers and that they should not be worried about their jobs. According to Gates, there is a tendency in the West to use broad generalizations when describing the Afghan authorities, and he believes this isn’t fair. Regarding the fact that these generalizations characterize many of Karzai's entourage, including his relatives, as corrupt and prone to favoritism, the head of the Pentagon remains diplomatic and uncorrupted.
However, in a different statement regarding the personnel policies of Afghanistan’s leadership, Mr. Gates did not restrain himself. Apparently, he’s had enough. The head of the Pentagon told the leader of the sovereign state that Americans will closely monitor Karzai’s appointments to the new cabinet. Gates did not go on to explain which choices might be viewed as “wrong” by the White House. He said that, for Washington, it is important to have capable and honest ministers in those vital Afghan government positions. Yet members of the Afghan militia are among the "untouchables," while the rest of the appointees in the government will have to pass Uncle Sam’s honesty exam.
The second important signal that Gates sent to the president of Afghanistan was recognition of the mistakes that the U.S. made in 1989. At that time, the White House was not supportive of Kabul. Gates assured Karzai that his country will not repeat its past blunders. However, the conditions under which the Afghans are asked to conduct a dialogue with Washington do not correspond to principles of equality in foreign relations.
Finally, Gates elaborated on the assistance that the U.S. is ready to provide to Pakistan in order to combat international terrorism. By speaking in Kabul about support for Islamabad, Gates has clearly shown the Afghan authorities what they can expect in terms of obedience. According to Gates, "the more terrorist attacks Pakistan suffers, the more they can rely on help from Washington."
During his meetings with the president and defense minister of Afghanistan, the head of the Pentagon enlightened his companions to the details of the transfer of additional U.S. troops into their country and briefed them on the grounds of this deployment.
Meanwhile, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen has warned that U.S. losses in Afghanistan are likely to increase in 2010. “This is the most dangerous time I've seen growing up the last four decades in uniform," Mullen said. The admiral claimed that a steep rise in the casualty rate was recorded in Iraq when they increased the contingent. "This is what happened in Iraq during the surge and as tragic as it is, to turn this thing around, it will be a part of this surge (in Afghanistan) as well," says Mullen.
It’s been a month, but these pledged actions have not yet been taken. In Washington and European capitals, people have begun to worry: What if the Pashtun chief has tricked them? Is it possible that such doubts also trouble U.S. President Barack Obama, when he made the decision to send additional troops to Afghanistan?
So far, everything has worked out for Karzai. The White House allocated an additional 30,000 troops to the Afghan operation. European members of the alliance were able to scrape together 7,000 soldiers. It has been only after the announcement of this hopeful news that Karzai began proactive moves against corruption. On Monday, the mayor of Kabul was arrested. He was accused of abusing power and accepting bribes. That same day, he was sentenced to four years in prison.
On Tuesday, it became clear that the arrest and speedy trial of the mayor of Kabul were not random decisions. The day after his arrest, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates flew into Kabul. Due to security concerns, his visit was kept secret from the press until the very last minute. It seems, however, that Karzai definitely knew about it. In Kabul, Secretary Gates has made several high-profile statements.
First, Gates reassured ministers of power stability in the Afghan government. He stated that no one considers them bribe-takers and that they should not be worried about their jobs. According to Gates, there is a tendency in the West to use broad generalizations when describing the Afghan authorities, and he believes this isn’t fair. Regarding the fact that these generalizations characterize many of Karzai's entourage, including his relatives, as corrupt and prone to favoritism, the head of the Pentagon remains diplomatic and uncorrupted.
However, in a different statement regarding the personnel policies of Afghanistan’s leadership, Mr. Gates did not restrain himself. Apparently, he’s had enough. The head of the Pentagon told the leader of the sovereign state that Americans will closely monitor Karzai’s appointments to the new cabinet. Gates did not go on to explain which choices might be viewed as “wrong” by the White House. He said that, for Washington, it is important to have capable and honest ministers in those vital Afghan government positions. Yet members of the Afghan militia are among the "untouchables," while the rest of the appointees in the government will have to pass Uncle Sam’s honesty exam.
The second important signal that Gates sent to the president of Afghanistan was recognition of the mistakes that the U.S. made in 1989. At that time, the White House was not supportive of Kabul. Gates assured Karzai that his country will not repeat its past blunders. However, the conditions under which the Afghans are asked to conduct a dialogue with Washington do not correspond to principles of equality in foreign relations.
Finally, Gates elaborated on the assistance that the U.S. is ready to provide to Pakistan in order to combat international terrorism. By speaking in Kabul about support for Islamabad, Gates has clearly shown the Afghan authorities what they can expect in terms of obedience. According to Gates, "the more terrorist attacks Pakistan suffers, the more they can rely on help from Washington."
During his meetings with the president and defense minister of Afghanistan, the head of the Pentagon enlightened his companions to the details of the transfer of additional U.S. troops into their country and briefed them on the grounds of this deployment.
Meanwhile, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen has warned that U.S. losses in Afghanistan are likely to increase in 2010. “This is the most dangerous time I've seen growing up the last four decades in uniform," Mullen said. The admiral claimed that a steep rise in the casualty rate was recorded in Iraq when they increased the contingent. "This is what happened in Iraq during the surge and as tragic as it is, to turn this thing around, it will be a part of this surge (in Afghanistan) as well," says Mullen.
Next article![]( "Hope for a New Global Order")
