[Peace-discuss] UFPJ Policy Notes.

[Morton K. Brussel]

Here is a fact sheet from UFPJ about the US policies in Afghanistan  
and Pakistan. I recommend it be reprinted and passed out when we have  
the opportunity. I find the objections of Neil and Carl  misleading. -- 
mkb

Afghanistan – Pakistan Crisis                                   Policy  
Notes
President Obama’s Afghanistan/Pakistan Strategy
In presenting his Afghanistan/Pakistan policy to the nation on March  
27, President Obama said we must escalate the war in Afghanistan and  
Pakistan to protect the U.S. from Al Qaeda terrorism.    But people  
are tired of such scare tactics, sick of endless wars which only  
increase violence.   United for Peace and Justice calls for a new  
policy which withdraws U.S. troops, prioritizes diplomacy, and repairs  
the damage we have already caused.
·       President Obama stated that we are fighting in Afghanistan to  
protect the U.S. from Al Qaeda terrorism.    But the rebels in  
Afghanistan are not Al Qaeda – they are fighting against foreign  
occupation and for their version of Islam, not to threaten the U.S. or  
other countries.    As a recent RAND report confirmed, military action  
is the least effective means of responding to terrorism (working in  
only 7% of the cases studied) – political engagement, economic  
development, education, and police work are far smarter.  More than  
7,000 Afghan civilians have been killed by U.S. military action in  
Afghanistan, compared to the 9/11 death toll of 3,067.

·       President Obama stated that the U.S. did not choose the  
Afghanistan war and that we were forced into it by the 9/11 attacks.    
But it was President Bush’s choice to define a crime – the 9/11  
attacks -- as an act of war, and to respond with military means.   
Pres. Obama has unfortunately not challenged Bush’s mistaken  
identification of criminal terrorists as “soldiers” fighting a “war”.   
The U.S. itself had created and armed the very forces we are now  
fighting -- the U.S. government organized, armed and funded Afghan  
jihadis to fight the Soviets in the 1970s.    Pakistan’s military,  
supported by U.S. aid, similarly created the Taliban in the 1990s.

·       Pres. Obama was right when he said that a return of  
Afghanistan to Taliban rule would mean brutal government and denial of  
human rights to the Afghan people, especially women and girls.    But  
he forgot to say that the regime of Hamid Karzai is little better.    
Support for warlords, corruption, involvement in the opium trade, and  
inability to enforce the rule of law, coupled with U.S. air attacks  
and night raids on civilians, means that the situation of the Afghan  
people including oppression of women, rape and lawlessness are now as  
bad or worse in most parts of Afghanistan as they were under the  
Taliban regime, according to Afghan women’s organizations.     Instead  
of military approaches we need to support Afghan civil society in  
their efforts to end impunity of all armed groups.

·       Obama said that the U.S. is not in Afghanistan to control that  
country or dictate its future.    But Hamid Karzai was chosen leader  
at the Bonn Conference in December 2001 because of U.S. support, not  
because of his standing in the country.   In 2004 the U.S. also  
interfered with the Afghan elections, ensuring that former warlords  
could run instead of being prosecuted for their crimes.    Now, press  
reports say the U.S. is pondering how to downsize the Afghan  
president’s position to a figurehead and install a new leader to  
exercise real power.    With such manipulations in the background,  
talk about safeguarding this year’s  elections is not about helping  
Afghans exercise their right to choose their leaders.   It is really  
about the U.S. strategic aim to control the region.

·       Pres. Obama said he will shift the emphasis of the U.S.  
military mission to training Afghan security forces, setting targets  
of 132,000 for the Afghanistan National Army and 82,000 for the police  
force.   But such enormous numbers are unsustainable for Afghanistan,  
one of the poorest countries in the world, and an oversized army has  
oversized political influence.    With a timetable for withdrawal of  
U.S. forces as proposed even by President Karzai, and a reduction of  
regional tensions, Afghanistan can defend itself without mortgaging  
its future.

·       While most expected Pres. Obama to call for negotiations to  
resolve the Afghan insurgency, he did not do so.   Instead he called  
only for a sham “reconciliation” process in which Afghans who have  
worked for the Taliban will be paid to switch sides.   But this model  
would further fragment the country and build up warlords.    Only  
Afghans can choose their political direction.   In a positive sign,  
the Afghanistan National Council of Ulemma (religious scholars)  
recently called for a new Loya Jirga (Grand Assembly), which would  
involve all Afghan groups and bodies and be mediated by the Saudi king.

·       Pres. Obama professed admiration for the Pakistani people  
because they have struggled for their democracy.   He should have  
mentioned who and what they are struggling against – rule by a small  
elite, and against a continual cycle of military dictatorships,  
supported by huge amounts of U.S. military aid.    Pakistan’s  
oversized military, fifth largest in the world, has dominated since  
the 1950s.   The U.S. should end, rather than increase, its colossal  
aid to the military. Since last summer U.S. Predator drones have been  
raining death on Pakistani tribal areas, killing civilians as well as  
militants.    New plans to expand air attacks to the Quetta area will  
further enrage Pakistanis.  The U.S. should focus on nurturing  
negotiations between India and Pakistan rather than sending arms to  
either.

·       Pres. Obama promised a $7.5 billion development aid package  
for Pakistan over 5 years, but said little about reconstructing a  
devastated Afghanistan.    While people in both countries have real  
needs, this money will not be well spent unless the U.S. changes the  
way it spends foreign aid.   As Oxfam said in a recent report on the  
U.S. Afghan aid program, “there has been limited success in part  
because the US uses foreign aid to achieve short-term or security  
objectives”.    60% of U.S. “foreign aid” spending never leaves the  
U.S., so that wheat is purchased in North Dakota and shipped to  
Afghanistan, while Afghan farmers are priced out of the market and  
turn to poppy cultivation.  Still more aid is wasted on high-priced  
Western consultants, skimmed off in bribes, or used to support  
military strategies which have little to do with human development.    
To be effective, development aid must be locally directed and managed  
by the people of each country.

·       The proposal to designate portions of Pakistan as  
“Reconstruction Opportunity Zones” is a scheme to enmesh Pakistan in a  
global economic web which could only increase the glaring inequities  
in Pakistani society.    Cooperative enterprise and production for the  
domestic and regional market is the economic model both Pakistan and  
Afghanistan should follow, and Pakistan needs land reform.

·       Pres. Obama said the U.S. will enlist its NATO allies and  
other countries in its Afghanistan/Pakistan project.     But few if  
any other major countries are on board with the new policy, which  
sends the signal that the U.S. is not interested in giving up control  
of its Afghan adventure or U.S. bases there.  NATO should go back to  
Europe.   A real international peace conference for Afghanistan should  
be called, grouping India, Iran, Russia, Pakistan, China, the U.N. and  
others to address regional security and establish a new international  
peacekeeping body to replace U.S. and NATO forces.

SPEAK UP NOW.   Call the White House comment line at 202-456-1111, its  
switchboard at 202-456-1414, and the Congressional switchboard at  
202-224-3121, and ask for an end to the U.S war in Afghanistan and 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090412/819c6ceb/attachment-0001.htm