Check for web archive captures
Reality Check
By lindamuralidharan on 2009-09-06 14:56:53
There are so many critical issues getting coverage in the news, espcially on the national scene, it makes one wonder why
anyone of conscience would even want to be President of the United States. This assessment is not even touching on
various issues that we see little about unless we go searching for them. Probably not necessary for our readers, but I'll list a
few. The administration needs to be on top of the environment, military concerns in Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan,
developments in Somalia, developments in Honduras, Columbia, Mexico, investigations into serious breaches of public
policy or ethics in a number of areas of government, Palestinian/Israeli solutions, and health care dysfunction. Beyond idle
speculation about motivations to run for national office, I prefer to emphasize the extent to which individual citizens and
citizen organizations need to be part of any solutions. I also keep coming back to what our policies are or need to be in
Afghanistan. Being only one person, I try to see the reality of conditions in Afghanistan and the reality of many proposed
goals and strategies. I talk to friends, many of whom see things differently from how I see them. I read and listen to people
talking from a variety of perspectives. There are peace activists. There are women leaders in Afghanistan. There are US
government and NATO allies' spokespeople. There are military and civilian spokespeople. There are reporters on the
ground. There are long time intelligence experts. There are university professors, both native born and those originally
from the region in question. Whether I look at the context of past failures to conquer Afghanistan (much has been written
about Alexander the Great, the British Empire, the Soviet Union in this regard and there were many others) or at the reasons
the United States invaded after 9/11, I find no good solutions. Every suggestion so far carries with it a great cost to some
numbers of people involved in the conflict, directly or indirectly. It has been said that there is no military solution. It has
been said that trying to build a peaceful nation by force will take 40 years...or more in some estimations. How many
military and non-military people will die in the process? How can the United States afford the cost? It has been said that the
presence of foreign troops makes matters worse, turns people against Americans for killing civilians, supporting a corrupt
and ineffective regime. It has been said that if we leave, women will be more persecuted than ever by those with distorted
interpretations of religion. "Shall I stay or shall I go?" I think some of us remember that song. I want to send messages to
my government leaders, and I want to share positive discussions with my fellow citizens. After all this, I cannot
recommend a cheery, let's hop to it, and get it done bromide. I have, however, come to the reluctant conclusion that the
lesser of disasters requires foreign troops to begin the process of withdrawal. Will Karzai then up his utilization of horrific,
brutal war lords, the ones the people had dreaded so much they once accepted the Taliban? Will the Taliban remain cohesive
in the absence of foreign troops and then take over much of the country and then impose more restrictive conditions for
women than even the backward traditions practiced by traditional Aghanis? We must, nonetheless, risk all of the above in
order to begin to reduce the bloodshed and the negative consequences of fighting an unwinnable war that almost nobody
claims to actually understand in full. Only a tiny percentage of the current make up of the Taliban care about spreading
Islam beyond their own borders. The remnants of Al Qaeda and any of these folks do not have the capability to attack and
conquer the US or even to inflict serious damage if the US continues some of its better policies for interdiction of
international criminals and improved attitudes among Muslim populations regarding the effectiveness or necessity of
violence. It never was the best way to make Americans "safe" or even Indians and tourists in Mumbai. The attacking of a
country vs. utilizing highly effective international policing and diplomatic alliances. It is an even worse strategy now. And
for those who believe the American responsibility to "save" Afghan women is the reason for making war on their
countrymen, where do we go next? Do we attack Saudi Arabia to save the women? Pakistan? Somalia? Certain other
African or Mideastern countries with extraordinarily bad practices relating to women? Ifnot, why Afghanistan? Actually if
you think about it, the lives of many women have been made worse by American attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan as we have
contributed one way or another to the killing of their breadwinners. I believe, however, we can minimize the damage we
have put in play by taking a very hard look at what negotiations might look like. The Iranians already have a big influence
in the Afghani region around Mazur-e-Sharif. They do not want a big Sunni threat on their border. The Pakistanis tend to
go in the other direction. They want to have a conciliatory Sunni government in Afghanistan because they have their own
breakaway ethnic groups, they have an irrational fear of India, and are not very supportive of Shia subgroups or
influences. That is why Pakistan is always tempted to undermine US efforts to weaken the Taliban. Thus, these groups all
need to be at the negotiating table. With the kind of negotiations that finally ended protracted conflict in Central America
and Northern Ireland, for example, stability could be achieved in such a way as to minimize the damage. Would the "West"
need to offer some kind of economic aid? Probably, although it needs to be better targeted and managed than heretofore.
The big issue would be to provide civil security so people can begin to have a life and be free from bombs, midnight raids
by fighting factions, and the worst of the highway robbery. Some corruption would continue. As tribal elders take over
some of the traditional functions...although much of that structure has been damaged by our interventions...it would be up to
the grassroots Afghanis to keep that to a manageable level. I would also try something I have not seen suggested anywhere
else. I would include in the multilateral negotiations, a requirement that any power sharing accorded peacefully to the
Taliban would require them to limit the oppression of women to the older style traditions, if at all. In other words, the
international guarantors...Pakistan, Iran, NATO,India....would say the deal is off if the Taliban do not at least allow women
to go out in public without male escorts and to obtain employment outside the home. Probably the Afghani people would
also support the absolute prohibition on stoning. As for the rest of women's rights, it might take time for the society as a
whole to adapt to inevitable changes that will come if the country is set on the road to independence, stability, and economic
development. This latter is a grim thought. Nonetheless I believe that continuing an unwinnable war is a far more grim
thought or reality. It causes disruption far and wide. Although I, personally, do not believe an American life is worth more
than an Afghan life, or an Iraqi life, I hurt terribly when I read about a healthy, competent, skilled, dedicated American
soldier losing his or her life for a cause that has little clarity of purpose and less chance of effective "success". Let us then
all really face reality. Let us think about the hard choices we can urge upon our leaders. Let us move quickly toward a
difficult end that will eventually open to a more positive future for the greatest number. I'll finish with a thought about
transformation, a subject I write about often. The other day I picked up a recently published book at the library just because
it piqued my curiosity. It is Born to Be Hurt: The Untold Story of Jmitation of Life, by Sam Staggs. Staggs begins his story
about this movie that raised the taboo subject of race in 1959 America by saying he saw it as a youngster and some time later
wrote a class paper about segregation in the South where he lived. His white teacher was dismissive of the subject and said
it was all just nonsense stirred up by outsiders. As an adult years later, Staggs met the teacher again. She had completely
changed her view and had become comfortable with the improved social conditons brought about by the American Civil
Rights laws and social activism. All of us, like this teacher, like individual Taliban supporters, are capable of change, of
transformation. Thus, even reality contains hope.
