COMMENT: Afghanistan after withdrawal — I —Amjad Ayub Mirza

For some time, the corporatised propaganda machine of dissimulation, i.e. western media, has been churning out tentative suggestions on how to ‘respectfully’ get out of the (by now widely acknowledged) unwinnable war. A close look at these propositions exposes an unedifying mixture of gullibility and haste to flee the war zone which they created

On the otherwise perfectly normal Monday morning on July 26, the American, British and German public, still hung-over from the weekend booze-and-clubbing fiesta and the shock of the tragic deaths of at least 19 participants of the 1.4 million strong street dance party ‘Love Parade’ held annually in the town of Duisburg in Germany, woke up to find out that the American daily, the New York Times, the British daily, The Guardian and the German weekly, Der Spiegel carried on their front pages horrific true stories of atrocities, tantamount to serious war crimes, committed by their fellow Americans, British, French, Polish and other NATO partners in Afghanistan during the period stretching from January 2004 to December 2009.

According to highly sensitive and confidential documents uncovered by WikiLeaks, a website created by Julian Assange, a 39 year-old Australian who will not let his source be made known to the CIA and British intelligence agencies, more than 91,000 documents about incidents of military atrocities resulting in death and injury have been released.

These reports include, for instance, American troops machine-gunning a public transport bus, killing 15 innocent civilians, the British freely shooting (at least on four occasions) in the streets of Kabul, killing the son of a general and wounding many passers-by, the French strafing a bus carrying children, seriously wounding at least eight youngsters, and the Polish attack on a wedding party, killing almost everyone including a pregnant lady. What seems crystal-clear is that until the WikiLeaks revelations, news of these atrocities has either been distorted to protect the credibility of foreign troops or totally blacked-out from the western mainstream media and general public.

A full list of the atrocities has now been made available on The Guardian’s web site. This is the worst leak in US military history and is the first time that the true face of the war in Afghanistan has been revealed. As the coalition forces under the political and military leadership of the US approach humiliating defeat, the political and military spin doctors in the speculative mainstream western media have started to look for scapegoats on which to shift the shame and dishonour of the soon-to-be-lost war in Afghanistan.

Almost all fingers point towards the Pakistani intelligence agencies, with claims that the ISI has been helping the insurgents in Afghanistan. These hyped up allegations have not been backed up by any evidence. Iran is the other country that is being blamed for the failure of NATO to defeat the Taliban. Again, no evidence has been provided to back up this claim. Keeping in view the ongoing US hostility towards Iran in particular and the region in general, it will be hard for the almost ubiquitously corporatised western media to convince an increasingly suspicious European and American public about the credibility of their reports. Under the circumstances, the general public increasingly is searching for alternate sources of news and information, of which WikiLeaks is a key example.

On July 20 this year, addressing the international conference in Kabul, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi said in July this year that Pakistan would support any reintegration of the Taliban into Afghan government and society. Mr Qureshi was one among the representatives of 90 countries who attended the biggest international conference in Kabul for 40 years. Unfortunately, it ended without any conclusive joint declaration regarding a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan. All that emerged from the conference was a vague pledge by the participants that while Afghanistan continues to be battered and bruised by NATO, efforts should be made to help the war-torn semi-tribal country to be able to take up home-rule in five years’ time.

For some time, the corporatised propaganda machine of dissimulation, i.e. western media, has been churning out tentative suggestions on how to ‘respectfully’ get out of the (by now widely acknowledged) unwinnable war. A close look at these propositions exposes an unedifying mixture of gullibility and haste to flee the war zone which they created. It is easy to cast blame for the failure of the western forces to defeat the Taliban on neighbouring countries such as Pakistan and Iran, but the leaked documents have also revealed that the Taliban have access to the latest technology, including the portable heat-seeking surface-to-air missiles and other sophisticated weaponry provided to the mujahedeen by the west (principally the US and British) during the 1980s to fight the Soviet troops and the Marxist government in Kabul.

As the west loses heart in the (sixth) Afghan War and scrambles about for a quick exit, suggestions have been circulating in the western spin factories regarding the transfer of power (how, and to whom?) once the occupation forces have left. The report also reveals the protection racket-style intimidation and killings of local people committed by the Taliban and also their responsibility for multiple civilian deaths by improvised explosive devices (IEDs), which have mushroomed in Helmand and Kandahar.

One suggestion being posited by the writers of the facilely-titled, ‘Defining Success in Afghanistan’, published in the July/August issue of the American foreign policy magazine, Foreign Affairs, suggests that “power sharing [with the terrorists] would be easier under a decentralised democracy, in which many responsibilities now held by Kabul would be delegated to the periphery”. Describing their responsibilities, the essay suggests that some of the powers “would surely include the authority to draft and enact budgets, to use traditional alternatives to centralised justice systems for some offences, to elect or approve important officials who are now appointed by Kabul and perhaps to collect local revenue and enforce local regulation.”

(To be continued)

Dr Amjad Ayub Mirza is a freelancer based in London. He can be reached at dr_amjad_mirza@hotmail.com