However, as the dust swirled at the NATO gathering in Chicago, no real consensus emerged from the 50 participating nations on how “victory” can still be achieved after more than a decade of dismal failure.
As a result, the only common trend was a hastening toward the exit.
U.S. President Barack Obama pushed for a more rapid transfer of combat responsibility to the Afghan security forces, which would allow for a large-scale reduction of American troops in 2013 and a full withdrawal by 2014.
Obama’s critics pointed out that these target dates are not suggestive of new-found efficiency among the Afghan security forces. Rather, Obama’s timeline is reflective of a domestic weariness for the war and the dates happen to align with this November’s presidential election.
Recognizing his own countrymen’s fatigue for the war, newly elected French President Francois Hollande proclaimed he would keep his election promise and begin withdrawing troops a year earlier than planned.
While other NATO allies, including Canada, remained committed to the current troop withdrawal timetable of 2014, there was no collective enthusiasm among the alliance for any additional extensions.
More than 10 years after the toppling of the Taliban, the international community’s dream of creating “the world’s newest democracy” is dead.
In 2009, when the corrupt presidential election process failed to produce a tangible result, the international community had no choice but to continue backing the man they appointed in 2002.
The unelected regime of President Hamid Karzai is one of the most hated and mistrusted governments on the planet. Without an alternative, NATO has been forced to create a massive security apparatus to keep his government in power.
At present, there are close to 400,000 Afghans on the payroll of either the police or the army. The basic costs to maintain this massive establishment comes to about $4.1 billion per year, not including the current expense of utilizing NATO trainers and advisors.
To keep this amount in context, one needs to realize that the current, legitimate government tax revenue in Afghanistan is only about $2 billion a year.
As those recruited into the ranks of the Afghan security forces have little or no love for the Karzai regime, their lure to the uniform is purely mercenary. While paltry by western standards, the $170 a month basic pay for a soldier is roughly three times that of a teacher’s salary and about six times that of a common labourer in Afghanistan.
The relatively princely sum paid to the Afghan security forces is in no way reflective of their competency. In 2010, the average police recruit was just 16 years of age and illiterate. Furthermore, far from being a force to fight crime, the Afghan police force is undoubtedly the biggest source of criminal activity in the country.
Last year alone, one in 25 Afghan police officers was convicted of a major crime, ranging from murder and rape to drug trafficking. And that was solely the result of NATO forces being present to bring about that justice.
Now that NATO is committed to pulling out in 2014, the central question at the Chicago summit was, who will finance the $4.1-billion cost of the Afghan security forces beyond that date?
Happy to oblige, Prime Minister Stephen Harper pledged that Canada would contribute $110 million for at least three years, beginning in 2015. Just like that, Canada has offered to spend millions to finance a corrupt and incompetent security force to prop up a hated regime for three more years.
Surely, we could include the caveat that our money be spent on literacy training for the police.
At the very least, they should be able to read the laws they are about to break.
Original Article
Source: the chronicle herald
Author: SCOTT TAYLOR
No comments:
Post a Comment