He's right, you know.
Afghanistan's president Hamid Karzai wants "foreign powers" to butt-out of the country's internal affairs. "Stop meddling" according to the Associated Press report today by Amir Shah.
Karzai has a point. One wonders how that could become a reality with U.S. and allied troops "conducting" a war in that country. I say conducting because we are absolutely NOT "fighting" a war there. Or anywhere else, for that matter.
We are conducting military efforts in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other areas as a maintenance program of global control, political realignment, and resource allocation. Arguably, the United States hasn't "fought" a war to win it since WWII. We have, for over 50 years now, been witness to the "military industrial complex" that former president Dwight Eisenhower considered in his final presidential speech in 1961. In that speech, Eisenhower discussed the need for balance in all of our endeavors as a free nation and global power.
But back to Karzai. He is correct that the U.S. is meddling in the so-called elections that take place in Afghanistan. No doubt this is a continuation of George W. Bush's idiotic efforts back in 2003 to make "democracy-building" a key component of the U.S.'s military adventures in the Middle East. Even former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a man I have long admired, parroted that misguided policy when he stated to students at City College of New York in 2003, "dictators and despots can build walls high enough to keep out armies, but not high enough to keep those winds from blowing in."
Powell was referring to "winds" of democracy. I say that was all rhetorical winds of horsecrap.
The notion that the United States, or any other western country can sprinkle the fairy dust of democratic tradition on non-democratic countries is simply stupid at face value. Ask yourselves how democracy (as we know it) could possibly be implemented in China, for example, where thousands of years of dynastic cycles moulded a world view that does not place emphasis on individuality, but upholds traditions of familial precepts.
Ask yourselves how tribesmen and others of any country who's name ends in "stan" could comprehend, let alone embrace, a political system and voting process that requires at least the appearance that its citizens are a nation of self-thinkers, able to make logical decisions about their political destiny.
No. Their cultures, ethnic traditions, religious practices, and "world" views preclude that.
In a country that dips voters' fingers in purple ink to prevent voter fraud, that's just not possible. Then, again, maybe we should look at the purple finger technique in places like, oh I dunno, Florida.
But Karzai has a point. If we're not willing to fight a war against the demonstrated evils of the Taliban; if we are willing to tip toe around the poppy seeds of negotiations with them; if we cannot take on the responsibilities of occupation and rebuilding that country from inside out and back again, then I say get out. Get out and let Karzai play with the fires of hundreds of years of tribal backtracking.
The world will always have despots and dictators. Most will be brutal and ruthless. A few will come to be know as "benevolent dictators". ( Former Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew comes to mind).
I'll play devil's advocate here: Some cultures, some societies, NEED a dictator to keep control of what might otherwise be an even more brutish and intolerable existence. Votes and purple fingers won't make it all better.
Democracy is an ideal that had institutional beginnings with the Indian sanghas (associations) and ganas (councils) in the sixth century BCE, with the Greek city states of Athens and Sparta, and to some extent throughout the centuries of the Roman Republic.
But these days, 21st Century United States has no business trying to whip a little democracy on everyone else as a cover for other motives, whatever they may be. We could have marched into Afghanistan with guns blazing, defeated the Taliban, propped up Karzai (or anyone else) as our puppet leader, and MAYBE we would have effected positive change. Though I seriously doubt it.
However, as previously mentioned, we are one of the world's military maintenance machines, manipulating the masses and keeping global order.
Yet, I believe our country in particular, and the world in general, would be better served if enough citizens and leaders would review and take to heart Eisenhower's words in 1961. Especially the part about balance.
That will never happen.
The Karzai's of the world will mollify our policy makers while seeking to negotiate with madness. They will point purple fingers in the air and in our face to say that corruption is under control, and that we have succeeded in guiding them from the depths of their long hell.
And, we can all live with an "acceptable" level of fear and anxiety. We can all be kept in our reasonable places with meaningless dialectics providing an illusion that the world is being made a safer and saner place. We can all believe that the world wants to be just like us (U.S.): Free, prosperous, and happy.
Karzai's right. Purple fingers notwithstanding.
Rick B. Baker
Rochester, NY
January 4, 2011
Note: Coinciding poem published on "Efficient Agony", 1-4-11.
http://efficientagony.blogspot.com/
© 2011 by R. Burnett Baker
Purple fingers photo from Muslims Against Sharia / CNN August 23, 2009.
Karzai photo from www.guardian.co.UK.
Tank cartoon by Graeme MacKay, "Hamilton Spectator", Hamilton, Ontario.
4 comments:
I am of the opinion that we allowed our "cowboy" president lead us into a quagmire from which we will have difficulty removing ourselves. I become distraught over the shenanigans of our government. It seems the wool was pulled over our eyes & perhaps over the eyes of the previous president.
Cultural & religious insight was left at the doorstep when invasion was proposed. We were ignorant of the situation in which we were headed, but we should not have been. In actuality, I think we just ignored the thousands of years of culture & religion of these Eastern peoples. They have always been at war with each other and most likely will continue to be except when they agree to fight an outside force such as a western one.
In looking at Eisenhower's speech I was touched by these words: "such basic purposes" [being the most influential, strongest, & productive nation] "have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among peoples and among nations."
I'm rambling, but it seems to me we need to decide as a country if we are willing to attempt to change the cultural, religious, political ideals of other countries. At present we do not seem to be tolerant of any of these ideas within our own country. Who are we to determine the type of government another country should have, what religion they should practice, what their culture should be?
I did like Ike's speech and it did feel as though he was somewhat left of center. His ending prayer/wish was clear:
"We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love."
Lizzy: Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I agree that the wool was pulled over the eyes of a lot of people. The previous president? Not really, because I really don't believe he was quite intelligent enough to think through all that. I firmly believe that Rove and Cheney were the "brains" behind that administration.
I would like to see our current president take a firm stand and either go on with the dubious mission of "nation building", as it were, in Afghanistan, or just get the hell out. The Russians were more evil than we could ever be and even THEY couldn't complete whatever mission they thought they were on.
Yes, cultural and religious insight has been ignored with both the Iraq and Afghan invasions. But as a nation/society we tend to be sinfully ignorant of cultures outside our TV screens and proscribed borders.
On one hand, I feel sorry for Americans in their decades-long dumbing down through the educational system.
On the other hand, we have every conceivable toy and gadget that allows us the power of information and knowledge, and yet we willfully ignore anything that doesn't stimulate our fun induced, pop-cultured orgasmic little minds for an immediate satisfaction fix.
I think that Ike's speech deserves further study and consideration. In response to your suggestion that his speech was somewhat "left of center", I would say that I think his thoughts should be considered just center: It's plain common sense, and precludes those labels of right/left, liberal/conservative. It just makes sense, and we should heed his advice.
Thanks again, Cheryl. Wonderful comments!
Rick
Hi Rick, I like your response to my note when you said "it's plain common sense". It seems many people don't possess that common sense or tolerance for that matter. At present we seem to be a nation of extremes where the person who shouts the loudest or makes the most outrageous statements is getting the most press (for lack of a better term). Common sense, tolerance, and compromise should be the attitudes that hold the most sway. Oh well, like you I don't have the answers, just opinions and I don't always voice them except at the polls. I am enjoying your thoughts.
...military power to accomplish political agendas.
The constitution foresaw this... Sounds like the politicians don't pay much attention to that bit of paperwork.
Once again, interesting thoughts to ponder.
Post a Comment