Afghanistan and Central Asia

In all the violent incidents that have plagued the people of Afghanistan in its recent history, many have died, but even more have been permanently maimed and disabled. Below is a remarkable video about some of the Afghani disabled and their struggle for rights and services: Because the New York Times, who produced this video, will not allow me to embed the video for some reason, please click here to watch.

And because I would rather leave you for the weekend on a more optimistic note, here are two more light-hearted and hopeful pieces.

David Sherman is an American veterinarian who works for an international NGO in Afghanistan providing medical to its citizen’s pet and farm animals. Sherman has had some amazing experiences in the country and it has definitely affected his life perspective.

And if you thought that story was soft, then check this one out! It is a review of a Chinese cookbook, ‘Beyond the Great Wall: Recipes and Travels in Other China.’ The book spotlights Uighur, Kazak and Tajik peoples, customs, and food. Let me know if you find any worthwhile recipes.

Yesterday, I made a statement that it appeared that the Pakistani government was implicitly alright with the use of US drone predator missile attacks in their territory, as long they avoided civilian casualties. While according to statements by Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry and several members of the country’s ruling coalition, this is not completely true. The Foreign Ministry and several parliament members requested the appearance of US Ambassador Anne Patterson so they could voice their protest of such measures to the US government. The For Ministry stated that the missile attacks should ’stop immediately’ as they argued that not only were they undermining Pakistani sovereignty and legitimacy, they were just adding fuel to the fire and turning the whole Pakistani populace against the US/NATO forces in Afghanistan. A report stated that many Pakistani’s even blamed the recent Marriot Hotel attack in Islamabad on US air strikes.

The US military/government and the Pakistani military/government are both smashed tightly between a rock and a hard place. The US desires to stabilize Afghanistan and keep its troops safe and they believe one of the best way to do this is to go after the Taliban and Al Qaeda elements were ever they may be, as was shown by a similar US strike in Syria against militant forces. The Pakistani government/military are fighting for legitimacy and the right to govern their own lands. Though we all know the issue is more complicated than just these two aims for each side, I would like to think that these goals can have one combined strategy. Afterall, the US would love to have a stronger Pakistani government that could effectively rule over all its sovereign territory and the Pakistani government needs some help in putting down the Taliban, at least to a point where many of them would be forced to negotiate.

How are the goals of the Pakistani government/military and US government/military congruent? Different?

Today I would like to go over recent developments in the conflict spanning the Afghan-Pakistan border as the conflict’s many sides (NATO, Afghans, Taliban, Pakistan military, Al Qaeda, and local tribes) have all recently been in the news for various reasons: The Bush administration has authorized even greater use of missile/drone attacks inside of Pakistan, the Pakistan army has made some headway into the tribal region of Bajur, Tribal leaders have attempted to once again rise up and challenge the Taliban, and Afghan and Pakistan tribal and political leaders have moved ever closer to negotiations with elements of the Taliban.

US forces have been using drones to target Al Qaeda and Taliban units since the beginning of the war, but this strategy has increased greatly of late and has moved ever deeper into Pakistan sovereign territory. Slate’s William Saleton catalogs many recent attacks, including one yesterday in which 20 people were reportedly killed, and argues with evidence from a New York Times article that despite claims from Pakistani officials, their government tacitly supports this tactic.

What the Pakistan government is adamantly against in the presence of US/NATO troops on their territory, as their officials argue it undermines their legitimacy. This is indeed true, but the US needs to see some results from the Pakistani military that these border regions are being governed and policed. While it appears that the Pakistani military, long accused of making deals that favor the Taliban, has made some progress in the Bajur area of the tribal belt. The region has been deemed a ‘mega sanctuary’ for the Taliban militants and after two months of hard fighting the Pak military has caused an outright fleeing of militant elements from the area. However, the holding of this strategic region will be the true test of the will and ability of the Pak military, this is indeed a welcome development.

Another encouraging sign is the slight reintroduction of lashkars, or tribal militias, into the fight against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the tribal regions. These tribes and their leaders have been decimated, first by the Pakistani gov in the 1980s (with US help) in their fight against the Soviets, and recently by the Taliban since 2001, who have strongly challenged their rule in the tribal regions. Despite great mortal threat to their lives, many lashkars are rising up, and supporting the Pakistan army in removing the Taliban from their regions. It seems impossible to imagine the Taliban defeated without the help and reemergence of these lashkars.

Lastly, a delegation of Afghan and Pakistani officials met in Islamabad to approach the issue of reconciliation with elements of the Taliban who would recognize both state constitutions and renounce violence. The US remained quiet on this issue, weary of former Pak gov deals with the militants, but has stated that it supports reconciliation with those elements who give up violence. Here is an excerpt:

Pakistani and Afghan leaders vowed Tuesday to seek dialogue with Taliban insurgents, saying the “door is now open” for reconciliation.

The declaration by political and tribal leaders adds force to existing moves in Afghanistan and Pakistan to talk to the militants amid what appears to be growing international recognition that dialogue with moderates is key to ending the violence.

Former Afghan Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah said both countries would talk only with those militants who “accept the constitutions of both nations,” but did not explicitly say they must first disarm.

Another delegate to the two-day talks between political and tribal leaders in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad said that the offer was not open to al-Qaida members blamed for some of the worst violence in both countries.

Just like the reemergence of the lashkars and more strategic uses of attacks in border tribal areas, negotiations with elements of the Taliban that are willing to live peacefully in the region will be necessary for a conclusion to this current conflict.

What do this new, and old, developments and strategies mean for the future of this conflict? Are these positive developments or just one more part of a long, sad story?

(Photo Source: New York Times: Tribal Militias with the Pakistani Army)

Ever since the Soviet Union’s collapse, the region of Central Asia, flush with newly minted states, has struggled to come up with a regional water arrangement to suit all those involved. In recent weeks, the region’s governmental leaders have been working on a short-term water sharing deal, and it now appears their work has come to a successful conclusion.

Here is an excerpt explaining the agreement’s intricacies and processes from The Times of Central Asia:

“After the conference of [our] heads of state in Bishkek [on October 10], we eventually managed to sign an agreement on measures to live through the very difficult autumn-winter period of 2008-2009 at a meeting of the deputy prime ministers of the five Central Asian countries on October 18 in Almaty,” Shukeyev said.
“It is the first such agreement between our five countries in the history of their independence,” he stressed. According to Shukeyev, similar agreements between the four countries of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan were terminated in 2004-2005, and afterwards the distribution of water, electricity, and fuel, as well as operation of the region’s united energy system, was based on bilateral agreements, which did not encompass the entire range of problems.
“Now Turkmenistan has been involved, because it is impossible to ensure a balanced operation of Central Asia’s energy system this year without Turkmen electricity,” the Kazakh deputy PM said. According to him, Turkmenistan has pledged to sell additional volumes of electricity to Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan has promised to transit this electricity.
Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan will assist Kyrgyzstan in maintaining the current water level in the Toktogul reservoir, insuring its use for Kazakh and Uzbek irrigation during the coming agriculture season, Shukeyev said. He reminded that the water level in the Toktogul reservoir is critically low this year – now at 9.5 billion cubic meters.
“According to the agreement, Uzbekistan will deliver to Kyrgyzstan an additional 150 million cubic meters of gas [this winter]. We [Kazakhstan] will deliver [to Kyrgyzstan] fuel oil and coal. We have also assumed the obligation to make an advance payment for [Kyrgyz] electricity during the next agricultural season,” the Kazakh deputy PM said. “In exchange, Kyrgyzstan will now introduce a very rigid electricity saving regime, maximally use its coal- and gas-fired power plants, and introduce an almost 30 percent restriction on electricity consumption this winter,” he added.
In his words, during the coming agricultural season Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan will buy 1.2 billion kWh of Kyrgyz electricity to ensure the irrigation of their arable lands. This is done primarily because discharging water from the Toktogul reservoir for the irrigation of Kazakh and Uzbek fields during the spring-summer season generates surplus electricity from the Toktogul power plant that is not needed inside Kyrgyzstan during the summer. At the same time, releasing the water during the summer causes water loss that is needed for generating electricity for domestic consumption during the following winter months.
(With Ferghana.ru, Kazakhstan Today)

Here is an analysis of the deal’s shortcomings and strengths from Paul Goble. Goble has wise words that this agreement has many tenuous attributes that are likely from making this a long lasting solution. The ability of Uzbekistan to follow through on all aspects of energy and water transfers will be one specific element to keep an eye and one area that could end up derailing the agreement. But compared to where things were at just a few weeks ago, this is a positive development that will hopefully bring some stability for the coming winter.

In other news, the countries of Central Asia and international organizations UN and OSCE held a two day conference on the prevention of the trafficking of drugs from Afghanistan through the region.

And that’s not all the cooperating going on, as many representatives from the region met in Tashkent to discuss Disaster Prevention, specifically regarding future earthquakes.

(Photo Source: zz77: Lake Tcharvak, a reservoir in Tashkent Province, Uzbekistan)

Continuing yesterday’s thread, I would like to highlight one major aspect of progress in Afghanistan; the role of women in the workplace and in society as a whole. To do this I will showcase the stories of a few particular women, and unfortunately in their stories there is great suffering and too visible of signs of how far the nation needs to go to be a place where there is equal opportunity and rights for all citizens. However, these stories which you are about to hear would be impossible before the Taliban’s removal in 2001 and would surely become negligible in the near future if the Taliban gained control back over more and more parts of the country.

Malalai Kakar became Police Lt.-Col. Malalai Kakar soon after the Taliban were overthrown in 2001 and she quickly rose to become Afghanistan’s highest ranking female police officer. Her bravery and will lead her to use her position to fight for and protect Afghan women suffering from domestic violence and other crimes. She chose this vocation knowing full well the threat to her physical life and in fact received death threats on a frequent basis. Unfortunately, her personal story ends on a tragic note, as perpetrators claiming to be members of the Taliban, finally murdered her and severely injured her son in late September. Kaker was obviously viewed as a mortal threat to the Taliban’s existence and way of life. If any one story personifies what is right and what is wrong, this has to be it. Kakar’s murderers need to be brought to justice, the Afghan populace needs to see that this is unacceptable and these wrongdoers will need to be seen paying their debt to society.

Unfortunately, this next story highlights that even the government and the country’s judicial system are at times anti-women’s and equal rights. Perwiz Kambakhsh, a young journalist, had a life sentence commuted to just 20 years in jail! for distributing an article critical of Muhammad’s treatment of women’s rights. What Kambakhsh wrote may have been offensive, but offensiveness should not translate to jail time or a death sentence. If the Afghan government is to reform the judicial system must become a greater voice and pillar of a constitution based on equality and freedom of speech.

Otherwise women and others who are oppressed will fear to speak out for their rights and well-being. Farida Nekzad, managing editor for Pajhwok Afghan News, discusses the dangers from all directions for those who dare to speak out for women’s rights and safety:
“When the reporters write about these issues, the ruling power does not want to tolerate it, does not want these issues to be heard by people or to be talked about,” she says. “When a woman leader comes out and talks about the issues of women’s rights, women’s freedom, and freedom of speech, that woman is in a lot of danger.”

So this trip through the progress of Afghan women has been bumpy to say the least, and this will no doubt continue, but I want to leave you a story of a group of women in the Bamian Province. These women now hold law enforcement positions, can drive a car, and a woman is actually governor of the entire province. I would like to say that this is a happy ending to my piece today, and in many ways it is, but we must know, as this group of women surely does, that their current way of life is being threatened everyday by the Taliban, other extremists, and at times their own government, and only time will tell what the future holds. But one things for sure, these women are extremely brave and their courage is no doubt an inspiration to all those who will hopefully follow in their footsteps. Enjoy the video.

If you read most of the news and editorial pieces I posted on Monday, you probably have a negative outlook on the stability and chances for progress in Afghanistan, and for the most part, rightly so. But there are positive things going on in the country, things that before 2001 probably seemed impossible to most Afghanis. I have mentioned before on this page that the tremendous work of NATO soldiers, humanitarian aid workers, and skilled trainers, both foreign and domestic, has brought progress to many sectors of Afghan life and that these people’s work was largely unreported, and this is still true today. The US State Department and the Afghan government are aware of this and have started to try to get the word out, but they need to do more. So does the overall US/Western/Middle East/Asia media, who too easily just report on the latest bombing, Taliban attack, civilian casualties, all vitally important, but not the entire story.

So as I said above, how has Afghanistan ‘improved’ lately and how has the US State Dep and Afghan government tried to get the word out about this progress? While US Ambassador and Coordinator for International Communications and Information Policy David A. Gross and his Afghan counterpart, Amir Zai Sangin, Minister of Communications and Information Technology have written editorials and made appearances in an attempt to showcase the nation’s progress in the communication field, mainly in the growth of the Internet and telephone industries. Though they acknowledge the tremendous amount of work to be done, they are proud of the accomplishments so far of the Afghan ministry of communications, which has ‘quickly licensed private mobil phone providers, effectively regulated a competitive communications environment and encouraged direct foreign investment into the extremely challenging post-conflict economy.’ In 2001, Afghanistan had fewer than 40,000 telephones and no cell phones, but today the country has 6 million telephone subscribers, of which an incredible 5.4 million of are cell phone. Five national and three highly competitive regional carriers support these networks. The amount of foreign direct investment in the telecommunications industry has exceeded $1 billion and the sector was expected to bring in revenues topping $100 million for the Afghan government.

Regarding the Internet, Afghanistan now has more than 500,000 Internet users and at least 18 providers. With US government support the Afghan government has started a project to construct a national fiber-optic network ring along with a new national system of highways. This project in Afghanistan is part of a larger State Department endeavor called the Global Internet Freedom Task Force, which brings together government, NGOs, and private industry to work toward these goals: 1. To address the challenges to free expression and the free flow of ideas on the Internet, 2. To advocate for the availability of the widest possible universe of content through the Internet, and 3. To actively minimize the success of repressive regimes in censoring information, and increase the transparency of content restrictions.

Perhaps the best aspect of a growing telecommunication’s network in Afghanistan is its ability to provide employment opportunities, as Gross and Sangin stated that already the sector has created 60,000 jobs. The other positives are that greater availability of phones and Internet services can help businesses begin and start up with greater potential for growth and these industries provide outlets for the Afghan people to see and hear views and cultures from anywhere in the world. New ideas and avenues for information will be more and more at their finger tips. The spread of greater telecommunications networks will hopefully also aid the Afghan government’s work, helping it be more efficient and effective in reaching its citizens and providing them the services they deserve. As Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post warns though, we must be careful where our aid money is spent, as even positive steps such as those mentioned above could have unintended negative consequences.

Tomorrow I will discuss another sign of progress in Afghanistan, the role of women in the workplace and in society. A few personal stories will show how far the nation has come since the oppressive Taliban regime, but also how far it has to go.

Kyrgyzstan’s capital of Bishkek, which just last week hosted a Commonwealth of Independent States CIS summit, was the site of a meeting between US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher and President Bakiyev and a following news conference. Boucher stated that the two sides discussed security and energy relations and issues. Specifically, the US sponsored Manas air base was discussed, with Boucher emphasizing its importance in stabilizing Afghanistan, providing security from terrorist and extremists in the region, and in its ability to support regional crisis, specifically its help in the aftermath of the recent earthquake in Kyrgyzstan. Boucher was less forthcoming regarding energy issues, but stressed that the US was there to help the nation prepare for energy shortages during the coming winter season.

A reporter also asked about Kyrgyzstan’s relations with Russia, asserting that the nation was moving closer and closer to Moscow. Boucher gave this rather diplomatic answer:

“I don’t think we criticize any relationships that you have. We’re not here for any competition or any games to play with other countries. Our interest is in the independence of Kyrgyzstan and the welfare of the people of Kyrgyzstan. We expect the government to have good relationships and to develop its relations as much as possible with neighbors like Russia. I guess north, south, east, west, Kyrgyzstan needs to have relations with China, Europe, India, with us far away. The more relations you have, the more choices you have, the more independence you have. That’s our interest — ensuring the independence of Kyrgyzstan. So, we’re glad to see Kyrgyzstan take advantage of these opportunities, as long as they contribute to the independence and the prosperity of Kyrgyzstan.”

It sounds like Boucher may be running for President of Kyrgyzstan. Watch out Bakiyev!

The ways the world’s leading newspapers have covered NATO’s efforts in Afghanistan and the situation on the ground there have morphed several times in recent years. After taking a backseat to the War in Iraq for nearly 4 years, the Afghan conflict came back into the mainstream about a year ago, mainly with statements that it was ‘the right’ or the ‘good’ war. But lately, we have seen a harder, more nuanced look at the troubling situation brewing in Afghan/Pakistan, and more and more cautious and negative toned editorials and articles have appeared of late. Of course, this seems mostly logical as the war in Iraq has settled down quite a bit, we had a presidential candidate emphasize its policy, and most importantly the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan has become increasingly volatile and unstable to be ignored any longer. So here a few recent news stories and editorials to take a look at below. Have you noticed a change in coverage? What about its tone? More negative? Positive? Why has this occurred?

News

Firstly, here are two articles both focusing on Afghan civilian casualties in this conflict and the fog of war; one reporting last Thursday’s brazen Taliban attack on two buses in which dozens of civilians appeared to have been killed, and another discussing the increasing toll on NATO generals of either mistaken or ‘unavoidable’ instances where Afghan civilians have perished, specifically the Azizabad airstrike that may have killed around 90 people.

Here is an update on the progress of a reassessment review of US strategy in the country by top level officials which is due to be completed right after the Nov. 4 US election.

Lastly, here is quick report about President Karzai’s recent shuffling of his cabinet and its possible implications.

Editorials

The following pieces present to the audience a gloomy picture of the Afghan situation and acknowledge that time may be running out for a chance at stability and strong government in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The New York Times editorial boards’ ‘Downward Spiral
Spiegel Online’s Susanne Koelbl’s ‘The West is at a Loss in Afghanistan‘
Financial Times Rodric Braithwaite’s ‘New Afghan Myths Bode Ill for Western Aims‘

David Miliband, foreign secretary of the UK, contrary to the previous editorials, argues in ‘Mission Possible‘ that NATO’s mission in Afghanistan is winnable, we just have to have a greater understanding of what that mission is. Miliband stresses that we should not expect Britain-style society to flower, but that we must help create an Afghan government with institutions with the capability and legitimacy to deny the Taliban power and influence. Miliband does not deny the sacrifices needed for this to come to fruition, but he thinks it is far from ‘mission impossible.’

Larry Everest in ‘Afghanistan: Not a Good War Gone Bad‘ argues against the idea that the US and NATO are in Afghanistan for legitimate and global order purposes, and instead, with much paranoia and dubious assertions, claims it is another imperialist adventure by a Western power and has the undeniable support of both future presidential candidates Obama and McCain.

(Photo Source: New York Times)

How does one reconcile the governmental promotion of atheism in a society with strongly entrenched religious beliefs and customs? The Chinese communist government has tried to square this circle for years now, and the Xinjiang Province’s Uighur Muslim majority has proven its greatest challenge. Edward Wong of the New York Times explores this societal conflict and reports on the most recent Chinese government efforts to control and undermine Xinjiang’s Uighur Muslims.

Here is a portion of Wong’s article where he discusses rising Chinese government attempts to restrict Islamic practices in Xinjiang, emphasizing that a more serious ‘crackdown’ may be in the works:

Many of the rules have been on the books for years, but some local governments in Xinjiang have publicly highlighted them in the past seven weeks by posting the laws on Web sites or hanging banners in towns.

Anti-China forces in the West and separatist forces are trying to carry out “illegal religious activities and agitate religious fever,” he said, and “the field of religion has become an increasingly important battlefield against enemies.”

The Chinese government does indeed face a violent threat from extremist elements in Xinjiang and from foreign sources who support the province’s muslims, but these crackdowns and rules targeting Uighurs are mainly imposed to further expand the government’s rule over the region. Wong details the government’s efforts in controlling Uighurs’ Hajj to Mecca and Ramadan practices, both sacred rights for all Muslims. The Chinese government fears the spread of Islamic radicalization and separatist motivations and organizations, and both of these they believe can be combatted if they strengthen their control over the Xinjiang region and its people. That is why the government has been importing Han Chinese into the region in great numbers, diluting the Uighur majority and their cultural and societal norms, and building infrastructure, specifically railways, which connect the region to Central Asia and more importantly, to eastern China.

How successful do you think the Chinese government’s anti-religious and anti-Uighur custom laws have been and will be? Are these measures, some quite oppressive and restrictive, more likely to sow a more governable and stable state for the Chinese government or are they more likely to foment greater amounts and degrees of radicalization and separatist feelings and actions? What would a McCain or Obama administration policy be towards the Chinese government’s treatment and efforts in Xinjiang?

(Photo Source: New York Times)

Most of you have probably heard the reports of Christian-targeted violence in Iraq in recent weeks. Religious minorities face many uphill battles, some higher and harsher than others, in most societies. Just this last week we heard people, though on a very marginal scale, at McCain rallies shouting derogatory Muslim references toward Barack Obama. It is in this light that I came across these two pieces regarding Christianity and its spread in Central Asia: Pope Benedict’s meeting with CA Catholic Bishops and leaders and observations from a group of American Southern Baptists who recently completed a missionary trip to the region.

Pope Benedict XVI hosted the bishops of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan and the heads of church missions in Turkmenistan and Tajikistan at the Vatican on Oct. 2. The Pope encouraged these Christian leaders to keep the faith and remain united in their mission to ‘find new ways of ministering and sharing the Gospel taking into account the language and culture of the faithful entrusted to you.’ The report acknowledged the difficulties of spreading any type of religion in the region as most their government’s keep them under tight control, mainly fearing a radical Islamic uprising. Pope Benedict, who early this decade made a controversial speech regarding Islam, did not shy away from discussing Islam and the region’s ‘plague of violence and terrorism and the spread of extremism and fundamentalism.’ He also cautioned against any measures that would or do repress religious freedom: “Law must never be transformed into inequity, nor can the free exercise of religion be limited because to profess one’s faith freely is a fundamental and universally recognized human right.”

Now I’m not exactly sure where I came across this next piece, but I hope you find it of interest. It is report of and by the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary who sent a group of about a dozen missionaries, mainly students, to the CA region, unfortunately it never says exactly where, to promote Christianity. The groups leader, Shawn Wright has made numerous missionary trips to the region attempting to spread the Gospel and pass out native-tongue New Testaments to the Muslim dominated population. The missionary group on this trip attended a Friday prayer service at a large Mosque and recorded their thoughts. Here is a interesting and enlightening quote: “It was eye-opening. This mosque had between 5,000 and 6,000 men, so there were more people worshiping there at that moment than there are believers{Christians} in the entire country. For several of us, it was a shock, but a very good shock, because as you watch these very devout people, it forces you to ask yourself, ‘How do I know that what I believe is right?,’ It was a great time for me to reflect upon the Gospel and its truthfulness and fullness while I was watching these people who are deceived. It is also very sad.” This group of Southern Baptists was also surprised at what they called the ‘nominalism’ or lack of knowledge of many of the CA muslims they came across, especially in regards to the Koran.

So two very different pieces discussing nearly the same thing. What does the Southern Baptists’ observations say about American religious views? What do say about religion in Central Asia? What effect may the Pope’s statements about Islamic extremism have? What about his comments regarding religious freedom?

On a side note here is an update about the legal situation of those 17 Uighur Guantanamo Bay prisoners. Make sure to go back and read a comment left by one observer, he provides a more detailed legalistic argument than I could. What are your views of the situation? What would you do if you were the Bush administration? Judge Urbina?