Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Our foreign policy is retarded, part MMMMCXXV5billion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Our foreign policy is retarded, part MMMMCXXV5billion

    KABUL, Afghanistan, Oct. 7 — After the biggest opium harvest in Afghanistan’s history, American officials have renewed efforts to persuade the government here to begin spraying herbicide on opium poppies, and they have found some supporters within President Hamid Karzai’s administration, officials of both countries said.

    Since early this year,Mr. Karzai has repeatedly declared his opposition to spraying the poppy fields, whether by crop-dusting airplanes or by eradication teams on the ground.

    But Afghan officials said the Karzai administration is now re-evaluating that stance.
    Some proponents within the government are pushing a trial program of ground spraying that could begin before the harvest next spring.

    The issue has created sharp divisions within the Afghan government, among its Western allies and even American officials of different agencies. The matter is fraught with political danger for Mr. Karzai, whose hold on power is weak.

    Many spraying advocates, including officials at the White House and the State Department, view herbicides as critical to curbing Afghanistan’s poppy crop, officials said. That crop and the opium and heroin it produces have become a major source of revenue for the Taliban insurgency.

    But officials said the skeptics — who include American military and intelligence officials and European diplomats in Afghanistan — fear that any spraying of American-made chemicals over Afghan farms would be a boon to Taliban propagandists. Some of those officials say that the political cost could be especially high if the herbicide destroys food crops that farmers often plant alongside their poppies.

    “There has always been a need to balance the obvious greater effectiveness of spray against the potential for losing hearts and minds,” Thomas A. Schweich, the assistant secretary of state for international narcotics issues, said in an interview last week in Washington. “The question is whether that’s manageable. I think that it is.”

    Bush administration officials say they will respect whatever decision the Afghan government makes. Crop-eradication efforts, they insist, are only part of a new counternarcotics strategy that will include increased efforts against traffickers, more aid for legal agriculture and development, and greater military support for the drug fight.

    Behind the scenes, however, Bush administration officials have been pressing the Afghan government to at least allow the trial spray of glyphosate, a commonly used weed-killer, current and former American officials said. Ground spraying would likely bring only a modest improvement over the manual destruction of poppy plants, but officials who support the strategy hope it would reassure Afghans about the safety of the herbicide and make eradication possible.

    Aerial spraying, they add, may be the only way to make a serious impact on opium production while the Taliban continues to dominate parts of southern Afghanistan.

    On Sunday, officials said, a State Department crop-eradication expert briefed key members of Mr. Karzai’s cabinet about the effectiveness and safety of glyphosate. The expert, Charles S. Helling, a senior scientific adviser to the department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, met with, among others, the ministers of public health and agriculture, both of whom have opposed the use of herbicides, an Afghan official said.

    For all the controversy over herbicide use, there is no debate that Afghanistan’s drug problem is out of control. The country now produces 93 percent of the world’s opiates, according to United Nations estimates. Its traffickers are also processing more opium into heroin base there, a shift that has helped to increase Afghanistan’s drug revenues exponentially since the American-led invasion in 2001.

    A United Nations report in August documented a 17 percent rise in poppy cultivation from 2006 to 2007, and a 34 percent rise in opium production. Perhaps more important for the effort to stabilize Afghanistan, officials said, the Taliban has been reaping a windfall from taxes on the growers and traffickers.

    The problem is most acute in the southern province of Helmand, a Taliban stronghold. It produced nearly 4,400 metric tons of opium this year, almost half the country’s total output, United Nations statistics show.

    Moreover, as Afghanistan’s opium production has soared, the government’s eradication efforts have faltered. Federal and provincial eradication teams — using sticks, sickles and animal-drawn plows — cut down about 47,000 acres of poppy fields this year, 24 percent more than last year but still less than 9 percent of the country’s total poppy crop.

    And even that effort had to be negotiated plot by plot with growers. Powerful and politically connected landowners were able to protect their crops while smaller, weaker farmers were made the targets. The eradication program was so spotty that it did little to discourage farmers from cultivating the crop, American and European officials said.

    “The eradication process over the past five years has not worked,” Antonio Maria Costa, executive director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, said in an interview. “This year, it was a farce.”

    The Americans have been pushing the Afghan government to eradicate with glyphosate for at least two years. According to current and former American officials, the subject has been raised with President Karzai by President Bush; Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser; and John P. Walters, the director of national drug-control policy.

    American officials thought they had the Karzai administration’s support late last year to begin a small-scale pilot program for ground spraying in several provinces. But that plan was derailed in January after an American-educated deputy minister of public health presented health and environmental concerns about glyphosate at a meeting of the Karzai cabinet, Afghan and American officials said.

    Since then, Mr. Karzai has said he opposes spraying of any kind.

    “President Karzai has categorically rejected that spraying will happen,” Farooq Wardak, Afghanistan’s minister of state for parliamentary affairs, said in a recent interview. “The collateral damage of that will be huge.”

    Yet in the weeks since the latest United Nations drug report, the Bush administration’s lobbying appears to have made new headway. It has already won the backing of several members of Mr. Karzai’s government and the spray advocates here are now trying to swing other key Afghan officials and Mr. Karzai himself, one high-level Afghan official said

    “We are working to convince the key ministers and President Karzai to accept this strategy,” said the official, who supports spraying but asked not to be identified because of the issue’s political delicacy. “We want to convince them to show some power. The government has to show its power in the remote provinces.”

    General Khodaidad, Afghanistan’s acting minister of counternarcotics (who, like many Afghans, goes by only one name), said in an interview last week that ground spraying is under careful consideration by the Afghan government. A high-level official of the Karzai administration said he believed some spraying might take place during this growing season, which begins in several weeks.

    The American government contends that glyphosate is one of the world’s safest herbicides — “less toxic than common salt, aspirin, caffeine, nicotine and even vitamin A,” according to a State Department fact sheet.

    One well known supporter of glyphosate as a counternarcotics tool is the American ambassador in Kabul, William B. Wood, who arrived in April after a four-year posting as ambassador to Colombia. There, Mr. Wood oversaw the American-financed counternarcotics program, Plan Colombia, which relies heavily on the aerial spraying of coca, the raw material for cocaine.

    Mr. Wood has even offered to have himself sprayed with glyphosate, as one of his predecessors in Colombia once did, to prove its safety, a United States Embassy official in Kabul said.

    But among European diplomats here, a far greater concern than any environmental or health dangers of chemical eradication is the potential for political fallout that could lead to more violence and instability.

    Those diplomats worry particularly that aerial spraying would kill food crops that some farmers plant with their poppies. European officials add that any form of spraying could be cast by the Taliban as American chemical warfare against the Afghan peasantry.

    The British have been so concerned that on the eve of Mr. Karzai’s trip to Camp David in August, Prime Minister Gordon Brown called President Bush and asked him not to pressure the Afghan premier to use herbicides, according to several diplomats here.

    In something of a reversal of traditional roles, officials at the Pentagon and Central Intelligence Agency have also challenged the White House and State Department support for spraying, raising concerns about its potential to destabilize the Karzai government, current and former American officials said.


    American officials who support herbicide use do not dismiss such concerns. They say an extensive public-information campaign would have to be carried out in conjunction with any spraying effort to dispel fears about the chemical’s impacts.

    Mr. Schweich, the assistant secretary of state, emphasized that a new American counter-narcotics strategy for Afghanistan, introduced in August, went far beyond eradication. He noted that it would increase punishments and rewards, including large amounts of development aid, to move farmers away from poppy cultivation. It also calls for more forceful eradication, interdiction and law enforcement efforts, and closer coordination of counternarcotics and counterinsurgency efforts, which until now have been pursued separately.

    “We will do what the Afghan government wants to do,” Mr. Schweich said, referring to the use of herbicides. The Bush administration, he added, simply wants to ensure that the Afghans “have all the facts on the table.”




    Incidentally our current Ambassador to Afghanistan, William Wood (who replaced a fairly qualified string of people, such as Zalmay Khalilzad), has previous experience not in places like Pakistan or Tajiikistan or Iraq, but Colombia. That pretty much spells out the Adminstration's priorities. They apparantly believe that opium is a greater threat to us than the Taleban and AQ. The fact that Karzai is resisting our pressure despite the fact that he's completely dependent on us is demonstrative of how dumb the policy happens ot be.
    "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
    -Bokonon

  • #2
    Telling Afgans to quit growing poppies, especially given the current (non)development of their country for other purposes, is assinine. This approach to that is even worse.

    Bravo! That sure will help us win hearts & minds!

    -Arrian
    grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

    The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

    Comment


    • #3
      They apparantly believe that opium is a greater threat to us than the Taleban and AQ.
      From a certain PoV, that might be true.

      Not that spraying fields in Afganistan is really going to help, of course.

      -Arrian
      grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

      The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

      Comment


      • #4
        What's great is that proponents of opium eradication defend this policy by saying that the Taleban is generating lots of revenue from it. But that's utterly circular logic; if the Afghan gov't legalized and taxed opium, they'd be getting said revenue instead of the Taleban.
        "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
        -Bokonon

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Arrian
          From a certain PoV, that might be true.
          1/2 true. AQ is still more of a threat than opium. Taliban, not so much.
          I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
          For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Ramo
            What's great is that proponents of opium eradication defend this policy by saying that the Taleban is generating lots of revenue from it. But that's utterly circular logic; if the Afghan gov't legalized and taxed opium, they'd be getting said revenue instead of the Taleban.
            At a minimum, if we don't want Afgan farmers to grow poppies, we need to pay them to grow something else - or nothing at all, as we sometimes do with our own farmers.

            -Arrian
            grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

            The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

            Comment


            • #7
              And, say, revisit our own farm subsidies...
              "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
              -Bokonon

              Comment


              • #8
                Impoverish good, god fearin' American farmers? You, sir, are plain unAmerican (just like Springstein)! You might as well just go join AQ!



                -Arrian
                grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I do hate teh honkies. In my gut....
                  "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
                  -Bokonon

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    apparantly believe that opium is a greater threat to us than the Taleban and AQ.
                    From a certain PoV, as has been said, they are one and the same. Most clandestine organizations, and all the relevant ones here, get a large portion of their operating money from drug trafficing.

                    In any case, what good does it do us to create an Afghanistan that supports itself off of something like poppies? There are a lot of poor countries out there, should we let all of them sell heroin? Long term people. Long term.

                    Spraying is not the answer, but to just let them go on operating like this as I think Ramo wants is retarded.
                    "The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I already addressed your post.
                      "What's great is that proponents of opium eradication defend this policy by saying that the Taleban is generating lots of revenue from it. But that's utterly circular logic; if the Afghan gov't legalized and taxed opium, they'd be getting said revenue instead of the Taleban."
                      "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
                      -Bokonon

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        should we let all of them sell heroin?


                        Yes.
                        "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
                        -Bokonon

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          They sell heroin because it's by far and away their best cash crop, right?

                          So the options appear to be:

                          1) Spray their fields, kill their crops, and earn their hatred.

                          2) Do nothing in particular wrt poppies.

                          3) Buy them off by subsidizing them to do something else. This, of course, runs the risk of paying them not to grow poppies and them growing poppies anyway.

                          4) Legalize/tax poppy growing. This would boost revenue for the Afgan government, though it would be interesting to see how collection of those taxes goes. The downside, of course, is that at least some of those poppies will end up here in the form of heroin and we don't like that part.

                          Me, I think the reality of the situation is that we don't have the luxury of trying to get them to stop growing poppies. Maybe, just maybe, in a decade or two, *if* the Taleban is defeated and stays defeated, and *if* the government in Kabul survives and grows stronger, and *if* something resembling economic development occurs, then it would be reasonable to look into cutting poppy growing (but again, not by spraying fields from the air).

                          Right now it's unreasonable to expect Afganistan to suddenly switch over to some other crop or economic activity. We're talking about freakin' Afganistan here!

                          -Arrian
                          grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                          The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Ramo
                            I already addressed your post.
                            "What's great is that proponents of opium eradication defend this policy by saying that the Taleban is generating lots of revenue from it. But that's utterly circular logic; if the Afghan gov't legalized and taxed opium, they'd be getting said revenue instead of the Taleban."
                            Except that would be legalizing a dangerous drug. Heroin is dangerously addictive, deadly, and destroys millions of lives. I can see the argument for legalizing marijuana, though I disagree with it. I don't think anyone with a conscience and an understanding of the heroin problem would ever suggest legalizing it.

                            And even if they did, I don't see why the Taliban would suddenly start paying taxes that they likely don't pay as it is

                            I'm not necessarily for spraying the fields - i'd honestly rather send in troops to destroy them, makes more of a point, and that way you can be more careful in what you destroy, even if you don't destroy nearly as much - but legalizing them is idiotic.
                            <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
                            I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I don't think anyone with a conscience and an understanding of the opium problem would ever suggest legalizing it.


                              I don't think that anyone who realizes the effectiveness of the war on drugs would defend it.

                              And even if they did, I don't see why the Taliban would suddenly start paying taxes that they likely don't pay as it is


                              You don't understand the basic situation. There are a bunch of peasants who are getting their crop eradicated by the Afghan gov't. So they choose the Taleban as their sovereign state over Karzai's gov't. The Taleban currently taxes them, and makes a whole lot of money.

                              i'd honestly rather send in troops to destroy them, makes more of a point, and that way you can be more careful in what you destroy


                              That's what they're currently doing. Only 9% of last year's crop was destroyed.
                              "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
                              -Bokonon

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X