Yet, while an uproar in the UK over their casualties this week – 15 dead in 10 days – grows, (see “renowned British military historian Correlli Barnett … in the pages of the very conservative Daily Mail” (h/t Steve Hynd of Newshoggers)) Gen McChrystal continues to up the expectation that he will be asking for more US troops and more billions when he completes his strategic review:
The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said Sunday that when he gives his assessment to the Obama administration next month of what is needed to defeat the Taliban , he won’t be deterred by administration statements that he cannot have more U.S. troops.
One of the central talking points justifying our ongoing war has always been talk about protecting or saving the women of Afghanistan. Both the right and the left have used this argument as a rationale for continuing – yet few ever listen to the wishes of actual Aghan women.
After the US air strike killed more than 140 Afghan civilians in Farah province, Malalai Joya, the MP for Farah who was forced from Parliament by the US backed warlords noted:
The Afghan ambassador in the U.S. said in an interview with Al Jazeera that if a ‘proper apology’ is made, then ‘people will understand’ the civilian deaths. But the Afghan people do not just want to hear ‘sorry.’ We ask for an end to the occupation of Afghanistan and a stop to such tragic war crimes…
It is a shame that so much of Afghanistan’s reality has been kept veiled by a western media consensus in support of the ‘good war.’ Perhaps if the citizens of North America had been better informed about my country, President Obama would not have dared to send more troops and spend taxpayers’ money on a war that is only adding to the suffering of our people and pushing the region into deeper conflicts.
A troop ‘surge’ in Afghanistan, and continued air strikes, will do nothing to help the liberation of Afghan women. The only thing it will do is increase the number of civilian casualties and increase the resistance to occupation.
To really help Afghan women, citizens in the U.S. and elsewhere must tell their government to stop propping up and covering for a regime of warlords and extremists. If these thugs were finally brought to justice, Afghan women and men would prove quite capable of helping ourselves. (emph. added)
More women’s voices were heard this week in the statement of Sonali Kolhatkar, co-cirector of the Afghan Women’s Mission and Mariam Rawi is a member of the Revolutionary Association of Women of Afghanistan:
…The U.S. invasion has been a failure, and increasing the U.S. troop presence will not undo the destruction the war has brought to the daily lives of Afghans.
…Here are the facts: After the invasion, Americans received reports that newly liberated women had cast off their burquas and gone back to work. Those reports were mythmaking and propaganda. Aside from a small number of women in Kabul, life for Afghan women since the fall of the Taliban has remained the same or become much worse.
Under the Taliban, women were confined to their homes. They were not allowed to work or attend school. They were poor and without rights. They had no access to clean water or medical care, and they were forced into marriages, often as children.
Today, women in the vast majority of Afghanistan live in precisely the same conditions, with one notable difference: they are surrounded by war. The conflict outside their doorsteps endangers their lives and those of their families. It does not bring them rights in the household or in public, and it confines them even further to the prison of their own homes…
The U.S. military may have removed the Taliban, but it installed warlords who are as anti-woman and as criminal as the Taliban. Misogynistic, patriarchal views are now embodied by the Afghan cabinet, they are expressed in the courts, and they are embodied by President Hamid Karzai.
Paper gains for women’s rights mean nothing when, according to the chief justice of the Afghan Supreme Court, the only two rights women are guaranteed by the constitution are the right to obey their husbands and the right to pray, but not in a mosque.
These are the convictions of the government the U.S. has helped to create. The American presence in Afghanistan will do nothing to diminish them.
… In our conversations arguing this point, we are told that the U.S. cannot leave Afghanistan because of what will happen to women if they go. Let us be clear: Women are being gang raped, brutalized and killed in Afghanistan. Forced marriages continue, and more women than ever are being forced into prostitution — often to meet the demand of foreign troops.
The U.S. presence in Afghanistan is doing nothing to protect Afghan women. The level of self-immolation among women was never as high as it is now. When there is no justice for women, they find no other way out but suicide.
The authors also have a few sharp words for the Feminist Majority Foundation and it’s Campaign for Afghan Women and Girls:
On its foundation Web site, the first stated objective of the Feminist Majority Foundation’s "Campaign for Afghan Women and Girls" is to "expand peacekeeping forces."
First of all, coalition troops are combat forces and are there to fight a war, not to preserve peace. Not even the Pentagon uses that language to describe U.S. forces there. More importantly, the tired claim that one of the chief objectives of the military occupation of Afghanistan is to liberate Afghan women is not only absurd, it is offensive.
Waging war does not lead to the liberation of women anywhere. Women always disproportionately suffer the effects of war, and to think that women’s rights can be won with bullets and bloodshed is a position dangerous in its naïveté. The Feminist Majority should know this instinctively.
For more background on the reality of conditions for Afghan women, read the report released this week on the situation of women in Afghanistan from the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan. It is devastating – and reminds us that conflict zones inevitably add risk to the lives of women and children.
Rethink Afghanistan is helping to support the efforts of the Afghan Women’s Mission and you can too – click here for more information.



31 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An’ go to your Gawd like a soldier.
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
So-oldier ~of~ the Queen!
Kipling: The Young British Soldier.
Been there done that.
Are there ANY historic examples of anyone being pleased about being liberated on account of war? Is there a single example of an empire that showed any cognizance of that principle?
Good for the women of Afghanistan. With any luck, the U.S. will get kicked out before the U.S. empire comes apart where so many other empires have failed.
Oh, and I might add the McChrystal has all the characteristics of a first class asshole.
Seems we never learn.
As I read history in my dotage, I learn that not learning is pretty much standard fare. Especially wrt to wars of empire. Reading Savage War of Peace about the Algerian war of independence, and seems W & Obama use it as a textbook rather than a what-not-to-do.
He’s also number one on my list of war criminals. He should be standing trial right now.
Thanks for a very sobering post, Siun. The failure to understand both the history of wars in Afghanistan and the current conditions there on the part of the US is just staggering.
And because the Taliban are such disgusting characters, and because the Afghan war is the “good” war, the U.S. can get away with anything. Juan Cole points out that everyone’s forgotten about it.
Simply bringing up our needless wars in conversation these days is met with deaf ears and blank stares like I never imagined.
Maybe James Carville’s new role as Afghanistan’s Karl Rove will ’change’ things.
After VN, I thought how unimagineable U.S. colonial wars would be. How naive I am. The chance to do it one more time and a little bit better is irrestible to an empire’s military.
Our military has become as bad as our politicians. Not the troops who do the real fighting and dying but the people at the top who want that victory, that promotion, that glory. Sick.
Think the military is almost always corrupt. Incentives always work the wrong way. Thus the “paranoid” foreign policy stance, which keeps the $$ going to military hardware producers who will hire retired generals, as just one example.
What does this mean, exactly, that McChrystalnacht “won’t be deterred by administration statements that he cannot have more U.S. troops.” In what way won’t he “be deterred?” Will he not “be deterred” in the sense of not following a direct order from his Commander in Chief with regard to how many troops he gets?
Because if that’s the case, I think we have a problem.
Obama, dripping behind the ears, will cave to whatever McC wants, and McC knows it enough to rub Obama’s nose in the dirt.
I also wondered what he meant. How could he possibly get the troops if the prez says no? He sounds like a puffed up nut case to me.
Deterred from asking.
He’s still only gonna get what he’s given unless that xeroxing thing works now.
A puffed up nutcase against a know nothing prez. Who do ya think will win?
I think you’ve got it! It sure seems that Obama bows to anything the Petraeus boys want … and they have been rubbing his nose since he arrived. Look at Odierno’s mouthing off on Iraq. For Iraq, they got what they wanted (more time to manufacture ways to stay) and only had to give up a veneer of withdrawal … changing city boundaries to place bases outside them, etc.
Only campaign pledge Obama has lived up to: expand war in Pakistan.
Don’t know but I don’t like the odds. It becomes more clear every day that we cannot win either of these wars so it doesn’t matter how many troops are there. I think we will get out of Afghanistan about the same way we got out of Nam and we probably won’t ever get out of Iraq.
Those who have benefitted do not want to accept responsibility. Yes, they never learn if there are no consequences. Without our war to destroy Al Qaeda there will never be any chance to bring about the direct consequences for the responsible.
We can ignore the past and withdraw from AfPak, but if we do there will be another time. Somehow it seems easier to push for accountability against our political enemies, the ones we know by name. But, are there nameless faces responsible for what we’ve been through since 9/11.
I know that sounds vague, but I really don’t know how to be specific since I too am in the dark. I think we fight AQ to find the light of the Truth of our recent past.
Besides, if we don’t destroy an enemy which attacked us we will always be vulnerable to them and potentially to anyone who sees the attack go unpunished. THAT is definitely a lesson of history we can’t ignore and it isn’t vague or uncertain.
Gnite pups
sleep well.
Great post. Thanks.
We weren’t actually attacked by the Afghans, and we’re not doing very well at attacking the Taliban, either.
(Iraq is a case of ‘they have oil, we want it, let’s take it’, AFAICT.)
We did ask them to hand over OBL after the attack and they did actually refuse.
I think that’s covered by ‘not doing very well’. (For all I know, the request was phrased so badly that they couldn’t come up with a way to hand him over without losing a lot of face. The Taliban losing face wouldn’t have been a bad result, actually ….)
Sure as hell agree that we haven’t done well and also that we haven’t done much good.
The request was very clear and certainly wasn’t going to be accepted without the Taliban losing face. They chose, we chose, and everybody lost more than face.
He won’t be deterred form transferring the blame of failure to someone else.
“It wan’t me who failed, I didn’t get the resources I needed to finish the job”
,,,,,,Failure is an orphan..
Once again troops are over there without sufficient material to fight this thing. It was in the BBC yesterday.
I would presume, with the states of both economies that our troops are also in the same position. ( don’t know but I’ll take bets)
McChrystal wants more billions and troops we don’t have. I guess he thinks he can do what Alexander the Great and Rome couldn’t do…and everybody else since then.
Obama looks more and more like a leaf in the wind.
Siun. This is an invaluable series. Thank you so much.