Recently a friend emailed me the link to an article by a distinguished American historian, Emanuel Wallerstein, about an interview given by Hamid Karzai to the French paper Le Monde that laid out very clearly Karzai’s position on relations with the U.S. going forward, but which the New York Times only mentioned in passing. Among other things, it revealed that if Karzai continues to refuse to sign the Status of Forces Agreement to regulate the continued presence of American military after the official pullout, President Obama is considering the possibility that it could just as well be signed by another Afghan official! Evidently, the slide away from legality affects not only drone strikes.
|By: Attaturk Friday November 29, 2013 1:30 am|
Never let a continuing disaster not be worth more disasters.
|By: CTuttle Wednesday November 27, 2013 7:05 pm|
Never underestimate the sheer might of AIPAC, Bibi, and the Neocons…!
|By: CTuttle Friday November 22, 2013 3:58 pm|
Mere hours after the ink dried on that Security Pact, in which Kerry assured… No combat role for US forces in Afghanistan, Karzai threw a hard fastball.
|By: DSWright Tuesday July 9, 2013 6:40 am|
The bribes don’t seem to be working. The Obama Administration may be leaving Afghanistan earlier than planned thanks to the deteriorating relationship between President Obama and Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai.
|By: DSWright Monday May 6, 2013 11:35 am|
The CIA faced some embarrassment when it was revealed that the intelligence agency had been giving Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai bags of cash for favorable treatment. This revelation was embarrassing for a number of reasons. First, it confirmed reports that Hamid Karzai was running a corrupt government with facilitation by agents of the U.S. government. Second, it is pretty tragic for America to have to bribe the man it installed as president, whose life it protects on a daily basis. You might think this exposure of corrupt practices would lead to a cooling off of the previously secret nefarious activity – not so.
|By: DSWright Monday April 29, 2013 6:40 am|
Empires are run using carrot and stick policies. The American Empire is no different. In Afghanistan the Taliban’s refusal to comply has gotten them the stick – drones, special forces teams, and all manner of things as punishment. President Karzai for acting as a U.S. puppet, has gotten some nice carrots. And like everything else in Afghanistan, you paid for it.
|By: DSWright Monday March 11, 2013 8:25 am|
Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai is pointing the finger at America for continued instability in his country. To America’s shock and dismay, Karzai claimed that the America and Taliban were colluding to continue the war beyond 2014 when US forces are set to withdraw by working together in series of recent bombings. His comments came as Chuck Hagel made his first visit to the country as Defense Secretary.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Tuesday February 26, 2013 9:15 am|
Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai ordered United States special forces to leave the Maidan Wardak province after reports of units engaging in the torture and disappearing of Afghan civilians.The order came on February 24 and was immediately followed by the US military rejecting the allegations.
Leaders in the province issued the order in response to Afghans working with US special forces who were allegedly responsible for the “disappearance of at least nine men and the murder of an Afghan university student.” But, on February 25, NATO spokesman German Gen. Gunter Katz said the “International Security Assistance Force found no evidence showing foreign forces were involved in abuses. Katz “did not comment on the Afghans allegedly linked to the Americans.” He added, ”We could not find evidence that would support these allegations.”
|By: Swopa Friday January 11, 2013 8:00 pm|
More than three years ago, I wrote here that Obama’s only real decision in Afghanistan was how to manage the United States’ inevitable defeat. Sure, he wound up announcing a “surge” of 30,000 troops, but it was clear to me that this was meant to serve the same purpose as George Bush’s similar 2007 gambit in Iraq: that is, postponing and camouflaging our surrender, rather than avoiding it.