Money talks in Afghanistan
Peter Hoskin 12:05pm
Afghan politics stinks; we all know it. But it's still shocking to read how the former governor of Helmand, Sher Mohammed Akhundzada, encouraged his supporters to join the Taliban after he lost his position, in 2005, under a cloud of drug-running allegations. Here's what he tells today's Telegraph:
The latest rumours are that Hamid Karzai is going to reinstate Akhundzada, now a Senator, as a reward for supporting him during August's presidential elections. It's dispiriting, to say the least. But it's probably also testament to the trickiness of any solution in Afghanistan, that keeping dubious folk like Akhundzada on side may be preferable to the alternative."When I was no longer governor the government stopped paying for the people who supported me .... I sent 3,000 of them off to the Taliban because I could not afford to support them but the Taliban was making payments.
Lots of people, including my family members, went back to the Taliban because they had lost respect for the government. The British bore the brunt of this because the Taliban became the defenders of Helmand, where the local tradition doesn't allow foreigners to go into people's homes."
Previous
malone
November 21st, 2009 12:37pm Report this commentThe fact that you and most of the press find it shocking is just testimony to how little most people understand Afghanistan how things work there, all of which points to the inevitable failure of the mission. Likewise with the own goal of demonising Karsai as being corrupt. Is it possible for an Afghan leader to be anything else? And how does his wheeler dealing compare with the recent events in Brussels and their non-election of leaders? It need not have been so but such is the vanity of politicians who nothing to think they know and can do everything.
The tragedy is that there WAS a window of opportunity in Afghanistan, now long gone, when we really could have made a difference but the hundreds of billions that should have gone there went on the killing of hundreds of thousands in Iraq instead. It's too late now. Blair you are such an utter utter chump.
In2minds
November 21st, 2009 12:56pm Report this comment“The latest rumours are that Hamid Karzai is going to reinstate Akhundzada, now a Senator”.
Ah! So this man Akhundzada was elected, well that puts him ahead of Lady Ashton and her new position in the EU, she was merely appointed. Let me remind you democracy is important.
anne allan
November 21st, 2009 1:11pm Report this commentAm I supposed to be surprised?
The Marshall
November 21st, 2009 1:58pm Report this commentWANTED - DEAD OR ALIVE
OSAMA BIN LADEN
$50 MILLION REWARD
And still no takers - 'Money talks'?
JohnOfEnfield
November 21st, 2009 3:25pm Report this commentMoney talks EVERYWHERE.
We are trying to impose a post-industrial political infrastructure (Central Government, National Army, National Police etc.) on an economy which is pre-feudal.
We exacerbate this situation by attempting to ban heroin & so raise the price that the drug runners can pay to corrupt Afghani society.
No country has EVER won in Afghanistan - there is nothing to win against!
Jez
November 21st, 2009 3:30pm Report this commentYou're all coming along swimmingly.
Taking a couple of key points in your last paragraph, your very well into the next stage regarding your steep descent into the world of cold reality;
Denial.
Frank P
November 21st, 2009 4:34pm Report this commentMoney talks - in all languages and all countries and when it does - bullshit walks!
Peter From Maidstone
November 21st, 2009 5:13pm Report this commentWhat are we there for? Really. What are we there for? Is there anything our presence there is doing for good that could not be done by Aid Agencies, IF the local population were willing. And if they are not willing then everything is impossible in any case.
porkbelly
November 21st, 2009 5:17pm Report this commentAll this extravagant outrage over Afghan "corruption" (one should be as surprised that there is corruption in Afghanistan as that there is corruption in Chicago or gambling in Casablanca) is nothing more than a preemptive justification for turning tail and withdrawing from the war there. The argument will be made that the Taliban is no worse than the Karzai regime, and that they can be remotely-controlled by their Pakistani ISI paymasters, so why do we need troops there? But in the end it will prove to be no better than a rationalization for Western cowardice and lack of resolve...and the world will take note.
RB Scott
November 21st, 2009 5:32pm Report this commentSher Mohammad was primarily responsible for the success in 2002 in Helmand for reducing opium cultivation by 85% in one crop year in Nad-i-Ali (some 30,000 acres of irrigated land) in collaboration with our reconstruction/counter narcotics project cleaning the irrigation drainage system mostly by hand labor. We put the farmers to work on their own system for pay (some $1.75 a day)with promises for continued reconstruction and market support for their traditional cash crops, which we failed to live up to. The governor begged for additional help in writing from USAID and the UN in 05 when most work stopped.We left him hanging.
The article fails to mention his famous mujahadin commander uncle and father who fought the Soviets. He had (has) a lot of local tribal support which was ignored in our process of making him our enemy. And he could likely bring some stability back to Helmand with our reconstruction/development support, not military force.
Back to top