Tweet
I assume that when the President of the United States lectures the President of Afghanistan about the need to root out political corruption, end drug trafficking and its influence, and restore the rule of law by holding law-breakers accountable, he’s talking about their country and not ours.
But still, you’d think at least some Americans would be a little embarrassed to hear their government make these kinds of statements without looking in a mirror:
What he is seeking, Mr. Obama told reporters afterward, is “a sense on the part of President Karzai that, after some difficult years in which there has been some drift, that in fact he’s going to move boldly and forcefully forward and take advantage of the international community’s interest in his country to initiate reforms internally. That has to be one of our highest priorities.”
The administration wants Mr. Karzai and the Afghan government to put into place an anticorruption commission to establish strict accountability for government officials at the national and provincial levels, senior administration officials said Monday.
In addition, some American officials and their European counterparts would like at least a few arrests of what one administration official called “the more blatantly corrupt” people in the Afghan government.
Administration officials declined to provide the names of people they wanted to see arrested and acknowledged that such arrests were a long shot. The international community’s wish list of potential defendants includes Mr. Karzai’s brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, a suspected player in the country’s booming illegal opium trade; Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum, who is accused of involvement in the killings of thousands of Taliban prisoners of war early in the Afghan conflict; and one of Mr. Karzai’s running mates, Marshal Muhammad Qasim Fahim, a former defense minister who is also suspected of drug trafficking.
“A couple of high-profile heads on a platter would be nice,” said one European diplomat involved in Afghanistan. The diplomat, like other officials, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the matter.
I don’t recall the Afghans asking us our opinion, let alone inviting us to invade their country or demand they change their society as a condition for our willingness to continue occupying their country.
But it must strike the Afgans as a bit presumptuous to get lectures on drug-related corruption from a White House and US government that are awash in PhRMa secret deals and compaign donations, that kidnaps and tortures other countries’ citizens and then tells them they have no remedies in our courts, and that steadfastly refuses to prosecute any senior officials who authorized, condoned and engaged in egregious war crimes. And speaking of legitimacy, need we mention that a blatantly partisan Supreme Court determined the winner of our Presidential election?
If you have an extra mirror, send it to D.C., with instructions on where to look.
NYT, Full Appeals Court Rejects Suit in Rendition Case
WaPo, Health sector has donated millions to lawmakers
LATimes, White House Deal with Drug Makers Draws Flak
Glenn Greenwald, A Historian’s Account of Democrats and Bush era war crimes.
Glenn Greenwald, John Yoo’s War Crimes
FDL, Sherrod Brown: Biologics should not be subject to endless monopoly
NYT, EU takes on drug companies for delaying generics
Center for Public Integrity, How the pharmaceutical industry gets its way in Washington
11 Comments
Well this is the sort of lecturing tone American presidents have always taken with the world. It’s always been hypocritical nonsense.
While I see your point, the Afghan government has in fact asked the US to be there and to stay there. And really, no one can debate the extent of corruption in our system that makes lectures from the US feel hypocritical. But we are there and US troops are dying enmasse and unless the Afghan government can demonstrate the ability to secure their territory, there may be nothing to do but abandon the country. I don’t support timed withdrawal because I don’t want to end Al-Queada or because I trust the Taliban at all or the Karzai government to do a damned for they people, or because I want to “lose.” I support it because I believe what I suspect the President does: nothing is going to change there. No matter how long we stay, the moment we leave it will return to the same state it was in before we got there. And truly corruption here or there, I don’t care, kids are dying for something that will likely not change. So, I think President Obama was just saying, “you can’t say I didn’t tell you,” so when we finally to pull out of Afghanistan and start taking a more targeted strategical approach to terrorism.
And not for nothing, the US has to change strategies because there is simply not the troop power available to occupy a mid eastern country for the long haul so the people there can have a better life, while those who wish us harm are planning from Somali, Yemen and the south side of Chicago.
There is no Afghan government at this point. There is the puppet that you installed as part of your criminal occupation.
I find it hard to express how much of a political zombie you must be to believe the Afghans voluntarily invited America to bomb and occupy their country.
and dude, no one is debating your point, what they maintain as government there did indeed request US presence. what ya gonna do?
Even if you put the best possible face on the US rationale for being there, if must strike you as odd that a country (US) that seems to have become hopelessly ungovernable, due to extremists (including religious fanatics) plus super-majority rules in a dysfunctional Senate, could be advising anyone else on how to run a government. And our corruption is just as blatant as theirs, but we’ve made most of it “legal.”
What exactly do we have to offer that warrants our occupation? And if the answer is NOTHING, we blew that argument, then we ought not to be lecturing them.
The only lecture we have a right to offer is: Fix our own house.
“you’d think at least some Americans would be a little embarrassed to hear their government make these kinds of statements without looking in a mirror:” ; I’m not embarrassed Scarecrow, I’m completely and totally disgusted.
“The administration wants Mr. Karzai and the Afghan government to put into place an anticorruption commission to establish strict accountability for government officials at the national and provincial levels, senior administration officials said Monday.” ; and yes, send Obama some mirrors because one doesn’t get an anti-corruption commission from those who are corrupted; just look at our own government.
All i’m saying is bring the kids home. i care not a bit for the rest. we can see and interpret it all any way we choose, but if young people are dying we need to be getting something quantifiable for the effort.
While I did like the sound of “high profile heads on a platter”, Obama will simply remind the anonymous diplomatic official that we are forever looking forward now, not backward.
For that reason, there won’t be any meaningful investigation here or in Afghanistan.
At any rate its good to see Obama is keeping busy with such vital work as lying to people who know he’s lying.
The U.S. should quit lecturing other people, when we can’t keep things fair, clean, intelletually sound in our own Country.
I heard this on Stephanie Miller a couple weeks ago with The Rude Pundit and it makes sense to me (following paraphrased, cannot find a transcript):
“Since Afganistan is “a place where empires go to die,” perhaps we need to let Afganistan be a place to grow their damn poppies and we buy them for our legal pharmaceuticals.
If we cannot out-thug them, then let’s at least out-pimp them …”
Lecturing as if the failed “drug war” works is ridiculous.
My 2 cents
Cat In Seattle