I admit it, I'm a "Star Trek" fan.My favorite episode isn't "The Trouble With Tribbles" or "The City on the Edge of Forever" (which starred Joan Collins). My favorite episode is "A Piece of the Action". In this episode, the Enterprise visits a planet that has been "contaminated" by a ship that landed there a century earlier. The "contamination" consists of a book on Chicago mobs of the 20s. Following the book, the people of the planet have all become members of Chicago-style mobs, complete with mob "hits". In the end, Captain Kirk gathers all the mob bosses together. He forces them to work together instead of fighting each other, to the mutual benefit of all of them.
A similar situation exists today in Afghanistan.
Twenty-five years ago, we contaminated Afghanistan by training the Mujaheddin in order to draw the Soviet Union into a quagmire. Eight years later the Soviets pulled out, leaving over two million Afghanis dead and the country in ruins. What did we do then? We walked away, leaving the country to ... well, to turn the reins of government over to the Taliban.
Then, after taking the Taliban out two years ago, we virtually turned our backs on them again. Sure, there are 15,000 troops still there, searching for ... whatever it is they're searching for. But what is the Bush government doing to rebuild the country?
The U.S. handpicked president Hamid Karzai is in charge -- in Kabul. Outside of the capital city, however, things are very different. In over one third of the country the Taliban is regaining control. The rest of the country is ruled by warlords, the "mob bosses". These warlords are not just going to give up their power. Truth be told, they're probably the only ones who know how to get things done in that country anyway. Since we're obviously not going to try to rule the country the way we're trying to rule Iraq why shouldn't the warlords have power in the new government?
Well ... they're warlords.
Yes, they are. But unless we're willing either to bring the warlords into government or to kill them, there's no way any "official" government in Afghanistan is going to get the job done. Besides, if the warlords actually set up a stable government that was beneficial to its own people, they stand to do even better. How many of them have electricity, running water, true security -- all things they would gain from forming a stable government?
With a stable government, American help building a new infrastructure, and a minimum of corruption, the warlords would stand to be a lot richer. They would also have a stake in maintaining peace, stability, and a rising standard of living in their own country.
Additionally, the people of that horribly shattered country would finally be given hope for a better future, free of war, destruction and poverty. They could start building schools and factories instead of growing poppies for heroin.
Bringing in the warlords would be far less expensive for us as well. Rather than spending billions to keep thousands of troops into Afghanistan, we could spend hundreds of millions helping to rebuild that country. It would also help us fight the war on drugs. After all, if fewer poppies were grown in Afghanistan, less heroin would be available on the streets of America.
We would also have a lot more help in our search for Osama bin Laden. Remember him? The "terrorist-in-chief"? Mr. "Wanted, Dead or Alive"? Public enemy number one? The guy who was actually responsible for financing the 9/11 attacks? The fella we had cornered in Tora Bora, but gave up on in order to invade Iraq? Somehow, the folks in the Beltway seem to have forgotten about him. With the warlords' help, even if we didn't actually capture bin Laden, we could pull his teeth and make the world safer for America.
Bottom line, we could have set up a democracy in Afghanistan if Bush hadn't been so hot to hit Hussein. We still can, if we're only willing to do the job.
And the best part is, by actually rebuilding Afghanistan, we not only save money, save lives and elevate our image around the world, but American contractors can be cut in for "a piece of the action."
Copyright 2004, Dan Jacoby
For a PDF version of this document, click here.
To contact Dan Jacoby, click here.
Return to the Main Menu