LLOYD GOODLEIGHLLOYD GOODLEIGH
AFGHAN RUGS or hounds what other things come to mind when you think of Afghanistan? This country, with its stark, austere landscape is a vast stage, upon which great powers have historically entered and exited in their own interest. The powers and the actors involved constitute a cast that is very impressive.
In pre-historic times, the Aryans from Central Asia migrated south to India through the fabled 'Khyber Pass'. Herodatus, the father of history, in 446 B.C., reported on the customs of the tribes of Afghanistan. Darius and the Persians invaded in 510 BC and Alexander the Great in 326 B.C.
It is difficult to capture the rich tapestry of Afghanistan history in a column. Notwithstanding that, we can give an idea by use of captions: Buddhism in the fifth and sixth century the Silk Road from China and camel trains five miles long; Arabian horses; warring tribes; war lords; Tartars; moguls; Sythian Arabs; the Ottoman Empire Radical Islam revolutions; assassinations; Russian and British Secret Service Agents Russian Divisions CIA ISI KGB Mujahideen Osama bin Laden Al Qaeda Taliban US Troops British Special Services an opium trade worth US$30 billion; criminal gangs etc.
What is it about Afghanistan that makes it such a magnet for powerful nations and for international intrigues?
STRATEGIC LOCATION
One of the major factors is its strategic location. Present day Afghanistan is surrounded by China, Pakistan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan.
As a consequence, historically those who rule Afghanistan have always been of interest to the powerful; especially the Russians and the British. In the last two centuries, they have both regarded Afghanistan as the place to halt the expansion of their respective empires. In pursuit of that objective, the British have invaded Afghanistan four times. They have yet to be successful. Their biggest disaster was in 1839, when 16,500 British Troops and 30,000 camp followers marched into Kabul. In 1842, the lone survivor, a British doctor, rode into Jobahad on a lame horse.
The British had originally gone into Kabul in an attempt to overthrow an emir, who they regarded as anti-British. With regard to the latest British excursion in conjunction with the Americans and ISAF, its outcome is in doubt. The alliance has installed the pro British/American Hamid Karzai as the president. He and his administration only control Kabul; the rest of Afghanistan seems to be returning to "its eternal prosperity to anarchy".
Why is this so? Most of Central Asia with its predominantly young and rapidly growing and poverty stricken populations, are in danger of becoming narcotic societies, unstable, lawless tinderboxes.
In Afghanistan's case, it has always been a major grower of opium poppy, but it has been established that the CIA and the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence "created the modern drug business in Central Asia; after the Russian invasion of Afghanistan between 1979 and 1989, by encouraging the Mujahideen fighting the Russians to try to addict the Soviet troops." That business has grown into a US$30-billion drug trade; that evidently stretches through Central Asia Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Dubai, Europe and the U.S.A.
This has resulted in the fact that:
In Afghanistan "powerful war lords have consolidated their control of the provinces" and are the world's foremost opium producers.
The issue is further complicated by the fact that the main factions in Afghanistan have foreign backing. The Jamiat is supported by Russia Ismel Khan by Iran, Dotsun by the Uzbeks and Iran.
It is argued that in Central Asia, "Terrorism is an equilateral triangle of violence, drugs, intelligence services; that many of the war lords and drug dealers are the current allies of the U.S./British-led coalition, in their fight with Al Qaeda and the remnants of the Taliban.
What we have is a witch's brew of American, British, Pakistani, Russian and Iranian interests, compounded by radical Islamic terrorism; poverty, drugs dealers, two million returning Afghan citizens and a weak central Government.
WESTERN COUNTRIES
All these issues are occurring amidst broken promises by Western countries. The US$4.5 billion promised in Tokyo in 2002, has not materialised.
But you might ask, what about the reconstruction of Afghanistan? In 2002, President Bush vetoed an aid bill that included US$147 million for re-construction in Afghanistan. In 2003, the administration had only requested funds to complete a major highway in Afghanistan. The World Food Programme evidently has no resources to accomplish its mission; and the U.N. High Commission for Refugees had only US$16 million of the US$195 million it need for 2003.
My guess is that the Americans/British do not intend to invest the money or time to transforming Afghanistan and probably never intended to. After all, great powers have been leaping on to and exiting the Afghan stage for centuries, always bent on pursuing their own interest and never the interest of the Afghan people. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
Lloyd Goodleigh is general secretary of the Joint Confederation of Trades Unions (JCTU).
