OCTOBER 12, 2009 3:48PM

Afghanistan is the Taliban is Afghanistan is the Taliban

Rate: 0 Flag

It's wonderful to have a loud-mouth liberal like Alan Grayson in Washington, along with all the loud-mouth neo-cons and mush-mouth Democrats, but whoever increases knowledge increases sorrow, and Alan Grayson's grim analysis of Afghanistan is even grimmer than he thinks.

It's not a country; it's not even a place. It's just an empty place on the map. It's terra incognita. People who live there are a welter of different tribes, different language groups, different religious beliefs.

All over the country you find different people who have nothing to do with each other except for the fact that we call them Afghans, and they don't even call themselves Afghans. They're Tajiks or they're Pashtuns, or they're Hazzaras or someone else. The things that hold them together are simply the things that we try to create artificially.

 

With all due respect, which is actually a lot, I have to say that Rep. Grayson has been addled by world-tourism, and when you spend just a few days or weeks or even a few months in very foreign countries like Afghanistan, it's easy to avoid understanding that you don't understand anything at all, and only if you're very, very lucky will you ever experience even one or two epiphanies of the obvious like a sudden realization that...

Afghanistan is the Taliban is Afghanistan is the Taliban.

Although the eternal tourist Alan Grayson ("I've been to 175 countries...") was probably right about Afghanistan in that blessed era when the Durrani and Barakzai dynasties were still enthroned in Kabul, and only an occasional coronation united so many feudal war-lords at the very same place and time, that happy isolation and mutual ignorance ended after the Soviet invasion in 1979, and hundreds of thousands of refugees from tribes which had never even heard of each other were suddenly united in refugee camps in Pakistan.

There was a melting pot like no other in the history of "Afghanistan," just a name on a map, or a series of names on a series of maps for thousands of years, but now a nation united for the first time in exile, Afghans and only Afghans, an enormous and almost undifferentiated mass deprived of all other identity except Afghanistan and Islam.

Afghanistan

So the Russians went down under suicide insurgents with nothing to lose and American SAM's, and for a while the old war-lords reimposed the old isolated order in their obsolescent fiefdoms, but now and only now Afghanistan existed, at first only as a national consciousness, an emergent property of enormous refugee camps in Pakistan, but in the pure and simple light of that primitive consciousness, the old war-lord order was only a charade, a community-theatre costume drama mercilessly exposed the morning after, and when the first and only national army of Afghanistan, the Taliban appeared, the old feudal order evaporated.

Bourgeois democracy wasn't born in those stinking camps! If we wanted a bourgeois democracy in those stinking camps in Pakistan we could have bought them a bourgeois democracy with all the trimmings for half the price of a week of war!

But we wanted to pig out instead, in our great Reagan-era pig-out, and those same pigs are still running our country, and our senseless war in Afghanistan, which exists as a nation nowhere except where it began, in the minds of those miserable refugees in Pakistani camps, in the primitive Islam and primitive human connections of refugees, expressed with a blinding clarity by the Taliban.

Drive the Taliban out of Afghanistan?

You might just as well say...

Drive Afghanistan out of Afghanistan!

American pundits and generals will posture and predict for another few months or years, but our future in Afghanistan is exactly the same as Joan of Arc predicted for the English in France...

Tous les anglais seront chassés de la France, sauf ceux qui y mourront!

And mutatis mutandis my up-to-date translation is...

Every American will be driven out of Afghanistan, except those who die there.

Author tags:

afghanistan, alan grayson

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
In their presence we first required the said Jeanne to take an oath to speak the truth on whatever concerned the trial. To which she replied that she would willingly swear to answer truly everything that concerned her trial, but not everything she knew.

Then we required her to swear to answer truthfully everything she should be asked. She replied as before, saying: "You ought to be satisfied, for I have sworn enough."
The Taliban are no more the nation of Afghanistan than the corrupt Karzai government is; they're simply the militia which the Pakistanis chose to represent their interests and which thus beat out the others to become dominant in the post-Soviet era. They exist now, both in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, largely because the ISI continue to hedge their bets by supporting them, and because people are sick of Karzai and our support of him. The average Afghan civilian doesn't want fundamentalist tyranny anymore than they want to be killed by US airstrikes; that was made plain by the wave of relief which swept the country after the Taliban were driven underground in 2001-2002. The fact that they're resurgent now has little to do with what Afghans would choose if given a choice and everything to do with the way Bush bungled things and the way we continue to emphasise military operations over the needs and desires of the Afghan people.
@nanatehay

Thanks for that exercise in magical thinking, where Pakistan "chooses a militia," and a few months later that same militia rides into Kabul with weapons they scavenged from local war-lords on the way.

That would be a very good trick, if anyone could do it, but the ISI and similar bogey-men never showed any signs of such a cosmic power before or after, and all sorts of organizations are always "choosing militias," but almost none of those militias ever arrive at the appropriate capital, and Western "observers" who only observe their own fantasy images of faraway nations have no idea why Taliban triumphed almost alone among so many militias which went nowhere.
You accuse me of using magical thinking Jacob, but what are you doing when you equate the Taliban with Afghanistan if not fantasizing? The Taliban only controlled the parts of Afghanistan they did because they had the full support of Pakistan, and only after a long bloody struggle with Massoud and others; anybody who's familiar with the region knows that. One gaping hole in your thesis for instance is that, even WITH the full support of Pakistan, they never succeeded in controlling the entire country. Read "Descent Into Chaos" by Ahmed Rashid, or even just a few of the dozens of books I've read 0n the topic then get back to me about it. This post, and your asinine comment, tells me you understand the region no better than Grayson does; being an opinionated prick isn't a substitute for knowing the facts.
@nanatehay

Ahmed Rashid has become the all-purpose "expert" for proponents of "staying the course," and doesn't he always find a convenient Afghan to quote about how only America can save that suffering nation?

But meanwhile it's just one fuck-up after another with our ludicrously incompetent occupation, as described today in the Times...

"Even as President Obama leads an intense debate over whether to send more troops to Afghanistan, administration officials say the United States is falling far short of his goals to fight the country’s endemic corruption, create a functioning government and legal system and train a police force currently riddled with incompetence."

"Afghanistan is now so dangerous, administration officials said, that many aid workers cannot travel outside the capital, Kabul, to advise farmers on crops, a key part of Mr. Obama’s announcement in March that he was deploying hundreds of additional civilians to work in the country. The judiciary is so weak that Afghans increasingly turn to a shadow Taliban court system because, a senior military official said, 'a lot of the rural people see the Taliban justice as at least something.'"

And yes, nanatehay, nine months is plenty of time for Obama to have accomplished something.
There's no question we have and are fucking things up Jacob. Where did I say we weren't? And where did I mention Obama or what he's doing or not doing? You claimed "Afghanistan is the Taliban is Afghanistan is the Taliban" and I explained why I think that's not accurate. What does Obama have to do with what we were discussing?
@nanatehay

Right you are, and just because 99% of the negative comments on my diaries originate with Obama's true believers, after two years of fighting with those trolls I think "horses" when I hear hoofbeats, and miss an occasional zebra.

But your assumption that the ISI can impose its will on Afghanistan with a raggedy bunch of badly equipped Taliban is still "magical thinking," like exactly the same thesis applied to the CIA all around Latin America.

All those spooky agencies like the ISI and CIA depend on a myth of omnipotence for their funding, and isn't it surprising that whenever their operations are actually documented, they look like a bunch of helpless clowns?
I'll just go ahead and get this 0ut of the way and leave you alone:

I didn't mention Rashid because I was attempting to say we need to stay the course. I mentioned him because his book, along with everything else on Afghanistan that I've read, refutes your contention that "Afghanistan is the Taliban is Afghanistan is the Taliban." You can use all the "quotation marks" you like about his "supposed" expert status, but the fact remains that he knows a lot more about the region than you. And you can pretend we were discussing Obama and what he ought to do or not do all you like, but the fact remains; this post is asinine and you really don't know what the fuck you're talking about. As I said before, being an opinonated prick is no substitute for knowing the facts, nor is shifting the conversation to something else when someone calls you on your ignorance.
My apologies, but now you're back to discussing the Taliban, so I'll address that. As I said before, Pakistan, meaning the ISI and the Pakistani military, backed the Taliban; that's the sole reason they were able to h0ld as much of the country as they did. Read the history, read up on the region, and you'll see that's what happened. I don't base a single thing I say here on magical thinking; I base it on what I've learned by reading extensively about the situation.
Interesting exchange, but you're both ignoring the fact that as long as we don't stress the Guard and Reserves too much the regular Army and Marines can sit over there and bust the Taliban up as long as they want to. The more boots Obama gives McChrystal, the fewer people get their noses cut off by the Taliban and the fewer kids get bombed. What about that election? We pulled that same stunt in Vietnam, trying to legitimatize our puppet government. Speaking of fantasies, I imagine Afghanistan as Somalia with force protection.
@Billy Glad

In the business of preventing atrocities, America has a very mixed record, and before the Taliban cut off as many noses as we killed civilians in Iraq already, it's likely that Afghan society will have evolved into something with a little more nuance, just as the United States evolved beyond our early custom of burning witches, even after we rejected the beneficent influence of a foreign armies.
What I wonder is what the Taliban could have been thinking when they refused to give up bin Laden. I suppose it was the personal relationship between bin Laden and Mohammed Omar. Tragic. Funny how we're always the ones expected to restrain ourselves, to take a fucking from two-bit tyrants in the name of humanity, whether it's Hussein, bin Laden or Omar.
You don't have to wonder what Mullah Omar was thinking. He spelled it out.

Show us some proof that bin Laden assassinated so many civilians, and we'll hand him over to a sharia court.

There was no proof.

There still isn't.

9/11 isn't even on bin Laden's FBI rap sheet.
Then that brings us full circle. If, as you say, the Taliban is Afghanistan and Afghanistan is the Taliban, they're getting exactly what they asked for.