Wikileaks releases over 90,000 classified reports from Afghanistan, a war that's being going badly (as EVERY attempt in history to occupy that country has done) and where the media reports are about as open and informative as the burkas some of the women are forced to wear by local fanatics.
The cables paint a picture of a different war from the re-assurances we've been spoon-fed. Some hints of the reality came out from McChrystal's statements about civilian casualties and some of his staff remarks that they are 'losing this f*c&ing thing'.
Reports available from Wikileaks and the Guardian Newspaper contain accounts of Polish troops raining mortars on a wedding party, of British troops killing civilians, of collusion between the ISI and Taliban, of the Taliban shooting down helicopters with anti-aircraft missiles, and of US troops killing and maiming the locals. In one case, it gives a report of an American base that was over-run by insurgents, abandoned by the surviving soldiers.
All in all, this war is causing a lot of death and suffering, and the hawks have little to show as justification for it.
The Taliban of course are causing a lot of suffering too, but they on the other hand have little to lose and plenty to gain by prolonging the bloody stalemate.
The White House, has reacted angrily of course to these leaked reports. Putting on their best show of moral outrage, they accuse Wikileaks of endangering lives (those of US soldiers - the only lives that really matter in domestic politics).
Even though compared to the quagmire in Iraq, it was considered 'the Good War', the American-led war and occupation of Afghanistan is now deeply unpopular in the US, and that's from figures BEFORE the wikileaks reports.
So the White House, has a tall order to try claim some moral high-ground in this scenario. Wikileaks hasn't shot up a single wedding party, strafed a bus at a checkpoint or covered up an errant air-strikes. They are merely helping to expose the reality of this war, bypassing the stage-managed media and giving the information direct to the public, from the soldiers on the ground.
Whereas the White House, has the gall to criticise anyone for endangering lives, when, since 2001, it has delivered death to Afghanistan from B-52s, F-16s, Apache helicopters, artillery, marines, special forces, and the latest weapons, the hellfire missiles from unmanned drones controlled from Nevada by pilots who don't even leave the ground.
The destruction wrought on that country, the dead, the maimed, the refugees freezing and starving in camps with little food or medicine already know the reality of the war in their country. The guns and bombs have been directed at them for long enough. The censorship has been directed at the 'civilised Western audience', mostly those whose taxes pay for the war, whose loved ones are in uniform over there, or in the case of Ireland, a much less onerous, but shameful burden, who turn a blind eye while our government surrenders and airport to the transport of troops and weapons to Afghanistan, while our taxes pay for the Air Traffic Control Fees and the security for these flights.
These reports of incidents between the NATO/ISAF forces, Official Afghan forces, Taliban, other insurgents and of course the unfortunate local civilians do not paint a pretty picture, and of course are subject to bias if the reporting units wish to cover up their own errors, perhaps reckless targeting when under pressure, perhaps occasionally malice, motivated by revenge or just being fed up at being stuck in a country whose national motto might as well be "there is no welcome for foreign troops"
It's a long way short of the full picture, but surely a lot more honest than asking a career general to report to Congress, knowing full well he will not contradict his commander-in-chief or secretary of defense.
By publishing these reports, Wikileaks is much more likely to be saving lives than endangering them. By letting it be known that atrocities may be leaked, it may reduce the chances of them occurring, but more importantly, by exposing just how awful the situation is, it may help to bring the tipping point of public opinion that bit closer, and force an end to this war.
Hawks still bitch and moan about the 'media' and the 'public' losing them the Vietnam War. They don't get the reality. The public is paying for it, suffering for it, and if they think that it's a futile war, if it's immoral and that the 'hearts and minds' of the the citizens under fire are lost, then the American Public has every right to demand that the senseless killing must stop, and a new solution must be found.
If the power politics were done away with, and the quest for control of pipelines and other resources were dropped in favour of truly making America safer, and improving Afghan life, it would be cheaper to life the Afghans out of despair, than to keep shooting and bombing to prop up the corrupt Kabul regime, try to stamp out any resistance, and control key territory against a very xenophobic population.
I once read that the cost of paying Afghan farmers to switch crop production away from opium, to anything else, (or to divert the opium to medicinal uses) would have been far less than the cost of a single days bombing during the original 2001 air raids on Afghanistan, which saw B-52s drop massive amounts of bombs in a few weeks.
But that of course would break the alliance with the drug peddling warlords of the Northern Alliance, some of whom are members of parliament in Kabul.
No comments:
Post a Comment