Electricity is the new Government in a Box™
Michael Cohen ups the ante by giving an even more depressing analysis of US policy towards Afghanistan than he did yesterday. Today’s installment is the military’s new thought that electricity in Kandahar is the solution to getting the people of that city to side with the Afghan government over the Taliban (it’s unclear whether this is a complement to or a substitute for Government in a Box™). The money quote:
The top NATO commander in southern Afghanistan, British Maj. Gen. Nick Carter, said increasing power in the city will produce a ‘head-turning moment’ among residents and will lead them to rally behind the Afghan government.
Cohen is skeptical, noting a contradiction (surprise!) in US policy:
At the same time that NATO view increasing power in the city as a “head-turning moment” it is steadfastly ignoring the fact that according to the US Army’s own public opinion surveys Kandaharis are almost unanimously opposed to NATO military intervention in their city. Do NATO and US military officials truly believe that providing electricity to Kandahar will serve to outweigh the negative consequences of increased violence that comes from our presence there? How does any increased support for NATO and the Karzai government not get completely reversed if against the wishes of local Afghans we intervene military and kill more civilians?
Cohen has some stiff competition in the pessimism about Afghanistan department. I think that Martine van Bijlert at the Afghanistan Analysis Network actually beats him in this round:
Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan is still based on the idea that many Afghans are “sitting on a fence” wondering which side they will support: the government or the insurgency. It was never a very good analogy, as most people are not really in a position to choose; they move with the currents, they duck when they can, and they fight when pushed too hard. But in Kandahar, listening, it seemed we are far beyond that now. There is increasingly no fence, no two sides. What remains is anger, over opportunities lost, trust betrayed and a country wrecked where it could have been alright.
I have returned from Kandahar shaken. Not because of the blasts and the warnings and the feelings of apprehension, but because of how dark the future looks when I listen to what people have to say. I fear that all the shiny plans will do very little to change that.
Come on Martine, why all the drama? Do you really believe that the Taliban can survive the onslaught of electricity and Government in a Box™?
Leave a comment
Sign up for our mailing list
Posts by Region
Posts by Topic
Recent Comments
Archives
- February 2012 (5)
- January 2012 (13)
- December 2011 (10)
- November 2011 (14)
- October 2011 (19)
- September 2011 (25)
- August 2011 (10)
- July 2011 (16)
- June 2011 (14)
- May 2011 (14)
- April 2011 (16)
- March 2011 (20)
- February 2011 (15)
- January 2011 (24)
- December 2010 (16)
- November 2010 (24)
- October 2010 (27)
- September 2010 (17)
- August 2010 (42)
- July 2010 (40)
- June 2010 (65)
- May 2010 (72)
- April 2010 (38)
- March 2010 (18)
- February 2010 (32)
- January 2010 (46)
- December 2009 (45)
- November 2009 (38)
- October 2009 (15)
- September 2009 (24)
- August 2009 (11)
- February 2009 (1)
Who we like
- AfPak Channel
- CIPE Blog
- Countries at the Crossroads
- Cyrus Samii
- Democracy Arsenal
- Democracy Dialogue
- Democracy Digest
- Democracy Resource Center
- EITI Blog
- ElectionGuide.org
- Fruits and Votes
- Global Voices Online
- One Blog
- Open Budgets Blog
- Open Democracy
- Policy and Power
- Progressive Realist
- Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Blogs
- Space for Transparency
- The Coming Prosperity
- The Democratic Piece
- The International Jurist
- The Kaufmann Governance Post
- United Nations Democracy Fund
- Zunia.org



