Obama and the Afghan elections
So the Afghan elections are "disputed." How shocking. A government handpicked from former exiles by an occupying force intent on raping the country for resources decided to rig an election. What on earth is the world coming to?
Hmm, perhaps unattractive as my cynicism is, it beats my sarcasm. Frankly, when I first heard the news, I figured the US government rigged the election on behalf of its puppets. I also assumed they rigged the elections the first time around, or at the very least most Afghans who were clear that Karzai was a foreign puppet were also quite clear that the elections were window-dressing, and didn't participate. I've never considered this government terribly legitimate, and due to the ongoing strife it seems like a lot of Afghanistan is of the same opinion (whether one would give much legitimacy to the previous government, or indeed any government, is another matter). In the early stages, it seemed the US was supporting Karzai, but that quickly moved to wanting to merely establish a legitimate government, that would stand up to international scrutiny while bowing to the demands of American capital. Now Obama has pulled a very strange maneuver in refusing to send more troops to Afghanistan until the matter is settled.
I was a bit perplexed at first by this, until I realised the difference between Bush and Obama. Bush would gleefully send in the guns to sway the electoral results. Obama would rather not get his hands dirty. After recent flare-ups in Mexico, Kenya, and Iran over disputed elections, civil wars between rival political juntas are looking particularly unattractive. Certainly, the Americans would like Karzai to win, preferably with as little fuss as possible. The American ruling class is already placing their bets. But really, I think Time has it right when they point out that the government doesn't actually make much of a difference to politics in Afghanistan. The job of the Afghan government is to serve the Americans. They can't very well refuse, because the Americans are providing the muscle for the government to operate. Really, the best government is a weak government, dressed up in all of the language of liberal capitalists (if you click one link today, click that one).
So Obama is waiting until the dust settles. The cronies of US Imperialism can argue over the scraps, divide up the spoils in any way they like (what do you think "unity government" means?), as long as they settle their disputes. This is what the administration means when it says it wants a partner worth working with: a government that is compliant and that deflects criticisms that the war is an Imperialist war, at least to the satisfaction of the mainstream media (we disgruntled bloggers don't add up to much).
It's actually quite a dangerous game Obama is playing. Delaying troop deployments strengthens anti-government and anti-American forces, but he needs that time to bully the electoral contenders into preparing for business as usual. I suspect he'll get his way. It makes no real difference, though: the war in Afghanistan will drag on for years to come. Contrary to the hopes of the Western elite, increasing military deployments will not end the insurgency any more than it worked in Iraq or Vietnam. I could go on, but that's really another article, and I don't like doing research...
Hmm, perhaps unattractive as my cynicism is, it beats my sarcasm. Frankly, when I first heard the news, I figured the US government rigged the election on behalf of its puppets. I also assumed they rigged the elections the first time around, or at the very least most Afghans who were clear that Karzai was a foreign puppet were also quite clear that the elections were window-dressing, and didn't participate. I've never considered this government terribly legitimate, and due to the ongoing strife it seems like a lot of Afghanistan is of the same opinion (whether one would give much legitimacy to the previous government, or indeed any government, is another matter). In the early stages, it seemed the US was supporting Karzai, but that quickly moved to wanting to merely establish a legitimate government, that would stand up to international scrutiny while bowing to the demands of American capital. Now Obama has pulled a very strange maneuver in refusing to send more troops to Afghanistan until the matter is settled.
I was a bit perplexed at first by this, until I realised the difference between Bush and Obama. Bush would gleefully send in the guns to sway the electoral results. Obama would rather not get his hands dirty. After recent flare-ups in Mexico, Kenya, and Iran over disputed elections, civil wars between rival political juntas are looking particularly unattractive. Certainly, the Americans would like Karzai to win, preferably with as little fuss as possible. The American ruling class is already placing their bets. But really, I think Time has it right when they point out that the government doesn't actually make much of a difference to politics in Afghanistan. The job of the Afghan government is to serve the Americans. They can't very well refuse, because the Americans are providing the muscle for the government to operate. Really, the best government is a weak government, dressed up in all of the language of liberal capitalists (if you click one link today, click that one).
So Obama is waiting until the dust settles. The cronies of US Imperialism can argue over the scraps, divide up the spoils in any way they like (what do you think "unity government" means?), as long as they settle their disputes. This is what the administration means when it says it wants a partner worth working with: a government that is compliant and that deflects criticisms that the war is an Imperialist war, at least to the satisfaction of the mainstream media (we disgruntled bloggers don't add up to much).
It's actually quite a dangerous game Obama is playing. Delaying troop deployments strengthens anti-government and anti-American forces, but he needs that time to bully the electoral contenders into preparing for business as usual. I suspect he'll get his way. It makes no real difference, though: the war in Afghanistan will drag on for years to come. Contrary to the hopes of the Western elite, increasing military deployments will not end the insurgency any more than it worked in Iraq or Vietnam. I could go on, but that's really another article, and I don't like doing research...