Monk

Rick Perlstein’s “Nixonland” affords us this shuddering glimpse into the Nixon White House, as the president and his men struggle with the Vietnam War, which has become our prototype for being stuck in a quagmire and which demonstrated that the Americans can be bloodied and beaten, even by Third World powers. They are discussing another wave of escalation against the north:

Connally urged him, "Don't worry about killing civilians. Go ahead and kill 'em. People think you are now. So go ahead and give 'em some."

"That's right, " concurred the president.

"There's pictures on the news of dead bodies every night," chimed in Haldeman. "A dead body is a dead body. Nobody knows whose bodies they are or who killed them."

I guess this was before Republicans came up with the concept of compassionate conservatism. In all fairness, Americans had been dying in that war for about ten years with no good end in sight, and there is no question about the totalitarian brutality of the enemy. However, the problem in Vietnam was the problem that we now have in Afghanistan, more than thirty years later: what are we fighting for?

All sweet souls of noble understanding want to see the fruits of democracy and freedom take root wherever the light of reason can shine, of course, but such grand ideals must achieve some recognizable form through real, man-run institutions, by a government, and therein lies the rub - along with all the corruption and all the betrayals and all that human misery, that familiar trail of broken dreams.

The United States backed a number of governments in Saigon, but there was no true democratic leadership, but only corrupt gangs taking advantage of the American need to have a native government to be fighting behind. And that is how things look with Afghanistan today and the Karzai government.

A key difference with Afghanistan, though, is the nature of the threat. Even if we cannot get a liberal republic, there is something to be said for having some forward bases in a region of the world that spawns terrorist cells, the country that was the original home of al-Qaida. It makes it easier to swat those cells down. It also helps to have a footprint in that region in the dread event that another massive invasion is required in some grimmer future.

Obama’s quandary is how to maintain a positive presence with the least pain in that alien, unwelcoming land. I am sure he did not want to be another president ceaselessly bleeding troops in a quagmire not of his making. Iraq is enough pain for any Administration. But it can all seem like one big swamp of illiberal, murderous fanaticism. Still, it is important to maintain your humane side, and not sink into the nihilistic doldrums of the Nixon Administration, not that I think we really have to worry about that with Barack Obama, who perhaps would have made a better pastor than a president.

♠
For many Afghans, sharia law is central. Others welcome freedom from torture, but not free media or freedom of religion; majority rule, but not minority rights; full employment, but not free-market reforms. “Warlords” retain considerable power. Millions believe that alcohol should be forbidden and apostates killed, that women should be allowed in public only in burqas. Many Pusthu clearly prefer the Taliban to foreign troops.

... It is not only politicians who misrepresent the facts. Nonprofit groups endorse the fashionable jargon of state-building and civil society, partly to win grants. Military officers are reluctant to admit their mission is impossible. Journalists were initially surprisingly optimistic about transforming Afghanistan. No one wants to seem to endorse a status quo dominated by the Taliban and drugs. Humankind cannot bear very much reality, particularly in Afghanistan.

-- Rory Stewart for The New York Times

The situation can really look impossible, no? The temptation is just to leave them to their dysfunction, while making sure that they do not strike out at the West and Israel. But that is the problem. Their dysfunction is such that they have to strike out for all their poverty and stagnation, which are the bitter fruits of their fundamentalist religion, where apostates are killed, and there are no minority rights, and there are no rational economic markets. It is easier to blame Israel and the Jews, as well as the Great Satan America and the West. It is harder to be free.

One thinks of that poem that Friedman published yesterday...

xXx

♠
The Taliban have a new star:

If Osama bin Laden likes being in the global spotlight, he's likely a bit depressed in his hideout these days. The leader of the al-Qaida terrorist organization hasn't made an appearance on the evening news for quite some time. What's more, the Taliban no longer need bin Laden as a figurehead. Western intelligence agencies warn that the Taliban now have "their own star" in their struggle against Western soldiers and the Afghan government of President Hamid Karzai. The new nightmare from the Hindu Kush Mountains is called Mullah Dadullah. He sports a pitch black beard, always wears a military jacket and these days, he is omnipresent in the media.

He is the one planning a big spring offensive in Afghanistan with 6,000 volunteers to carry out suicide attacks, with the recent attempt on Vice President Cheney's life being a little teaser for the main performance to come. Mullah Dadullah also has his own line of DVDs out, complete with live beheadings! So, you can see that he is still a traditionalist.


(Source: Matthias Gebauer for Der Spiegel)

xXx