The Roots of Some Failures in Kabul

[When reading what follows, bear in mind that I do not write from first hand knowledge, or even third-hand knowledge.  Read, for instance, https://www.u4.no/publications/corruption-in-afghanistan-and-the-role-of-development-assistance]

I read a very interesting article that arrived in my mailbox, courtesy of one of the newspapers, which I wanted to disseminate to our readers, but I have inadvertently deleted it.  But let's stumble through the main idea anyway.

The article was written by a political correspondent stationed in Afghanistan, who was so stunned by what she was hearing from rural Afghanis, that she quit her job, and moved to rural Afghanistan, to try and help the people there, especially the women.  She was recounting what she discovered when talking to these people.

The main thing is this: an enormous proportion of the money sent to Afghanistan, for the relief of the worst-off members of the population, was essentially stolen.  Of course, we in the US tend to expect this; we throw up our hands, what can we do when the the country is fighting guerilla gangsters?  As the story continues, we learn that the very people the US had installed as the civilian government in Kabul were the worst sort of racketeers.  Much of the food and supplies that were intended for the people, the troops, the hospitals etc, were actually channeled away---sometimes in the dead of night, sometimes in broad daylight---into the distant compounds of the so-called warlords.  A lot of the actual US dollars that were earmarked for the war effort, found their way into the bank accounts of terrorist leaders hunkered down in Pakistan.

As an aside: the groundwork for systematic, built-in corruption in Afghanistan was laid decades ago by the narcotics trade.

In fact, we have now learned that the so-called US ally, Pakistan, is in fact the location of a lot of insurgent hideouts, and many of these fellows came swarming into Afghanistan the second the US began to pull out.  (Recall that Bin Laden was hiding in Pakistan when the Seals got him.)

Let's take a slightly longer view of this problem.
When the US, in the middle of a war, or at any time, wants to support the institutions of a foreign country, it seems to take it as inevitable that the people it deals with are corrupt.  Usually this attitude is justified; the bureaucrats in foreign governments are usually either corrupt, or easily corruptible.  (Trump assumed that the US government was no different, but he was not entirely right about that.)  So the Pentagon budgets (verb)---I suppose---a certain amount of money to spend on corruption.  (This same problem crops up when the US establishes charities to help hardship in foreign lands.  A lot of the money raised in the US for the charities go to, I think, paying out bribes.  I don't know this for certain, and I'd like to be proved wrong.  In any case, a large proportion of the funds go to maintain the American---and even local---administrators and managers of these funds in the style to which they're accustomed.)

To conclude, the conservatives in Congress are often eager to prosecute wars abroad, for various reasons, chiefly to bolster our tendency to put the USA forward as a global policeman.  Even now, the conservatives are furious that the US is in the process of withdrawing from Afghanistan.  (The Democrats are not much better; they have been no less enthusiastic about some of these wars.)  The 'nice' thing about these wars is that they help out the arms industry, which is friendly towards conservative congressmen and senators.  However, as the war winds down, the vast numbers of Afghan citizens whom we had to depend on in Kabul: translators, drivers, orderlies, lawyers, what have you, are petitioning to be taken into the USA as refugees.  (Of course they should; for them to remain would be to get killed at the drop of a hat.)  But the Conservatives see this as just immigration in another guise, and can be expected to resist these initiatives.

Many political wonks are of the opinion that we should have settled on a permanent presence in Kabul (or somewhere in Afghanistan) to keep a lid on "our interests" there, rather than completely cut and run.  This would entail a constant stream of bribes to keep the local Afghanis happy, and would probably end up with a stream of US-origin firearms being trickled out to insurgent groups based in Pakistan, etc.  This would be "foreign aid" of the worst kind.

Arch