Archive for August, 2008

Humanizing Iran to Prevent Another War on the Eve of the DNC

Sunday, August 24th, 2008

I have been working on editing my book CALLED TO SERVE these past several weeks; hence fewer posts.  I attended the extraordinary one woman play, “No Background Music” at the Springfield Armory two weeks ago and could not resist the temptation to add one more interview to my project with the nurse, Penny Rock, whose experiences in ’67-’68 were the basis for the performance.  I journeyed to Stockbridge, MA where she was staying at the Red Lion Inn and conducted one of the most moving interviews of the close to 60 I have participated in.  Penny’s stories humanized the Vietnam War by consistently demonstrating how each of the men she took care of was so much more than the uniform or the supposed cause for which he was “in country”.  She also spoke with great humility about her encounters with Viet Cong people with whom she worked.  My friend, Lola, the first person to witness one of these intense interviews with me, and I were able to experience the depth of commitment and integrity that Penny brought to her work as her words brought her back to those days and those men.  It was overpowering.

Then this morning I was browsing www.commondreams.org and found a story that is also about humanizing a place and a people, but this time in the hopes of avoiding yet another misbegotten war.  It is about a photo exhibit focused on the culture of Iran.  Some of the bellicose talk of Mr. Obama and others about our possibly having to invade either Pakistan or Iran to eradicate terrorist cells has inspired Tom Loughlin to take his slide show of Iranians living their lives to the Democratic National Convention.  If only someone had done that with Bush and Co. and Iraq, but there was such a frantic rush to war that such efforts would most likely have been futile.  Maybe this time, especially after witnessing 5 years of horrific results from the U.S. invasion, there is hope for us to see that when we look at these photos we see, as the Rumi poem, which is the basis for the title of the show,  PICTURES OF YOU, says: No matter how I see myself, I’m nothing.
Anything I am entirely is you.

Mr. Future President: This is Iran
by Deena Guzder

As the hawkish debate on the “Iran Question” continues to possess Washington, most Americans’ exposure to the country is limited to photos of a bespectacled, bearded Supreme Leader and an unshaven, uncouth firebrand of a President. But one American, Tom Loughlin, is adamant that the next President of American knows that Iran is a vibrant society of millions of people.

Loughlin, an American-born lawyer-turned-photographer, has visited Iran three times to capture Iranian life for his installation, “Pictures of you: Images of Iran.” Photos of sepia-eyed young women, downy-haired scholars, and dimpled-cheeked adolescents are part of Loughlin’s innovative effort to humanize “the other,” the Iranian people.

This week, Loughlin is taking his exhibit to the Democratic National Convention in Denver in hopes that presidental contender Barack Obama makes eye contact with a Iranian day laborer with a shy smile, a Iranian girl wistfully playing with her silk scarf, and Iranian professor with gentle eyes and a iridescently white beard. “I want all Americans to have a chance to come face-to-face with their Iranian counterparts, and I want to document Americans’ responses to the encounter,” says Loughlin whose steel-blue eyes glisten with purpose. Loughlin’s dynamic exhibit consists of an interactive 3-D still movie of photographs with sound and light that is displayed in a 26-foot-high octagonal dome, a dome which symbolizes openness and warmth in Persian culture.

For Loughlin, the exhibit should illicit a visceral response from Americans, including Barack Obama, and make them grapple with their preconceptions.

“Many Americans have strong feelings and intuitions about Iran,” Loughlin notes, “and many of their ideas have developed in an environment tainted by ignorance and suspicion . . . I hope that the show will ultimately transcend the issue of Iranian/American relations. It will illustrate how Americans exercise their freedoms and privileges – including the privilege to remain uninformed about other nations and cultures without suffering any significant consequences. We’re all made of the same flesh,” he continues, “and that somehow got lost. I want this show to make that point viscerally through the humanity of Iranian citizens and the beauty of the Persian culture.

The show is a mirror.” The name of the exhibition, “Pictures of You,” comes from a poem by Rumi:

If my head holds one thought wise and clear, it’s you.
Poor as I am, what I hold dear is you.

- (Rumi’s Kolliyaat-e Shams-e Tabrizi)

Loughlin hopes that Americans will confront their fear of “the other” and the photos of ordinary Iranians will encourage them to look more openly at other nations and cultures. And, ultimately, Loughlin hopes his exhibit will dissuade warmongering by American policymakers.

Although Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is far less of a saber-rattler than John McCain, Obama has suggested that the United States one day might have to launch surgical missile strikes into Iran and Pakistan to keep extremists from getting control of nuclear bombs. The Bush Administration’s flawed reliance on violence has no place at the Democratic National Convention and Americans must demand to know how presidential candidates, especially ones who allegedly represent “hope” and “change,” will promote a better future for both Americans and Iranians. Loughlin is confident that recognizing the extraordinary commonality of the human experience is the first step in a new direction for a new America.

Loughlin’s work can be viewed at http://www.picturesofyouiran.com

A VIETNAM WAR NURSE’S STORY – NO BACKGROUND MUSIC

Tuesday, August 5th, 2008

I received notice about a very important play being performed this upcoming weekend in Springfield.  Here’s the information.  I hope some of you can attend.  Both the play itself – all about the experiences of Penny Rock – and the talkback with Vietnam War veterans will no doubt be very moving.

NO BACKGROUND
MUSIC

A powerful play based on personal
experiences of Vietnam

4 Free Performances -Aug. 8, 9,10 &11

Exactly 40 years ago, Army Nurse
Penny Rock cared for soldiers at the
front lines. This original, one-act play
is her story.

Written and performed by Normi Noel,
these performances are followed by
45-minute Talkbacks with the author,
nurse, and Vietnam veterans.

Sponsored by: Springfield Armory
National Historic Site
Performances:
Friday August 8 7:30 PM
Saturday August 9 7:30 PM
Sunday August 10 2:00 PM
Monday August 11 2:00 PM
Seating is limited.
To reserve contact spotlightinc@verizon.net
or 413-737-8474.
Springfield
Cultural Council

Women in the Military Deserve So Much Better Treatment!

Monday, August 4th, 2008

I have posted before about the absolutely unacceptable rate – 1 in 3 – of sexual assault in the American military, but insult has been heaped upon injury as the Defense Department is apparently covering up these crimes by refusing to allow the woman in charge of its SEXUAL ASSAULT AND PREVENTION RESPONSE OFFICE to testify in Congress this Thursday.  That 12% of the victims are male is additionally upsetting and that a third of the actual assaults go unreported is indicative of the culture of fear and humiliation that the military  encourages with its responses.

This time I am also including the responses the article about this gross injustice has engendered on www.commondreams.org where it appeared today, since they tell a story as well.  Several deal with the reality of young women (and men) deciding whether to join a military that puts their safety in jeopardy from their fellow servicemen and then does not enable them to seek redress.  Frightening and disturbing and one has to wonder whether such awful realities will change under an Obama presidency.  But there, too, there is cause for outrage as the latest polls show the McCain campaign team’s strategy of appealing to the worst instincts in the electorate this past week – depicting Obama as yet another mindless celebrity (a la Ms. Hilton and Ms. Spears, both of whom merit not our attention, but our sympathy as unwitting victims of our crazed culture) seeking attention and as being an ego-maniac who the McCain folks compare to Moses – worked and he is back neck and neck with his Democratic rival.  When I hear such news items I have to work hard not to feel tremendous frustration and doubt about our collective future.  If the article that follows moves you, please consider letting Congresspeople know that you are outraged at the silencing of yet another woman who is poised to speak truth to power.  And let’s be thankful that Ann Wright suffers neither fools or cover-ups lightly!

Sexual Assault in the Military: A DoD Cover-Up?

by Ann Wright

There was quite a struggle in Congress this week. The Department of Defense refused to allow the senior civilian in charge of its Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO) to testify in Thursday’s hearing on sexual assault in the military. Rep. John Tierney, chair of the House Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, angrily dismissed Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Michael Dominguez from the hearing when Dominguez said that he, the DoD chief of legislative affairs and the chief of public affairs, had ordered Dr. Kaye Whitley, chief of SAPRO, to refuse to honor the subpoena issued by the subcommittee for her appearance.

Full committee Chairman Henry Waxman called the DoD’s decision to prevent Whitley from testifying “ridiculous and indicating DoD is covering something up.” It could also place Whitley in contempt of Congress. Rep. Christopher Shays said the DoD’s decision was “foolish.”

One of the questions that would have been put to Whitley was why DoD had taken three years to name a 15-person civilian task force to look into allegations of sexual assault of military personnel. The panel was finally named early in 2008 but has yet to meet. She would have also been queried on the SAPRO program’s failure to require key information from the military in order to evaluate the effectiveness of sexual assault prevention and response programs.

I spoke with Dr. Whitley in April 2007 and had asked for an appointment to bring to her office four military women who had been sexually assaulted and wanted to tell her in what ways the DoD programs to prevent sexual assault were not working. Whitley declined, saying she worked at the policy level, and steered me to the chief of the Army sexual assault program. I called the Army program’s chief, who initially said she would talk to our group. However, when I mentioned that the mother of Army Spc. Suzanne Swift, who had been raped in Iraq, would be with us, she said she could not meet with anyone involved with an ongoing case. I replied that Swift’s case was closed as far as the Army was concerned. Her rapist had not been prosecuted, and Swift ended up with a court-martial and 30 days of jail time because she had gone AWOL for her own protection when the Army would not move her out of the unit to which both she and her rapist were still assigned. In view of the fact that the Army chief of prevention of sexual assault refused to meet with any of the four women who had suggestions on how to improve prevention and reporting of sexual assault and rape, I’m not surprised that the DoD snubbed Congress over the same issue.

Rep. Elijah Cummings joined Rep. Waxman in speaking of cover-ups. Cummings raised the cases of military women who had been sexually assaulted before dying in “non-combat incidents.” He spoke specifically about Army Pfc. LaVena Johnson, who was found beaten and dead of a gunshot wound at Balad Air Base, Iraq, in a burning tent owned by the contractor KBR. Her parents suspected that Johnson had been murdered and that the homicide was being covered up by the Army, which deemed the death a suicide. Cummings also spoke of Army Pfc. Tina Priest, who was raped at Taji, Iraq, and found dead 10 days later of a gunshot wound. After her family had measurements taken of her arms and of the angle of the bullet and found that she could not have pulled the trigger of her M-16 with her finger, the Army said she had pulled the trigger by using her toe. Cummings asked Lt. Gen. Michael Rochelle, chief of U.S. Army personnel, for assistance in getting all the documents the Army had on Johnson’s death. Additionally, four House members have asked for congressional hearings on the deaths of military personnel who have been classified as suicides, among them LaVena Johnson.

The fireworks with DoD followed the dramatic testimony of Mary Lauterbach, the mother of murdered pregnant Marine Lance Cpl. Maria Lauterbach, who had been raped in May 2007 at Camp Lejeune, N.C. Accused in the case is Marine Cpl. Cesar Laurean. After the rape, several protective orders were issued to keep Laurean away from his victim. The burned body of Lauterbach and her unborn baby were found in a shallow grave in the backyard of Laurean’s home in January 2008. Laurean fled to Mexico, where he was subsequently apprehended, and he now is awaiting extradition to the United States to stand trial. Lauterbach’s mother explained in great detail the warning signs that Laurean was a danger to her daughter and claimed that all these signs were ignored by the Marine Corps.

Two other military women have been murdered near military bases in North Carolina in the past two months.

Red Cross employee Ingrid Torres told the subcommittee of being raped at Kunsan Air Base in South Korea by an Air Force flight doctor. She spoke of the difficulty she had obtaining medical and emotional treatment from the facility where the doctor still worked, and later from military facilities in other parts of the world where she was assigned.

Rep. Jane Harman cited Veterans Administration statistics that one in three women in the military has been sexually assaulted. She said the prosecution rate of those accused of raping fellow military service members is abysmally low. Of the 2,212 reported rapes in the military in 2007, only 8 percent of the cases ended in court-martial of the perpetrator, while the rate of prosecution in civilian courts is 40 percent.

Lt. Gen. Rochelle, the Army chief of personnel, reported the little known statistic that 12 percent of reported rapes in the military are of male military personnel.

Rep. Shays said he had no confidence in DoD or the military services and their policies of prevention of sexual assault, and asked how recruiting will fare when young women learn that one in three women is sexually assaulted and when young men find out that one in 10 men is raped while in the military.

Brenda Farrell, director of the Government Accountability Office, said that getting data on rape from the military services is difficult because there are no common definitions of terms for the services to use in such cases.

Farrell said the GAO believes rates of sexual assault currently used by DoD are low because many military personnel do not want to report what happened and suffer the gossip, harassment and stigma prevalent in units when confidential reporting is compromised. In a survey of 3,757 persons on 14 military installations, 103 said they had been sexually assaulted in the past year and had reported it, while 52 others said they did not report the sexual assault.

Several Congress members spoke of lack of leadership and accountability in stopping sexual assault. The same day as the sexual assault hearing, the Navy relieved two senior officers of the USS George Washington because of the injury to 23 sailors and $70 million in damage to the ship caused by a smoking violation. Imagine if commanders in units where rape occurred were relieved of command for the harmful actions of their subordinates. That would send a signal of zero tolerance of sexual assault, whereas in the current climate victims are intimidated and alleged perpetrators are given administrative punishment instead of court-martial.

Sexual violence against both female and male military personnel must stop. Let Congress know of your concern about sexual assault in our military. Call or e-mail members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees and members of the Oversight and Government Reform committees.

Ann Wright is a retired Army Reserve colonel and a 29-year veteran of the Army and Army Reserves. She was also a diplomat in Nicaragua, Grenada, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Afghanistan and Mongolia. She resigned from the Department of State on March 19, 2003, in opposition to the Iraq war. She is the co-author of “Dissent: Voices of Conscience” (www.voicesofconscience.com).

Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C.

14 Comments so far

  1. Rockerbabe1 August 4th, 2008 12:43 pm

    Boys will be boys! I bet none of the supervisory military officers would want their sons or daughters in the situation so many other military personnel have faced. Maybe,if the DoD would “walk in the shoes of another”, then maybe, they would take criminal assault seriously.

  2. locust August 4th, 2008 1:20 pm

    “…how recruiting will fare when young women learn that one in three women is sexually assaulted and when young men find out that one in 10 men is raped while in the military.”

    Who’s going to tell them? The military? The media?
    I haven’t seen any such information on any military tv ads. It should be mandatory, just like all the side-effect caveats at the end of drug ads.

    “You may notice adverse side-effects to military enlistment, like bleeding from rape trauma, feelings of utter helplessness and paranoia, followed by what will be described officially as your suicide.”

  3. citizenblog August 4th, 2008 1:29 pm

    When a systematic regime of torture (General Taguba’s conclusion) is left to sham military tribunals and the people ordering it not held accountable, is it any wonder that similarly criminal activities (a systematic regime of rape) within the Army is dealt with with similar disdain? Zero tolerance is the only way to make torture and sexual assault become uncommon occurrences. Better still, get rid of the military. No grey here.

    The situation is even worse for women working for private military contractors where justice seems even less likely.

    http://tinyurl.com/48jr6w

    “Rep. Jane Harman cited Veterans Administration statistics that one in three women in the military has been sexually assaulted. ”

    A statistic for Outrage!

    Letter to Congress on the way. It is becoming a full time unpaid job communicating with my representatives. I wish they would just do their job that they get paid for.

  4. grigor August 4th, 2008 1:32 pm

    My, my – Rep. Harman is concerned about such things. Harman – the warmonger neocon Democrap, yuk!

  5. Samson August 4th, 2008 1:35 pm

    Once upon a time, Congress had power and knew how to use it.

    Did anyone notice the scene in “Charlie Wilson’s War” where he wants answers on what’s going on in Pakistan, and he threatens to cut money every day from the budget until he gets it. The CIA guy is in his office by 10 am to talk to him.

    That’s how to handle this. You don’t BS around with contempt charges. Instead, they call Sec. Gates personally and say this ….

    “Every day of delay before Dr. Whitley testifies before my committee means $10 billion gets cut off the overall DoD budget.”

    Do that, and be willing to back it up, and I’d bet Dr. Whitley is there by 10 am.

  6. Ronald White August 4th, 2008 2:06 pm

    and asked how recruiting will fare when young women learn that one in three women is sexually assaulted and when young men find out that one in 10 men is raped while in the military.

    If I , a rationally-thinking female recruit surmised my possible fate when surrounded by ten , twenty , thirty…MALE “admiring eyes” who ,state-side, would be admiring spouses , girlfriends , fiances , kids… and whose punishment for “enhanced admiration” goes unpunished,unreported , I would weigh that fate against the alternative of perpetual poverty or the risk of being labelled unpatriotic and then politely shun the recruitment centres.

    As with most “diseases” the Sexual-Assault-in-the-Military syndrome is going to have to approach HIV/AIDS proportions before there is a mass movement against the military in general.

    Americans just don’t care;it’s understandable;it’s the “just say no” to socialism slip that’s showing.

    In the mean time , a lotta lt.-and-under-ladies will die.

  7. wild_watcher August 4th, 2008 3:30 pm

    typical- this committee, not unlike other committees is shut out with wonderful excuses.

    typical- the governmental systemic impotence is kept covered.

    typical- the abusers shift the blame to the victims.

    typical- justice in the courts is profaned daily.

    break the traditional. vote Nader

    wild

  8. Thomas More August 4th, 2008 3:49 pm

    Ann Wright is correct in every facet of her article.

    This is a disgrace for the service’s, but even more so for military leadership. Heads should roll and some careers should be wrecked because many senior officers forgot their prime directive. Protect theier troops. Not the service, not the officer corp and damn sure not the government.

    The DOD needs a good house cleaning anyway. Why not start now?

  9. Rebel Farmer August 4th, 2008 5:22 pm

    Citizenbolog said: “When a systematic regime of torture (General Taguba’s conclusion) is left to sham military tribunals and the people ordering it not held accountable, is it any wonder that similarly criminal activities (a systematic regime of rape) within the Army is dealt with with similar disdain? Zero tolerance is the only way to make torture and sexual assault become uncommon occurrences.”

    Exactly right! Either you have the Rule of Law or you don’t. Either officials are held accountable or they aren’t. Either the Congress does its job or it doesn’t. Pretty clear cut.

    So, as citizens we also have a job. Either we hold our elected officials accountable or we don’t. Either we speak up or we don’t. Either we vote on principle or we don’t. Pretty clear cut really.

  10. Gail August 4th, 2008 7:04 pm

    “One of the questions that would have been put to Whitley was why DoD had taken three years to name a 15-person civilian task force to look into allegations of sexual assault of military personnel.”

    Well, it probably took them 3 years to figure out how to get around these allegations and/or destroy any evidence that would convict these misfits.

  11. Thomas More August 4th, 2008 7:12 pm

    Rebel Farmer August 4th, 2008 5:22 pm &
    Citizenbolog

    “Exactly right! Either you have the Rule of Law or you don’t. Either officials are held accountable or they aren’t. Either the Congress does its job or it doesn’t. Pretty clear cut.”

    Well said!

  12. citizenblog August 4th, 2008 7:42 pm

    Citizens For Ethics and Responsibility in Washington Releases Report Honoring “Those Who Dared”

    On July 16, CREW released a report titled “Those Who Dared: 30 Officials Who Stood Up for Our Country.” Offering a more optimistic view of Washington, the report tells the tales of thirty brave individuals who have acted and spoken out against unethical and dishonorable conduct in the Bush administration. The report is the culmination of the review of hundreds of news articles, inspector general reports, and congressional reports. The impact of the individual’s actions, the risk involved, and the changes that resulted were also taken into consideration in the decision making process. Some of those included in the report, such as Glenn Fine of the Department of Justice and John Higgins at the Department of Education acted to check agency-wide corruption, misconduct, and undue political influence. Other individuals are included because of a single act of courage, like Army Specialist Joseph Darby who was responsible for turning over the picture of detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib to authorities. Other honorees include Inspector General Earl Devaney, Dr. James Hansen of NASA, and U.S. Army Major General Antonio Taguba.

    http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/33317

  13. Johnny36 August 4th, 2008 7:46 pm

    This has been going on forever. When I was a young PFC back in the 1950’s the women who were then called WACS were considered something less than trailer court trash and the fact that it continues today is a tribute to the military mind. The 4 star generals who set the pace are usually tough old birds of the paternalistic order who don’t take kindly to anyone telling them how to treat women folk; after all, its their property.

    It is slowly changing; the rhetoric has certainly changed, but when women are being raped and murdered on a regular basis it is clear that the Department of Defense is largely responsible. I few well publicized castrations would cool the ardor of these cowardly military bastards.

  14. Juliann August 4th, 2008 8:11 pm

    Years ago I said to a group of women – all of whom had children, boys and girls – that the rate of violence in this world would be greatly reduced if at birth males had one testicle removed. Anticipating anger from the mothers of boys – they surprised me by saying (to a woman) “why stop at one?” (I like millions of women had MY ovaries removed at some doctor’s whim – I didn’t know better – so don’t start with the charges of male bashing.)

    As a gender, males are dangerous to society.

AFGHANISTAN is Not the Place to Go for the Right War!

Sunday, August 3rd, 2008

The article below appeared on the website commondreams.org in the wake of both presidential candidates urging that, with the casualty toll down in Iraq, more troops and resources be committed to the War in Afghanistan. TIME MAGAZINE had a cover story about Afghanistan asking whether it could be the RIGHT WAR a couple of weeks ago. This reporter attempts to answer that question by examining what is happening in Afghanistan and what our presence there is causing to the populous and the government. He strongly urges our government to listen to the views of the Afghan people who are expressing their collective desire not to have us ratchet up the war and our occupying presence as we have woefully done in Iraq.

This is definitely going to be a significant issue in the upcoming election as well as for the next administration. I would be very interested in the views of those who read what follows:

—————————————————————————————

Afghanistan: Not a Good War

by Conn Hallinan

Every war has a story line. World War I was “the war to end all wars.” World War II was “the war to defeat fascism.”

Iraq was sold as a war to halt weapons of mass destruction; then to overthrow Saddam Hussein, then to build democracy. In the end it was a fabrication built on a falsehood and anchored in a fraud.

But Afghanistan is the “good war,” aimed at “those who attacked us,” in the words of columnist Frank Rich. It is “the war of necessity,” asserts the New York Times, to roll back the “power of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.”

Barack Obama is making the distinction between the “bad war” in Iraq and the “good war” in Afghanistan a centerpiece of his run for the presidency. He proposes ending the war in Iraq and redeploying U.S. military forces in order “to finish the job in Afghanistan.”

Virtually no one in the United States or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) calls for negotiating with the Taliban. Even the New York Times editorializes that those who want to talk “have deluded themselves.”

But the Taliban government did not attack the United States. Our old ally, Osama bin Laden, did. Al-Qaeda and the Taliban are not the same organization (if one can really call al-Qaeda an “organization”), and no one seems to be listening to the Afghans.

We should be.

What Afghans Say

A recent poll of Afghan sentiment found that, while the majority dislikes the Taliban, 74% want negotiations and 54% would support a coalition government that included the Taliban.

This poll reflects a deeply divided country where most people are sitting on the fence and waiting for the final outcome of the war. Forty percent think the current government of Hamid Karzai, allied with the United States and NATO, will prevail, 19% say the Taliban, and 40% say it is “too early to say.”

There is also strong ambivalence about the presence of foreign troops. Only 14% want them out now, but 52% want them out within three to five years. In short, the Afghans don’t want a war to the finish.

They also have a far more nuanced view of the Taliban and al-Qaeda. While the majority oppose both groups -13% support the Taliban and 19% al-Qaeda – only 29% see the former organization as “a united political force.”

But that view doesn’t fit the West’s story line of the enemy as a tightly disciplined band of fanatics.

Whither the Taliban

In fact, the Taliban appears to be evolving from a creation of the U.S., Saudi Arabian, and Pakistani intelligence agencies during Afghanistan’s war with the Soviet Union, to a polyglot collection of dedicated Islamists to nationalists. Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar told the Agence France Presse early this year, “We’re fighting to free our country. We are not a threat to the world.”

Those are words that should give Obama, The New York Times, and NATO pause.

The initial invasion in 2001 was easy because the Taliban had alienated itself from the vast majority of Afghans. But the weight of occupation, and the rising number of civilian deaths, is shifting the resistance toward a war of national liberation.

No foreign power has ever won that battle in Afghanistan.

War Gone Bad

There is no mystery as to why things have gone increasingly badly for the United States and its allies.

As the United States steps up its air war, civilian casualties have climbed steadily over the past two years. Nearly 700 were killed in the first three months of 2008, a major increase over last year. In a recent incident, 47 members of a wedding party were killed in Helmand Province. In a society where clan, tribe, and blood feuds are a part of daily life, that single act sowed a generation of enmity.

Anatol Lieven, a professor of war at King’s College London, says that a major impetus behind the growing resistance is anger over the death of family members and neighbors.

Lieven says it is as if Afghanistan is “becoming a sort of surreal hunting estate, in which the U.S. and NATO breed the very terrorists they then track down.”

Once a population turns against an occupation (or just decides to stay neutral), there are few places in the world where an occupier can win. Afghanistan, with its enormous size and daunting geography, is certainly not one of them.

Writing in Der Spiegel, Ullrich Fichter says that glancing at a map in the International Security Assistance Force’s (ISAF) headquarters outside Kandahar could give one the impression that Afghanistan is under control. “Colorful little flags identify the NATO troops presence throughout the country,” Germans in the northeast, Americans in the east, Italians in the West, British and Canadians in the south, with flags from Turkey, the Netherlands, Spain, Lithuania, Australia and Sweden scattered between.

“But the flags are an illusion,” he says.

The UN considers one third of the country “inaccessible,” and almost half, “high risk.” The number of roadside bombs has increased fivefold over 2004, and the number of armed attacks has jumped by a factor of 10. In the first three months of 2008, attacks around Kabul have surged by 70%. The current national government has little presence outside its capital. President Karzai is routinely referred to as “the mayor of Kabul.”

According to Der Spiegel, the Taliban are moving north toward Kunduz, just as they did in 1994 when they broke out of their base in Kandahar and started their drive to take over the country. The Asia Times says the insurgents’ strategy is to cut NATO’s supply lines from Pakistan and establish a “strategic corridor” from the border to Kabul.

The United States and NATO currently have about 60,000 troops in Afghanistan. But many NATO troops are primarily concerned with rebuilding and development – the story that was sold to the European public to get them to support the war – and only secondarily with war fighting.

The Afghan army adds about 70,000 to that number, but only two brigades and one headquarters unit are considered capable of operating on their own.

According to U.S. counter insurgency doctrine, however, Afghanistan would require at least 400,000 troops to even have a chance of “winning” the war. Adding another 10,000 U.S. troops will have virtually no effect.

Afghanistan and the Elections

As the situation continues to deteriorate, some voices, including those of the Karzai government and both U.S. presidential candidates, advocate expanding the war into Pakistan in a repeat of the invasions of Laos and Cambodia, when the Vietnam War began spinning out of control. Both those invasions were not only a disaster for the invaders. They also led directly to the genocide in Cambodia.

By any measure, a military “victory” in Afghanistan is simply not possible. The only viable alternative is to begin direct negotiations with the Taliban, and to draw in regional powers with a stake in the outcome: Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, China, and India.

But to do so will require abandoning our “story” about the Afghan conflict as a “good war.” In this new millennium, there are no good wars.

Conn Hallinan is a Foreign Policy In Focus columnist.

Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies