As the situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan worsens, the leaders of these two Asian nations were in Washington this week meeting with President Obama and his foreign policy advisors; after which the President gave a speech that began with apologies for the latest civilian deaths by aerial assault.

If it seems we’re getting nowhere in this battle, the reason is we are attempting to use military force to coerce a political/economic solution, using corrupt politicians who are mostly anxious to reap American dollars.

Encouraging Pakistan to attack Swat valley insurgents may seem like a good idea to the military-minded, which includes everyone on the US side of the equation, but forcing Pashtuns to attack Pashtuns won’t get the job done.

A military mindset accompanies every move the Obama team makes. America obviously depends far too much on the military, and the advice the military hands out.

If the peasantry of remote western Pakistan truly represents a threat to America, does it not also represent a threat to China? To Russia? To India?  Are these nations preparing to spread a king’s ransom throughout the region? Or are they grinning from ear to ear as they watch President Obama lay the foundation for years of military folly?

People close to the situation argue that the Taliban are despised by majorities in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. But, as history clearly shows, people there are first and foremost against foreign troops, foreign meddling, and foreign occupation. Statistics clearly show that increases in NATO forces have been accompanied by increases in violence.  Are Obama, Gates, Clinton, Petraeus and Jones simply going to ignore these statistics?

Opium poppies have been a cash crop in Afghanistan for centuries. Putting farmers out of business, at a time when a corrupted government has nothing to offer by way of replacement, won’t win hearts and minds.

Building secure oil and gas pipelines through these troubled regions might seem like good geopolitics, but at what cost? Is America not capable of using its natural resources, including the ingenuity of its people, to set out in a better direction? You know, ‘change we can believe in’?

Apparently not.

© 2009 Timothy O. Villard - 5/7/09

Add Timothy O. Villard as favorite writer

include comments

email a friend