Afghanistan’s Failures Are Not The Fault Of Its President
In Defense of Hamid Karzai
Our government is in a quandary over what to do about Afghanistan. They tried unsuccessfully for several weeks to oust Hamid Karzai. This article provides important background on why it is good that our government failed in it’s attempt.
We need leadership in Washington that will look at the facts before dumping allies.
In the matter of Hamid Karzai (this would be the feckless, warlord-backed, corruption-tainted and dubiously re-elected president of Afghanistan), it’s wonderful to observe how he has single-handedly created a new designation in the American ideological lexicon: the neo-neocon.
Who are the neo-neocons? They’re a bipartisan, single-issue group that has recently discovered the virtues—nay, the necessity—of clean, orderly, democratic governance.
On the left, they are the same folks who enthusiastically supported the Oslo Accords that brought about Yasser Arafat’s violent and kleptocratic rule. They were no less enthusiastic about underwriting the enterprise with billions in foreign aid, even as evidence accumulated that the money was being put to every use except improving the life of Palestinians.
These historical precedents are worth recalling because they are the templates of the kind of governance Afghans can reasonably expect. Would they have done better under Mr. Karzai’s main challenger in the last election, former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah? Maybe, but Dr. Abdullah is half-Tajik. And the brute reality of Afghanistan is that it would be even more difficult to govern under a non-Pashtun president, since Pashtuns are half the Afghan population and most of the trouble.
No wonder, then, that the announcement of Mr. Karzai’s re-election was greeted in Kabul with “a collective sigh of relief,” as the Washington Post reported last week. “I think people were fed up with this controversy over the election,” the Post quoted a running mate of Dr. Abdullah. “I think it’s a good thing that this is finished. Whether it’s legal or not, we can stop discussing this matter. Now he’s elected.”
Tags: Afghanistan, Barack Obama, Congress, Foreign Policy
This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 10th, 2009 at 3:34 pm and is filed under National Issues, The U.S. Government. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Categories
Tag Cloud
Abortion Afghanistan balanced budget Barack Obama Congress Conservative Political Action Conference Consumer Safety CPAC economy Election 2008 Election 2010 Energy Policy Environmental Issues fannie mae First Amendment Rights Foreign Policy freddie mac government control Healthcare Availability health insurance Houston Houston Voters Hurricane Ike Illegal Immigration John Faulk John McCain Marriage Mortgage Crisis Nancy Pelosi national healthcare National Security Pelosi personal responsibility Public Education Sarah Palin Second Amendment Sheila Jackson Lee socialism socialized medicine Social Security Taxes Terrorism Texas 18th Congressional District unemployment voter fraud-
Recent Posts
- Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs
- The Democrats Won’t Talk About This Provision
- ‘America Live’ Makes It to Late Night
- Redneck Tire Mounting [After a week of Serious Politics I Have To Add A Little Humor]
- Williams with Sowell – Government-Run Health Care
- John Stossel – Fat Politics
- Roberts: Scene at State of Union ‘very troubling’
- Final ‘reform’ push: twisting arms
Archives