Afstan: Globe reporter declares quagmire

Geoffrey York does it without actually using the "Q" word. It's hopeless; time to cut and run.
...
Just like the U.S. troops in Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s [See! It is a quagmire!], the coalition is trying to prop up a corrupt and unpopular government. Local governments are dominated by so many warlords and gangsters that many Afghans express nostalgia for the Taliban regime of 1996 to 2001, which at least was not perceived as corrupt and immoral.

"The Afghan population is throwing up its hands," a veteran aid worker in Kandahar said. "The disorder today is coming from the government itself. Its mandate was to clean out the warlords, but instead it's engaged in an endless dance with them. Everyone says that the Taliban regime, if nothing else, at least stopped the corruption and created law and order."..

Mussolini made the trains run on time. Hitler both built the Autobahns and eliminated unemployment. Stalin and Mao both increased literacy remarkably. Pol Pot excelled at population control.

This is the same Mr York who called the B-1 a "stealth bomber" in his recent article, Bombs kill Afghan villagers.

Update: Mr York is a graduate of the Carleton University School of Journalism. Enough said. (H/t to Dave in Comments for making me think to check.)

Upperdate: Another Globe reporter, Graeme Smith, called the B-1 a "stealth bomber" in this article, Karzai tries to calm fears over violence; perhaps he was reading Mr York's copy. Silly boy.

Uppestdate: A brief analysis for those who may not realize why Mr York's Vietnam analogy is bogus:

In this piece he compares the Afghan insurgency with Vietnam--but leaves a very false impression. He does not mention (more likely does not know) that the Viet Cong insurgents were beaten comprehensively--the war was won by NVA regulars with tanks and artillery, and only after all American combat support had been withdrawn from South Vietnam, and economic and military aid severely reduced by Congress.

If Mr York means to say that the Taliban might win only if all similar assistance were cut off from the Afghan government, why does he not come out and say so? As it is he is leaving the impression, by false analogy, that the situation is essentially hopeless.

Now if Pakistani regulars were to intevene in Afstan on the Taliban side the analysis would be radically changed (joke, I hope).

Mark C.

Posted by markc at May 28, 2006 12:32 AM