On second thought, don't help to reconstruct Afghanistan

With the Taliban in retreat, the top story in today's Globe and Mail is about...Afghanistan signing a natural gas pipeline deal with three of its neighbours:

Afghanistan and three of its neighbouring countries have agreed to build a $7.6-billion (U.S.) pipeline that would deliver natural gas from Turkmenistan to energy-starved Pakistan and India – a project running right through the volatile Kandahar province – raising questions about what role Canadian Forces may play in defending the project.

To prepare for proposed construction in 2010, the Afghan government has reportedly given assurances it will clear the route of land mines, and make the path free of Taliban influence.

In a report to be released Thursday, energy economist John Foster says the pipeline is part of a wider struggle by the United States to counter the influence of Russia and Iran over energy trade in the region.

The so-called Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline has strong support from Washington because the U.S. government is eager to block a competing pipeline that would bring gas to Pakistan and India from Iran.

[...]

In an interview, Mr. Foster – a former economist with Petro-Canada, the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank – said he believes the TAPI project could provide major benefits for Afghanistan and the region generally. If the project proceeds – and serious obstacles remain – Afghanistan's national government could reap $160-million (U.S.) a year in transit fees, an amount equivalent to half the government's current revenue.

But he said the security issues remain daunting and the Canadian military could – wittingly or not – become embroiled in a “new great game” over energy security that is playing out in the region.

Acting Foreign Affairs Minister David Emerson – who chairs the cabinet committee on Afghanistan – would not comment on the pipeline yesterday. When asked about the project earlier this spring, he said only that Canada wants to see Afghanistan develop a “legitimate and legal economy that can sustain a credible, viable state.”

Needless to say, Globe readers are going berserk:

The Con hacks on here have often stated the mission is about stopping terrorism and allowing little girls to attend school....we are starting to get a glimpse of the truth.

So the Enron feasibility study is coming into view. Cheney and the Halliburton boys must be all smiles.

LOL it was always about an oil pipeline. Why the he11 do you think Russia fought in Afghanistan for 10 yrs? It brought the USSR to it's knees and it's doing the same to the USA and her so-called allies. NATO be damned - it's a Carlyse Group venture and always has been. Noam Chomsky called this one in the mid 1990s.

Of course as you state, these goals were CLEARLY documented in a rather brazen doctrine and manifesto written by the real NeoCons in the document titled " The Project For a New American Century" written in the late 1990's. ( H!tler wrote Mein Kampf in prison and we all know what transpired after that!)

So what, exactly, is Afghanistan supposed to do if it ever wants to rebuild itself? There's no answer. There never is.

Damian P.

Update: as Mark notes in the comment section, this is old news - and the Globe's timing is interesting, to say the least.

Posted by damian at June 19, 2008 09:17 AM