Very interesting day in Afghanistan today. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, the US Ambassador to Afghanistan, visited. He received the first ever honorary diploma from NMAA. As an Army General stationed here a few years ago he was instrumental in the creation and stand up of NMAA. He gave a good speech, but the auditorium was insufferably hot! Literally thought I might pass out. Not really, but there was lots of sweat.
Doing a bit of reading on the Ambassador before his visit I ran across a link from the January NY Times. I highly recommend reading it. Ambassador Eikenberry is extremely critical of the troop surge and President Karzai. He raises a number of excellent points. It turns out that the link above is an actual scan of the classified cables that were sent to Secretary Clinton by the Ambassador. Pretty heady stuff! One thing that resonates with me is his point about Karzai's motivation. As long as the international community is here dumping literally billions of dollars into the country, and Karzai, his family members, and friends are profiting substantially from it, what motivation is there to rock the boat and pursue stability. A 30,000 to 40,000 personnel troop surge only brings more money, more contracts, and more civilians in to support. Oh yeah, and more opportunities for bribes, corruption, and contracts, which seem to all be synonymous here.
This brings up another article I read today. Check out this Washington Post link. It seems there is good evidence that US taxpayer money is being used to fund warlords and even the Taliban to ensure the safety of supply convoys.
Lastly, late breaking news. Our Commander here, Gen Stanley McChrystal, has ticked off a number of people in an interview due to be released in a Rolling Stone article. He insulted a number of senior governmental civilians, to include Ambassador Eikenberry. Specifically he commented on his cables and assessment linked above. This Washington Post article has more details. Here's another good story on the topic from BBC.
Will the madness ever end? It is hard sometimes to reconcile enthusiastic support of the mission, and to your tasks in support of it, with all this madness going on around you.
Interesting post today, Jeff. While I'm far from fully informed on the subject, I lean toward Eikenberry's philosophy ... we have to cut the cord at some point. Didn't we learn this basic concept when we were about six and took the training wheels off our bikes?
ReplyDeleteHaving been here for even a little while, more money and more troops are not the answer. I agree too with many Ambassador Eikenberry's points. The big thing holding me back is that I've been raised to follow orders and support my chain. Currently that includes Gen McChrystal, and not Ambassador Eikenberry. For good or bad, I pride myself in setting an example and being a good soldier. It is essential in this line of work. It doesn't mean I blindly follow orders however. The ultimate objective is to always do what's right, balancing good order and discipline, mission accomplishment, and following orders, against right and wrong. A tough choice sometimes. However, if I disagree with my orders or my mission, my job is not to openly question my superiors, it is to quietly resign and let someone fill the job that is comfortable with the mission, orders, and resources allowed.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to riding a bike, I never learned the training wheels lesson. In fact, I never had a bike with training wheels, ever. I had a big brother that put me on his bike, pushed hard, and hoped for the best. More bumps and bruises that way, and I learned a bit of a different lesson.