How quickly things change... This letter
appeared a couple of months ago
in a Washington newspaper. It points out
something that has gone unmentioned
in all the coverage of today's news about the
Taliban.
BUSH'S
FAUSTIAN DEAL WITH THE TALIBAN
by Robert
Scheer
Enslave your girls and women, harbor anti-U.S.
terrorists and destroy
every vestige of civilization in your homeland, and
the Bush
administration will embrace you. All that matters is that you line
up
as an ally in the drug war, the only international cause that
this
nation still takes seriously.
That's the message sent with the
recent gift of $43 million to the
Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most
virulent anti-American
violators of human rights in the world today. The
gift, announced
last Thursday by Secretary of State Colin Powell, in addition
to
other recent aid, makes the United States the main sponsor of
the
Taliban and rewards that "rogue regime" for declaring that
opium
growing is against the will of God. So, too, by the
Taliban's
estimation, are most human activities, but it's the ban on drugs
that
catches this administration's attention.
Never mind that Osama
bin Laden still operates the leading
anti-American terror operation from his
base in Afghanistan, from
which, among other crimes, he launched two bloody
attacks on American
embassies in Africa in 1998.
Sadly, the Bush
administration is cozying up to the Taliban regime at
a time when the United
Nations, at U.S. insistence, imposes sanctions
on Afghanistan because the
Kabul government will not turn over Bin
Laden.
The war on drugs has
become our own fanatics' obsession and easily
trumps all other concerns. How
else could we come to reward the
Taliban, who has subjected the female half
of the Afghan population
to a continual reign of terror in a country once
considered
enlightened in its treatment of women?
At no point in
modern history have women and girls been more
systematically abused than in
Afghanistan, where in the name of
madness masquerading as Islam, the
government in Kabul obliterates
their fundamental human rights. Women may not
appear in public
without being covered from head to toe with the oppressive
shroud
called the burkha, and they may not leave the house without
being
accompanied by a male family member. They've not been permitted
to
attend school or be treated by male doctors, yet women have been
banned
from practicing medicine or any profession for that matter.
The lot of
males is better if they blindly accept the laws of an
extreme religious
theocracy that prescribes strict rules governing
all behavior, from a ban on
shaving to what crops may be grown. It is
this last power that has captured
the enthusiasm of the Bush White
House.
The Taliban fanatics,
economically and diplomatically isolated, are
at the breaking point, and so,
in return for a pittance of legitimacy
and cash from the Bush administration,
they have been willing to
appear to reverse themselves on the growing of
opium. That a
totalitarian country can effectively crack down on its farmers
is not
surprising. But it is grotesque for a U.S. official, James
P.
Callahan, director of the State Department's Asian anti-drug
program,
to describe the Taliban's special methods in the language
of
representative democracy: "The Taliban used a system
of
consensus-building," Callahan said after a visit with the
Taliban,
adding that the Taliban justified the ban on drugs "in very
religious
terms."
Of course, Callahan also reported, those who didn't
obey the
theocratic edict would be sent to prison.
In a country where
those who break minor rules are simply beaten on
the spot by religious police
and others are stoned to death, it's
understandable that the government's
"religious" argument might be
compelling. Even if it means, as Callahan
concedes, that most of the
farmers who grew the poppies will now confront
starvation. That's
because the Afghan economy has been ruined by the
religious extremism
of the Taliban, making the attraction of opium as a
previously
tolerated quick cash crop overwhelming.
For that reason,
the opium ban will not last unless the United States
is willing to pour far
larger amounts of money into underwriting the
Afghan economy.
As the
Drug Enforcement Administration's Steven Casteel admitted,
"The bad side of
the ban is that it's bringing their country -- or
certain regions of their
country -- to economic ruin." Nor did he
hold out much hope for Afghan
farmers growing other crops such as
wheat, which require a vast
infrastructure to supply water and
fertilizer that no longer exists in that
devastated country. There's
little doubt that the Taliban will turn once
again to the easily
taxed cash crop of opium in order to stay in
power.
The Taliban may suddenly be the dream regime of our own
drug-war
zealots, but in the end this alliance will prove a costly
failure.
Our long sad history of signing up dictators in the war on
drugs
demonstrates the futility of building a foreign policy on a
domestic
obsession.
Pubdate: Wed, 30 May 2001
Source: Marysville Globe,
The (WA)
Copyright: 2001 Marysville Globe/Arlington Times
Contact:
mglobe@premier1.netAddress: Letters
to the Editor, Marysville Globe, PO Box 145,
Marysville, WA 98270
Details:
http://www.mapinc.org/media/1288Author: Robert
Scheer
__________________________________________________________________________
Hope you are enjoying your Tidbits. If
you're not a member of ReconsiDer and would like to join please fill out our membership form. And be sure to visit our website.
Click here to unsubscribe to this mailing list.