Hi everyone!
As the United Nations tries to put out fires in Syria, this week saw a whole new conflagration erupt in Afghanistan...again. This time it isn't video of U.S. marines urinating on the corpses of dead Taliban and then joking about it, as if that wasn't bad enough. No, this time we've gone back to our old standard of burning the Holy Koran. When will we learn?
It doesn't matter if this desecration was performed out of malicious intent as we saw last year in the case of the "mock trial" officiated by Florida pastor Terry Jones or out of seeming ignorance as we witnessed this week at Bagram Air Force base in Kabul. Burning the Koran is not only the epitome of disrespect toward Muslims worldwide, but it's just plain stupid. And frankly it's this stupidity that is costing us the so-called "hearts and minds" of the Afghan people our forces are trying to win over.
American military personnel were clearing out a room in Bagram that contained books they claimed were filled with handwritten communication pertaining to terrorist strikes against coalition forces. Obviously they couldn't keep these around. These personnel also claimed that they had no idea that the books were copies of the Koran. As they were being tossed into an incinerator, a couple Afghan workers at the base noticed what these guys were doing and intervened. Word got out and understandably outraged Afghanis took to the streets in violent protest. This was on Monday.
Yesterday, President Obama issued a formal apology to the Afghan people which was accepted by Afghan President Hamid Karzai who expressed outrage at the offense but, realizing the last thing he or the Americans need is another outbreak of anti-American violence, urged his security forces to help maintain calm while calling for a swift trial for the offenders.
It's already too late. As of yesterday, seven Afghans were killed in the violence while an Afghan Army soldier attacked and killed two American servicemen. This is only the latest in a series of killings of coalition servicemen and women at the hands of their supposed allies in the Afghan Army. One such attack against French troops is what prompted Sarkozy to announce his early withdrawal of French troops from Afghanistan this year.
After over ten years of war in this part of the world, you would think by now that we'd know better than to blatantly demonstrate our continued ignorance--or lack of consideration--of the Islamic faith. While killing of any nature is rarely justified, I can understand the rage that the Afghan people feel over yet another desecration of their religion at the hands of foreign occupiers. Our troops complain about not winning the fight in Afghanistan and the Muslim world, well, is it really so surprising? Without taking away from the courage and valor demonstrated by our men and women in the armed services, there seems to be a continued and demonstrated lack of knowledge about the countries and cultures to which they are being sent. Or perhaps it's just a lack of intelligence? Either way, it's no wonder the Taliban continue to be as powerful as they are.
And while I again don't believe we should be legitimizing an organization that indiscriminately stones women to death, bans music, and commits other unspeakable acts against its people in the name of religion, I can see how the Afghan people are angry, disillusioned, and fed up with the insults they and their religion are subjected to by our troops that after ten years still have not learned to respect their religion and their culture.
What a shame.
Ciao.
Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts
Friday, February 24, 2012
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Conflict for the Good of Change
Privet vsem!
Reading the Sunday papers this morning I was once again struck by the volatility shaking much of the world today. Of course, one could argue that there's never been a time when the world hasn't been riven by conflict--both petty and catastrophic. As humans, we seem to thrive on it. If we don't have enough drama in our lives we seek it out on television, in our relationships with friends, family, co-workers, in the daily news... But some conflict is good. Some conflict is necessary. Conflict is what forces and drives change...for better and for worse, though ideally it is for the better.
Take, for example, the top story in today's New York Times. The main headline reads: "Libya's Civilian Toll, Denied by NATO: Scores of Unintended Casualties, and a Reluctance to Investigate." It seems that while NATO was helping to bomb the hell out of Qaddafi's loyalist forces on behalf of the rebels, NATO pilots made egregious errors that resulted in anywhere from 40 to 70 civilian deaths, in some instances, wiping out whole families. Granted, there was at least one case where Qadaffi's top brass deliberately met in civilian areas and this is an area of the world where civilians have been used more often that anyone would care to admit as human shields: just look at the staggering number of civilian deaths in the Iran-Iraq War. A margin of error is to be expected. And while no one likes to read about innocent people being slaughtered in the name of a good cause (as I believe the overthrow of Qadaffi and his family to have been), collateral damage is almost unavoidable. It remains to be seen what the outcome in Libya will be, what with reports of rival rebel groups shooting it out in the streets of Tripoli while U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta met with Libya's interim government (which also happened to be the first time a U.S. Defense Secretary has ever visited Libya), but hopefully Libya will right itself after surviving for years as a pariah state under Qadaffi. So...out of conflict--fingers crossed--comes good.
In nearby Egypt, Cairo was rocked by yet another day of violence as the military continued to crack down on protestors occupying Tahrir Square and nearby government buildings. While the moral advantage is definitely with the protestors, an article I read today said that many average Cairenes are getting fed up with the upheaval as it increasingly interferes with their daily lives. People can't get to work because of the protests and subsequent government crackdown, and there were reported cases of non-protestors being rounded up and beaten by the military police in a case of merely being in the wrong place at the wrong time. One Egyptian blogger posted a particularly ominous Tweet this morning that said something along the lines of Tahrir Square being eerily quiet and dark tonight, with an impending sense of blood about to be shed soon. But again, we have conflict out of which--judging by the relatively peaceful elections--good is coming.
And then finally in Russia yesterday in an address to the United Russia party, for the first time President Dmitri Medvedev spoke out almost in support of the 50,000 protestors who came out en masse last weekend against the recent fraudulent elections there. Mr. Medvedev said it was time to start listening to the voices of the people on the street, as those voices represented the true desires of the Russian people. Putin, of course, was nowhere to be seen. Could this be a sign of a rift between the top Russian powers-that-be? Medvedev has always come across as a reasonable sort. The question is, if he continues to endorse the protestors, is his job as prime minister once Putin takes over the presidency in jeopardy? But then, maybe that wouldn't be such a change as it's clear Putin has always been top brass despite the job title.
So, we have three scenarios here where conflict has the potential to resolve itself in favor of good. A lot remains to be seen. But I'd like to think the world as a whole is taking a step in the right direction.
Ciao.
QUESTION OF THE DAY: "Is collateral damage to be expected in the pursuit of positive change? Why or why not?"
Reading the Sunday papers this morning I was once again struck by the volatility shaking much of the world today. Of course, one could argue that there's never been a time when the world hasn't been riven by conflict--both petty and catastrophic. As humans, we seem to thrive on it. If we don't have enough drama in our lives we seek it out on television, in our relationships with friends, family, co-workers, in the daily news... But some conflict is good. Some conflict is necessary. Conflict is what forces and drives change...for better and for worse, though ideally it is for the better.
Take, for example, the top story in today's New York Times. The main headline reads: "Libya's Civilian Toll, Denied by NATO: Scores of Unintended Casualties, and a Reluctance to Investigate." It seems that while NATO was helping to bomb the hell out of Qaddafi's loyalist forces on behalf of the rebels, NATO pilots made egregious errors that resulted in anywhere from 40 to 70 civilian deaths, in some instances, wiping out whole families. Granted, there was at least one case where Qadaffi's top brass deliberately met in civilian areas and this is an area of the world where civilians have been used more often that anyone would care to admit as human shields: just look at the staggering number of civilian deaths in the Iran-Iraq War. A margin of error is to be expected. And while no one likes to read about innocent people being slaughtered in the name of a good cause (as I believe the overthrow of Qadaffi and his family to have been), collateral damage is almost unavoidable. It remains to be seen what the outcome in Libya will be, what with reports of rival rebel groups shooting it out in the streets of Tripoli while U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta met with Libya's interim government (which also happened to be the first time a U.S. Defense Secretary has ever visited Libya), but hopefully Libya will right itself after surviving for years as a pariah state under Qadaffi. So...out of conflict--fingers crossed--comes good.
In nearby Egypt, Cairo was rocked by yet another day of violence as the military continued to crack down on protestors occupying Tahrir Square and nearby government buildings. While the moral advantage is definitely with the protestors, an article I read today said that many average Cairenes are getting fed up with the upheaval as it increasingly interferes with their daily lives. People can't get to work because of the protests and subsequent government crackdown, and there were reported cases of non-protestors being rounded up and beaten by the military police in a case of merely being in the wrong place at the wrong time. One Egyptian blogger posted a particularly ominous Tweet this morning that said something along the lines of Tahrir Square being eerily quiet and dark tonight, with an impending sense of blood about to be shed soon. But again, we have conflict out of which--judging by the relatively peaceful elections--good is coming.
And then finally in Russia yesterday in an address to the United Russia party, for the first time President Dmitri Medvedev spoke out almost in support of the 50,000 protestors who came out en masse last weekend against the recent fraudulent elections there. Mr. Medvedev said it was time to start listening to the voices of the people on the street, as those voices represented the true desires of the Russian people. Putin, of course, was nowhere to be seen. Could this be a sign of a rift between the top Russian powers-that-be? Medvedev has always come across as a reasonable sort. The question is, if he continues to endorse the protestors, is his job as prime minister once Putin takes over the presidency in jeopardy? But then, maybe that wouldn't be such a change as it's clear Putin has always been top brass despite the job title.
So, we have three scenarios here where conflict has the potential to resolve itself in favor of good. A lot remains to be seen. But I'd like to think the world as a whole is taking a step in the right direction.
Ciao.
QUESTION OF THE DAY: "Is collateral damage to be expected in the pursuit of positive change? Why or why not?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)