Afghanistan – NATO; who is screwing whom ?

By Christof Lehmann. Today, at the NATO Summit in the Windy City, Chicago, Afghanistan will be demanding that NATO contributes 4.1 billion USD per year after withdrawing NATO troops in 2014. Afghanistan´s Foreign Minister Jawed Ludin informed international media that Afghans are “going to make sacrifices for years to come, in what is essentially an international war. ” Ludin stopped short of mentioning the growing tensions between Afghanistan and NATO, and the extremely complicated geo-political situation of Afghanistan with respect to coping with the consequences of NATO´s occupation, Afghanistan´s  new political orientation towards China and the Shanghai Cooperation.

When the diplomatic parleur is translated into clear language, what NATO is being told in Chicago is something to this effect: “ If you, our friends, want to continue your high stakes and high risk game of military encirclement of Russia and China on Afghani soil, and if you like us to effectively wage a war on our own people under the guise of a “war on terror”, then you will have to pay 4.1 billion USD a year to cover some of our losses”.

NATO has never been popular in Afghanistan since it´s illegal invasion of the country in 2001, but the stepping up of drone attacks and the countless murders on civilians by drones in Afghanistan and Pakistan have effectively turned the population against NATO and has driven thousands of young Afghani and Pakistani to join the ranks of the resistance. Even though many won´t exactly agree with the Taliban and it´s policy, many join because it is the only organized militarily credible form of resistance against the occupying forces and the hostile Afghani government.

The demanded 4.1 billion USD a year are most likely meant to cover the costs for the implementation of the “Partnership Agreement” that was signed by US President Obama and Afghanistan´s President Hamid Karzai, which covers US/Afghani relations until 2024.

According to NATO´s official declarations, NATO will withdraw it´s troops by 2014. The Partnership Agreement clearly indicates that NATO has no plans to withdraw from the region and that it plans to have a permanent presence in the region as part of the geo-strategic campaign against Russia and China. NATO would, however, appreciate if Afghanistan could fight it´s war while freeing NATO man-power and financial resources for other campaigns. A recent article that reviews changes in official NATO doctrine during the Summit in Chicago details NATO´s ambitions to make more often use of “the responsibility to protect” and Article 5 to justify future military campaigns. (1)

Currently the USA alone has 100.000 troops in Afghanistan and is spending 10 billion USD per month on the occupation. The 4.1 billion annually, that Afghanistan is demanding for fighting a war on it´s own people and for maintaining Afghan forces function as NATO proxy for regional hegemony directed against Russia, China, and not to forget Pakistan, is of course a minor amount compared to the present costs.

While the Afghani governments messages could sound as if Afghanistan wants to assert it´s position as “partner on equal terms” it is also acutely aware of two important factors. For one, that it is extremely unpopular among the majority of Afghans, and that publicly demanding to be accepted as partner on equal terms may be a good strategy to win public opinion – it is, however – a strategy that is doomed to fail as long as it is waging a war on it´s own people and as long as it lets CIA drones operators murder civilians with impunity. The other factor is that the Afghani government is most likely attempting to convey to the US and NATO that it easily could re-orientate it´s foreign policy towards Pakistan, China, Russia and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization where it has observer status – which would threaten one of the golden cows the US and NATO are milking while in Afghanistan – Opium and Heroin Production for the Too Big To Fail Boys at Wall Street and the City of London.

Is it this signal that is being sent by Foreign Minister Ludin ?”Pay 4.1 billion a year and we make sure that the US and NATO maintain the Heroin business, that the Afghani military controls the popular uprising against the proxy government, and to make sure that NATO maintains it´s geo-strategic position by proxy.” What is in it for Karzai and his government ? The spoils of war. The other gain is that both NATO and the Afghani government are well served by maintaining a civil war. As long as the Taliban is the sole political alternative to the Karzai regime it remains extremely difficult for both China, Russia and Pakistan to develop political partnerships that aim at wrestling Afghanistan out of the Anglo-American hegemony and into regional integration.

It all comes down to two criminal fractions who cooperate on a basis of the lowest possible common denominator to secure that all get what they want. The irony is, that the regional geo-political dynamics are forcing both sides to stay engaged with one another.

Compare it with two horny heterosexual rapists who are sharing the same prison cell; inmates who are forced into practicing mutual anal sex by their own device. The dirty towels are sold as human rights, civil liberties and democracy to the people of Afghanistan. 4.1 billion per year is quite a reasonable price tag for NATO who can substitute the mutual prison sex with Afghans raping themselves – or is it ?

Christof Lehmann – nsnbc

20.05.2012

1) NATO`s 25th Summit in Chicago in Preparation of Global Full Spectrum Dominance, Interventionism, Possible Preparations for A Regional War Directed against Russia and China, and Developments in Global Security.