Afghans get the bombs, Pakistan the bucks

Obama’s new strategy raises eyebrows in Afghanistan and The Hague.

Jean MacKenzieMarch 31, 2009 18:46Updated May 30, 2010 11:51

A journalist tapes the remarks of Afghan President Hamid Karzai at the opening of a UN-backed conference on Afghanistan in The Hague, Mar. 31, 2009. Karzai told the international conference with delegates from Pakistan and Iran on Tuesday that Afghanistan needed regional cooperation to tackle terrorism. (Jerry Lampen/Reuters)

KABUL — There wasn't much to see, save for Hamid Karzai’s resplendent green-and-purple striped chapan, or coat, paired smartly with his trademark karakul hat, at an international conference on Afghanistan in The Hague on Tuesday.

And the most substantive discussions of the meeting of 70 nations, all eager to to affirm their commitment to peace and reconstruction in the beleaguered nation, were almost certainly behind closed doors.

The Afghan president's sartorial knack is nothing new to the millions of his compatriots watching a live broadcast of the three-hour plenary session, broadcast on the Sabaa national television channel.

Nor is his deferential manner when in the company of those foreign powerbrokers who, by and large, will determine his future as their head of state. Opening the conference, Karzai dutifully delivered a list of government achievements over the past seven years. His message was unsurprising: Much has been accomplished, challenges remain. Tactfully, he also welcomed the world’s fresh commitment to finding a regional solution to his country’s problems.

Karzai left it to those unrestrained by the rarefied atmosphere and courteous diplospeak to say what was really on Afghan minds: That President Barack Obama’s new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan was wrongheaded, putting too much emphasis on military solutions and not enough on economic and financial aid, and reconstruction; and that the billions of dollars America was paying yearly to help reconstruct Pakistan’s infrastructure was filtering through to elements of the Taliban and Al Qaeda and being used by Pakistan to destabilize Afghanistan.

As Mohammad Mansoor, a recent graduate from the law faculty of Balkh University, watching the conference proceedings from faraway Kabul put it: “In this strategy, the message to Afghanistan was bombs and bullets. For Pakistan, it was money. It should have been the other way around. If America has decided that it should split the aid for counterterrorism between Afghanistan and Pakistan, they should split the bombs and bullets as well.”

Afghanistan Daily, one of the country’s most influential newspapers, had already made its position clear with a blistering editorial on March 28: “Pakistan has once again managed to sway America in its own interests ... . Pakistan has raised the Taliban like its own child, and has used Al Qaeda to destabilize the political situation in Afghanistan. But America is paying $1.5 billion yearly for the reconstruction of Pakistan’s infrastructure.”

Shukria Barakzai, a prominent member of the Wolesi Jirga, the lower house of Parliament, said: “The main focus of this plan for Afghanistan is on military solutions. Afghanistan needs economic and financial aid, reconstruction. There is a question that needs to be answered here: what kind of Afghanistan is America supporting?”

Meanwhile, back at The Hague, Karzai was followed by a long line of dignitaries, from U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon to the foreign minister of Bangladesh. Iran and Pakistan, Afghanistan’s neighbors, also stepped up to affirm their commitment to peace and reconstruction in the beleaguered nation. Iran’s presence in particular was heralded as a breakthrough in regional cooperation, although Tehran finely calibrated its enthusiasm by sending its deputy foreign minister rather than the top diplomat.