A poll by Oxfam just completed in Afghanistan makes interesting reading. It suggests that ordinary Afghanis see the things that make their life miserable somewhat differently than the popular reports put out by diplomats and the international media . Based on a sample of 720 people, seven in ten (70%) individuals see unemployment and poverty as a major cause of the conflict in the country, while almost half (48%) point to the corruption and ineffectiveness of the Afghan government. Other factors that individuals identify as major drivers of the conflict are: the Taliban (36%); interference by other countries(25%); Al Qaeda(18%); the presence of international forces (18%); lack of support from the international community (17%); warlords (15%); and criminal groups (14%). The poll suggests what many have said for a long time – that the economy and jobs are the most important things that need addressing to win the confidence of the people, and that the presence of the international forces is not an important factor in alienating Afghanis from government. The real sources of alienation are poverty and the corruption of the Karzai government. For almost incomprehensible reasons the west, Canada included have virtually ignored these two important facts. Military spending has pushed economic development aid to the back burner, and the corruption and malfeasance of the Karzai government was ignored until the election finally forced it onto the attention of the western media.

Oxfam’s recommendations deserve the attention of the west. It says that “the government must take serious steps to establish the rule of law at all levels, crack down on corruption and end the culture of impunity and patronage, including through root and branch reform of the police and judiciary. There must be a commitment to investigate crimes and abuses associated with the conflict and pursue justice, acknowledgement, reconciliation and redress.” The west must “commit and deliver not just more aid, but more effective aid for humanitarian, reconstruction and development activities throughout the country; hold the Afghan government accountable and provide more support for it to tackle corruption and criminality; provide strong support for local peace building and conflict resolution initiatives, led by
civil society, and urge the Afghan government to pursue justice, reconciliation and redress for abuses caused during the past three decades of conflict”.

It also urges the establishment of a “regional peace process, including all regional powers, to end adverse interference in Afghanistan’s affairs and provide constructive support for its security and economic development”

It is impossible to say it any better. The west, including Canada, needs to listen and act. This does not mean the troops must leave. It does mean that the hot pursuit strategies of our troops in the south is largely irrelevant and silly. But it also means we should be debating what we should be doing differently, rather than simply over reaching each other in embracing 2011 when our troops are to leave. This is really in most ways a minor sideshow. The things that really matter – the things raised by Oxfam – are hardly ever discussed seriously in Canada. That is a shame.

Hamid Karzai’s main contender in the Afghan election, Abdullah Abdullah, has announced that he will not be running in the election between he and Karzai scheduled for November 7. He has done so for good reason. Karzai has maintained an iron grip over the election machinery. He used that plus other corrupt practices too numerous to mention to steal a win in the first round. Abdullah made it a condition of running this time that the election must meet the “free and fair” standard that the UN and international community has set out for elections everywhere. So long as Karzai has his people running the Afghan Election Commission, that can never be the case.

What will happen next? Abdullah is clearly attempting to force the hand of Karzai, the UN, and the US. But he will not run if there is no change in the oversight and organization of the election. Time is very short. The UN and the US are highly compromised, having throughout the first election and the run up to it ignored Karzai’s blatant corruption. Karzai believes they have no choice but to back him again. They do have a choice – most in Afghanistan would welcome independent management of the election. Karzai knows he is actually very weak without the western support. He cannot govern without it.

Of course there are those who say that Afghanistan should be left to author its own future misfortune. This means leaving Karzai to run another corrupt election and weak and corrupt government dominated by warlords and drug dealers. The west played a very large part in getting Afghanistan into is current mess – we cannot morally now walk away. And many of the international security threats from al-Qaeda would re-appear if we walked away.

So what now? Its really simple. The west must insist that the election be postponed until an acceptable election commission is appointed. The power of appointment should be delegated to a respected neutral party, and the rules set out by a committee working under her in accordance with well established standards. Abdullah will run in an election organized this way. Karzai may still win, but he is more and more looking to be incapable of taking the country forward. The Afghan people must be given a fair chance to send him that message.

It is discouraging to encounter these seeming endless obstacles to making things work in Afghanistan. But we must demand more of our leaders in the west. I was sounding the alarm bell about the election in July and August. So were other observers. But the western diplomatic community continued what has become a pattern there. They stuck with old discredited leader (remember Musharaff in Pakistan) until it is too late. The professional diplomats – conservative, closed minded, and dismissive of anyone not in their insular little circles – spent their time fending off critics and defending the indefensible. They get plenty of help from academics and journalists. Meanwhile the chance to do something to avert a crisis passes, at which time they hunker in and profess defeat by circumstances.

Let’s hope they are ready this time to draw a line in the sand with Karzai. There isn’t much time left.

According to the BBC, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has questioned Pakistan’s failure to capture senior al-Qaeda leaders.

It reports that Mrs Clinton said in an interview with journalists in Lahore she found it “hard to believe” nobody in the government knew where they were.

Mrs Clinton has been in Pakistan for two days trying to strengthen ties with the government, shore up the fight against militants and tackle rising anti-US feelings among the Pakistani people, says the BBC.

The BBC goes on to say that in an interview with the journalists she was asked why Pakistan was seen as the centre of terrorism and why other nations could not do more in the fight against it. We often say, ‘yes, there needs to be more focus on finding these leaders’ said US Ambassador Anne Patterson, it said.

Mrs Clinton said: “The world has an interest in seeing the capture and killing of the people who are the masterminds of this terrorist syndicate. As far as we know, they are in Pakistan.”

“Al-Qaeda has had safe haven in Pakistan since 2002… I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and couldn’t get them if they really wanted to”, the BBC quotes her as saying.

Well Mrs. Clinton you are right. And you do know the answer. Good for you for finally setting out the facts. But tell us the whole truth. You and the Pakistani military and intelligence know more than you say. You know – and I know – that the key Taliban leaders, including Mullah Omar, safely reside on the outskirts of Quetta, a provincial capital in Pakistan down the highway from Kandahar across the border to the north. If you can’t figure it out give me a call. It is not that hard to find where they are. Just ask a Quetta taxi driver. It requires only a motorized vehicle to go to their homes on the outskirts of the city.

The Taliban presence in Quetta has been confirmed by members of the Taliban itself. In early 2007, CBC reported that Mohammad Hanif, 26, a Taliban spokesman arrested by Afghan security forces near the border with Pakistan, said when he was questioned by Afghan intelligence service agents that Omar is in Pakistan. A video CD of his interrogation was given to reporters.

“He lives in Quetta,” Hanif said on the video, referring to Omar. “He is protected by ISI, (the Pakistan Intelligence Service)” Hanif said in a quiet voice, referring to the acronym of the Pakistani spy agency.

Quetta, by the way, is not some inaccessible mountain tribal town. Airbus flights provide regular service in and out. The highway is a good usable transportation link to the rest of Pakistan.

The fact is the Taliban leaders are coddled by the Pakistan security forces, who are linked by all kinds of nefarious arrangements to the Taliban and al Qaeda forces. Why continue this silly dance? Why do our soldiers keep getting killed while world leaders play these silly word games? Why not deal with them? Some things are not that hard. This is one of them.

Sadly this is not a failure of the elected government of Pakistan, at least not directly. It has its origins with the army dictator Mushraff. The Pakistan army and intelligence services are riddled with al Qaeda and Taliban supporters and commanders. They are the biggest threat to a democratic and stable government in Pakistan, the Afghanistan undertaking and the fight against terrorism. One hopes that the US army and the CIA are not implicated, thus in part explaining the inaction. Regardless, it is time this problem was dealt with honestly. It is time to clear away all of the sleazy deals and clandestine arrangements. Perhaps Hillary Clinton has started that process. We’ll see.