|
US plans African military command
America is falling out of fashion in Africa
Gamal Nkruma
America is falling out of fashion in Africa, and that is an understatement. Washington's Africa policy, like its diabolical Middle Eastern debacles, unquestionably brings out the "F" word - excuse my French.
United States President George W Bush last week has approved a fiendish plan to centralise military operations in Africa under American command. He expects, it is believed that he will exact absolute obedience from his African lackeys.
The American-style democracy that has been forced by the US on Africa is a sham. There is no such thing as good governance in America for it to have the audacity to forcibly impose it on others. For starters, foreign funders with big business interests in Africa and local tycoons who have lined their pockets with ill-gotten gains decide the vote of presidential and parliamentary elections in their henchmen's favour. American-style multi-party democracy has not alleviated the distressing poverty of the people of Africa. Social injustice has intensified with privatisation, economic deregulation and democratisation. So to add insult to injury, the awkward Americans now want to police the continent they have long treated with antipathy and revulsion.
The Bush administration has apparently approved plans for a so-called command centre for Africa. This despicable idea smacks of the opprobrious "contra" policy practiced by the Americans in Nicaragua in the 1980s when they attempted by force to overthrow the leftist Sandinista government of Daniel Ortega. Uncouth Americans such as John Negroponte and US Defence Secretary Robert Gates should not be permitted to run African affairs. It is the very same evil masterminds behind the contras who now rule the roost in Washington.
Negroponte, currently the director of US National Intelligence, faithfully carried out ex- president Ronald Reagan's despicable policy of destabilising the Caribbean and Central American region. Negroponte was US ambassador to Mexico (1989-93) where he presided over the war against the Zapatista movement of the indigenous people of Chiapas. More recently, Negroponte was appointed US ambassador to Iraq - the bloody legacy of his ambassadorship in Baghdad (June 2004- April 2005) was characterised by the brazen occupation and brutish crackdown against the Iraqi resistance to US occupation. The thought of such a monster having anything to do with the new proposed Africa command is enough to make the blood curdle.
These vicious villains, like Gates and Negroponte, have the blood of countless innocent victims on their hands. These depraved butchers now call the shots in Washington and expect Africans to bow in obeisance.
African leaders are pretending to be the politicians they so obviously are not - independent thinking America does not have a leg to stand on. Nor do the African leaders who will allow themselves to accept the proposed African command plan.
But the public reaction to the Bush administration's dubious militaristic plans for Africa was somewhat muted. Pundits in Africa have not yet extrapolated their opinions, but they will no doubt do so in the weeks ahead. One suspects that the real reason the Bush administration gets away with murder is that, alas, the pimps and prostitutes who rule the continent at Washington's behest and kowtow deferentially at America's every beck and call.
Africa's leaders have sold their souls to the very Devil. Utterly unabashed, they have succumbed to the amoral and abominable neo-liberal dictates of the Bretton Woods institutions - they have pauperised their own people and rendered them unemployed and unemployable. They have religiously implemented the economic deregulation dictates of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund - the two Washington- based Bretton Woods Institutions that hold sway throughout the unfortunate continent and its hapless people. They have closed down factories, laid off workers in the thousands, and dumped poisonous and carcinogenic wastes on African soil. They have turned the continent into a disease-ridden refuse heap and a dumping ground for murderous weapons and cheap but deadly small arms, foodstuffs that are unfit for human consumption in the West, and genetically-modified grains. Moreover, many African countries have become utterly dependent on American food aid, and America, in turn has become increasingly interested in African energy. Africa supplies the US with 10 per cent of its energy needs. However, other powers are also keenly interested in Africa's energy and natural resources.
African leaders have become the laughing stock of the Western world. Perhaps only Arab and Muslim leaders are even more despised, derided and jeered at.
African democracy does not work by votes, and nor does America's - both work by the bloody greenback. Why is America now interested in policing Africa? Hidden agendas and conspiracy theories abound. These same thoughts must surely have occurred to many Africans. America has left a trail of blood in many parts of the world, including its genocidal liquidation of its indigenous Native Americans - not to mention the ruthless exploitation of African American slave labour. If that bloodstained history really is to be discovered by Africans, they can never put their trust in the Bush administration's plan or policing Africa.
Successive US administrations will be penalised for this heinous crime committed by the Bush administration, with its appalling record of blood and gore.
The African Union (AU) summit was eclipsed by the African tour of Chinese President Hu Jintao. There is something about Chinese dealings in Africa that brings out the worst in the Western media.
Surely, there are better ways to manage the US's rivalry with China over Africa in the Western media than harping on endlessly China's poor human rights record. On the contrary, this has not done a disservice to China, nor harmed its business dealings with Africa.
The Western media should focus instead on American atrocities across the world. Why is Chinese interest in Africa's energy so baffling to Westerners - China is after all is the world's economic powerhouse. And, at least China does not interfere in African politics and its aid, unlike America's, has no strings attached to it.
Political bombshell from Carter's security adviser Brzezinski
Bush is seeking a pretext to attack Iran
Barry Grey in Washington DC
Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee earlier this month, Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser in the Carter administration, delivered a scathing critique of the war in Iraq and warned that the Bush administration's policy was leading inevitably to a war with Iran, with incalculable consequences for US imperialism in the Middle East and internationally.
Brzezinski, who opposed the March 2003 invasion and has publicly denounced the war as a colossal foreign policy blunder, began his remarks on what he called the "war of choice" in Iraq by characterizing it as "a historic, strategic and moral calamity."
"Undertaken under false assumptions," he continued, "it is undermining America's global legitimacy. Its collateral civilian casualties as well as some abuses are tarnishing America's moral credentials. Driven by Manichean principles and imperial hubris, it is intensifying regional instability."
Brzezinski derided Bush's talk of a "decisive ideological struggle" against radical Islam as "simplistic and demagogic," and called it a "mythical historical narrative" employed to justify a "protracted and potentially expanding war."
"To argue that America is already at war in the region with a wider Islamic threat, of which Iran is the epicenter, is to promote a self-fulfilling prophecy," he said.
Disturbing description
Most stunning and disturbing was his description of a "plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran." It would, he suggested, involve "Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure, then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran, culminating in a 'defensive' US military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan." [Emphasis added].
This was an unmistakable warning to the US Congress, replete with quotation marks to discount the "defensive" nature of such military action, that the Bush administration is seeking a pretext for an attack on Iran. Although he did not explicitly say so, Brzezinski came close to suggesting that the White House was capable of manufacturing a provocation-including a possible terrorist attack within the US-to provide the casus belli for war.
That a man such as Brzezinski, with decades of experience in the top echelons of the US foreign policy establishment, a man who has the closest links to the military and to intelligence agencies, should issue such a warning at an open hearing of the US Senate has immense and grave significance.
Brzezinski knows whereof he speaks, having authored provocations of his own while serving as Jimmy Carter's national security adviser. In that capacity, as he has since acknowledged in published writings, he drew up the covert plan at the end of the 1970s to mobilize Islamic fundamentalist mujaheddin to topple the pro-Soviet regime in Afghanistan and draw the Soviet Union into a ruinous war in that country.
Following his opening remarks, in response to questions from the senators, Brzezinski reiterated his warning of a provocation.
He called the senators' attention to a March 27, 2006 report in the New York Times on "a private meeting between the president and Prime Minister Blair, two months before the war, based on a memorandum prepared by the British official present at this meeting." In the article, Brzezinski said, "the president is cited as saying he is concerned that there may not be weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq, and that there must be some consideration given to finding a different basis for undertaking the action."
He continued: "I'll just read you what this memo allegedly says, according to the New York Times: 'The memo states that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation.'
"He described the several ways in which this could be done. I won't go into that... the ways were quite sensational, at least one of them. If one is of the view that one is dealing with an implacable enemy that has to be removed, that course of action may under certain circumstances be appealing. I'm afraid that if this situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate, and if Iran is perceived as in some fashion involved or responsible, or a potential beneficiary, that temptation could arise."
Conspiratorial methods
At another point Brzezinski remarked on the conspiratorial methods of the Bush administration and all but described it as a cabal. "I am perplexed," he said, "by the fact that major strategic decisions seem to be made within a very narrow circle of individuals-just a few, probably a handful, perhaps not more than the fingers on my hand. And these are the individuals, all of whom but one, who made the original decision to go to war, and used the original justifications to go to war."
None of the senators in attendance addressed themselves to the stark warning from Brzezinski. The Democrats in particular, flaccid, complacent and complicit in the war conspiracies of the Bush administration, said nothing about the danger of a provocation spelled out by the witness.
Following the hearing, this reporter asked Brzezinski directly if he was suggesting that the source of a possible provocation might be the US government itself. The former national security adviser was evasive.
The following exchange took place:
Q: Dr. Brzezinski, who do you think would be carrying out this possible provocation?
A: I have no idea. As I said, these things can never be predicted. It can be spontaneous.
Q: Are you suggesting there is a possibility it could originate within the US government itself?
A: I'm saying the whole situation can get out of hand and all sorts of calculations can produce a circumstance that would be very difficult to trace.
Courtesy: WSWS
 ^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
NEWS IN BRIEF
First Muslim heads Canadian University
When Mamdouh Shoukri takes over as president of York University in the summer, he will become the first Muslim to head a Canadian university, reports Montreal Gazette.
The 59-year-old Egyptian-born engineer was named the seventh president of Canada's third-largest university earlier this month. Shoukri, currently vice-president of research and international affairs at McMaster University in Hamilton, had his appointment confirmed last week by York's board of governors. He replaces Lorna Marsden, who is retiring on June 30th after 10 years in the post.
Kamal Haseeb, president of York's Muslim Association, says Shoukri's appointment is based on his credentials, but the fact he's Muslim "solidifies the acceptance of all groups and faiths."
Adam Hummel of Hillel at York, known as the centre for Jewish life on campus, called Shoukri's selection "very Canadian" and a reflection of York's diverse population.
One senior York official says Shoukri was hired because of who he is - a fantastic researcher, a fantastic educator and a great administrator - not because of his ethnicity.
- The Montreal Gazette
Survey says Canadians are least bias toward Muslims
Randy Boswell
Canadians are least likely among citizens of 23 Western countries to be bigoted toward Muslims, according to a new international study that measured "Islamophobia" in each nation.
More than 32,000 respondents from 19 European countries, plus Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand, were asked the question: "Would you like to have a person from this group as your neighbour?"
Of the nearly 2,000 people surveyed in Canada - which recently drew international attention for the CBC's prejudice-piercing comedy Little Mosque on the Prairie - only 6.5 per cent said they would not like to live beside a Muslim. Respondents in Greece (20.9 per cent), Belgium (19.8), Norway (19.3) and Finland (18.9) were most likely to answer "No" to the question.
Results in Britain and the United States were 14.1 per cent and 10.9 per cent respectively, and negative responses across all western countries averaged 14.5 per cent.
Despite the West's "reputation for liberalism, there can be little doubt that, in the past decade or so in western countries, there is an increasing awareness of, and a hardening of attitudes toward, people who are 'different,'" argue the study's co-authors, economists Vani Borooah of the University of Ulster and John Mangan of the University of Queensland in Australia.
Love Thy Neighbour: How Much Bigotry Is There in Western Countries? is to be published in Kyklos, the International Review for Social Sciences.
Salma Siddiqui, an official with the Toronto-based Muslim Canadian Congress, said the survey results reflect the fact Canada is a very tolerant nation. "We are lucky to be living in a country that recognizes all human rights," she said.
- CanWest News Service
Eritrean poet dies in detention
Credible Eritrean sources in Asmara and abroad have told Reporters Without Borders that poet and playwright Fessehaye "Joshua" Yohannes, who was a journalist with the now-banned weekly "Setit", died in detention on 11 January 2007, reports International Freedom of Expression Community (IFEC).
"The death of Fessehaye Yohannes would be an appalling tragedy, one made all the more unbearable by the accommodating attitude of European governments towards Eritrea." Reporters Without Borders said. "This regime cannot be treated in a normal way as it is responsible for the disappearance and imprisonment of the best of its citizens. Firm demands are now needed."
The press freedom organisation added: "The Eritrean government must prove to us that Joshua did not die or, at the very least, it should hand over his body to his wife and two sons. It should prove to us that journalists Medhane Haile, Said Abdelkader and Yusuf Mohamed Ali are still alive contrary to the reports we have received of their deaths. And it should tell us where it has imprisoned the journalists who are being held incommunicado, and explain the crimes it has committed with complete impunity since 2001."
Fessehaye was paralysed in one hand and had been walking with difficulty for years. He reportedly succumbed to the extremely harsh conditions in which he had been held since his arrest in September 2001. After being held at an Asmara police station and an underground prison and after spells in the Halibet and Sembel hospitals in Asmara, he was reportedly taken to a prison camp at Eiraeiro, in the Northern Red Sea desert province. According to the information received by Reporters Without Borders, he was being held in cell No. 18 of this camp, where at least 62 political prisoners are being held in complete isolation and in inhumane conditions, guarded by about 100 soldiers of the 32nd division.
The genesis
Fessehaye surrendered to the police during the week of 18-23 September 2001, after around 10 other journalists and many members of the political opposition had been arbitrarily arrested and the privately-owned press had been "suspended" by the authorities. Ten detained journalists were transferred to undisclosed locations in April 2002, after going on hunger strike to demand the right to appear in court.
Their hands permanently manacled, the detainees at Eiraeiro are just given bread, lentils, spinach or potatoes to eat. Their hair and beards are shaved once a month. All they have for beds are two sheets. They sleep on the ground. Any contact with other prisoners or with guards is absolutely forbidden.
On the basis of information from credible sources, Reporters Without Borders suggested last November that Said Abdulkader, co-founder and editor of the weekly "Admas", Medhanie Haile, co-founder and deputy editor of the weekly "Keste Debena", and Yusuf Mohamed Ali, the editor of the weekly "Tsigenay", were among the nine prisoners who had died in this prison camp in the course of 2005 and 2006. The officer in charge of the Eiraeiro camp is Lt. Col. Isaac "Wedi Hakim" Araia, the former commander of the 29th division's second brigade, who replaced Maj. Gen. Gerezghiher "Wuchu" Andemariam.
Fessehaye was initially held at the Asmara No. 1 police station following his arrest. He was moved to an underground prison at Dongolo in April 2002 after taking part in the hunger strike to demand the right to be tried. A former political prisoner held there at the same time told Reporters Without Borders: "Dongolo is a prison with cells that measure 1.5 metres by 1.5 metres, and 2.5 metres tall. They are lit by a bulb that is never turned off. The prisoners are chained to the wall by their feet. Their wrists are manacled. The harm done to the prisoners' health by these conditions is indescribable. Insects buzz around the bulb in the ceiling." Already weakened by his hunger strike, Fessehaye was interrogated harshly by Col. Gaim Tesfemichael and Col. Simon Ghebregindil, the source said. His fingernails were ripped out.
Source: RSF, Paris
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Ministers sacked in Sri Lanka
Mahinda seems committed
to inclusive governance
Jehan Perera in Colombo
The abrupt dismissal of three senior ministers by President Mahinda Rajapaksa came as a surprise to most people. It is likely to reinforce the belief in many people of the President's ability and willingness to dispose of any opposition to him, if necessary. But the dismissals have also raised questions about the stability of the government and about the scenario of a snap general election. Until the sacking of former ministers - Mangala Samaraweera, Anura Bandaranaike and Sripathy Sooriyarachchi - the government seemed to be heading from strength to strength.
For the past several months the LTTE has been lying relatively prostrate after a series of military defeats, while the major opposition party, the UNP, was also silenced and broken. Those who are confident and strong do not seek to make enemies out of those who have been allies, even if there is a present divergence of visions and interests.
Only a severe threat, as perceived by the President and those who advise him, might have caused him to take such drastic action against the ministers, two of whom helped the President at the Presidential election of November 2005 in such a big way. The rumour mills are active in putting forward conspiracy theories. The state media even talks of assassination plots, indirect assistance to the LTTE by not being present for voting for the emergency and voting at the UN at the behest of the United States against a resolution on Palestine, as some of the causes of the upheaval.
But more than anything else, the sacking of the three ministers has called into question the President's commitment to an inclusive approach to governance. In the aftermath of becoming the ruling party's presidential candidate in 2005, President Rajapaksa showed himself as striving for inclusivity and getting everyone on board his journey to the presidency. Mangala Samaraweera, who was one of the sacked ministers, played a key role in allying the Marxist nationalist JVP with the President, who had cultivated a middle of the road image.
After winning the presidential election by a narrow margin, the President continued with his bid for inclusivity, trying to get everyone on board his journey to peace. He seemed to be succeeding with great aplomb, even securing an unprecedented memorandum of understanding with the main opposition party, the UNP. That agreement could be considered to be the high point of the President's bid to adopt a consensual and inclusive approach to governance. But this MoU was not adhered to when an opportunity to break up the UNP came into being.
President Rajapaksa was able to bring in 18 of the most impressive and reform-minded UNP parliamentarians onto his side to strengthen his government. These cross overs appear to have taken place on the President's terms, as the MoU that the UNP group was expected to sign with the President never materialized. But this cross over also came at a considerable price to the government. It meant a withdrawal of support of the JVP.
President's terms
While cultivating inclusiveness, the President also gave early indications that the basis of inclusiveness had to be on his terms. In his most recent call to the LTTE to return to the negotiating table, the President insisted that the LTTE should first lay down their arms. This also explains why the TNA which was elected on the basis that they were to be the LTTE's proxies in Parliament, have been effectively excluded from the President's efforts to reach a consensus. The costs of this policy of exclusion have been war, human rights abuses, abductions, assassinations and internal displacement.
Now it is also apparent that the President is prepared to exclude even those who have been his most loyal allies, if they have a different agenda to his. In recent weeks, the President has demonstrated decisiveness in openly distancing himself from the JVP whose grassroots election machinery was crucial in delivering to him the votes he needed for victory at the presidential elections of 2005. With the sacking of the three ministers, he has shown himself to be capable of making quick decisions, even if they are controversial ones.
But the costs of dismissing those dissenting ministers need to be weighed against the benefits. Sometimes it is better to win back dissenters than to have them join opposing parties. There are already speculations about new alliances that will bring together disparate parties such as loyalists of former President Chandrika Kumaratunga from within the ruling party and the JVP, and even the UNP.
Undoubtedly, partnering the JVP in the governance of a multi ethnic and plural society that is thoroughly integrated into the international economy is a difficult task. The JVP's economic philosophy is more relevant for a bygone era of socialism, while its attitude towards the ethnic conflict is bereft of understanding of the nationalism of other peoples. But the JVP has the merit of being disciplined, pro poor and anti corruption.
The difficulty of partnering the JVP in governance may have been the reason why President Rajapaksa was prepared to ignore the MOU he had signed with it in the heady days of the Presidential election campaign. Mangala Samaraweera was one of the few government ministers to openly show his disagreement with the President regarding the exchange of allies that saw the UNP reformist cross overs come in and the JVP go out. But there was more to the sacked minister's dissent than the partisan interests of party politics.
Minister's dissent
In an open letter to President Rajapaksa when he was still the country's foreign minister, Mr Samaraweera highlighted the unacceptable nature of human rights abuses taking place in the country. Especially in a civil war, a government is responsible for ensuring that human rights are not violated, as those who suffer from such violations are its own citizens. Perhaps it is this concern that Mr Samaraweera showed for the human rights of the mostly Tamil victims that has caused the state media to label him as indirectly supporting the LTTE.
There were other issues as well in Mr Samaraweera's letter to the President, such as corruption and interference with tenders by the Presidential Secretariat, that might have catalysed the President's ire. But what may have forced the President's hand was the prospect of more parliamentarians from the ruling party following the lead set by Mr Samaraweera. There are reports of a great deal of resentment due to important ministerial portfolios being taken away from old time loyalists of the ruling party and being given to the newcomers from the UNP who have crossed over. Unless the present conflict within the government is swiftly resolved, it can continue to grow.
President Rajapaksa has said that the ministers who have been sacked can have their positions restored to them if they admit to their mistakes. The tragedy of the present turn of events is that the pressing problems of the people will continue to be neglected, while the political leaders fight for power and position. Instead of being moved by the human tragedy that is unfolding in the country, their attention will be riveted on the clash of the political titans. President Rajapaksa and his government would do well to reconsider their strategy of excluding those deemed to be enemies. The price of trying to keep them excluded can prove to be very high. Often inclusion can be the less costly option.
The stakes are high for the people. Over 200,000 persons continue to live in abject conditions as refugees in their own country, and the ambushes, killings, abductions and child recruitments all continue without abatement. The cost of living that affects all sections of the people continues to soar, even as billions are expended on war and corruption. These are Sri Lanka's major challenges and they require the inclusion, cooperation and consensus of all sections of the polity, including the JVP and LTTE, if long term answers to them are to be found.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Afghanistan: Boom in poppy harvest
Helmand's (in Afghanistan) status as the opium capital of the world seems secure for the present. Sources inside the provincial government say this year's opium poppy harvest could dwarf even the record levels of 2006. And a team of eradicators sent from Kabul to destroy the crop is meeting with armed resistance even before they begin work, say local residents.
"There is almost twice as much land under cultivation for poppy this year," said Engineer Ghulam Nabi, head of Helmand province's agriculture department. "Farmers are not receiving adequate support from the government, so they are growing more poppy."
Helmand is part of the increasingly problematic south of Afghanistan, where a growing insurgency has made it difficult for the government to mount an effective eradication campaign. Farmers, emboldened by the lack of effective counter-measures, as well as by support from the Taleban, are increasing their poppy acreage.
"More and more poppy is being grown in areas under Taleban control," said Ghulam.
In December, the United States government estimated that total opium production in Afghanistan for the year was 26 per cent higher than in 2005, while the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, UNODC, cited a higher forecast increase of 49 per cent in the Afghanistan Opium Survey it published in October.
Helmand's dominant role is clear from the statistics on how much land is used to grow opium poppy around the country. The UNODC report estimated that this one province accounted for 42 per cent of all Afghan cultivation in 2006, far more than any other part of the country. The poppy crop area in Helmand has been expanding exponentially - last year it was two-and-a-half times the land used in 2005.
If predictions are correct, 2007 could be the biggest year ever in Helmand. Ghulam said that this year there were 60,000 hectares planted with poppy, compared with 35,000 last year. However, he underlined that his agriculture department only looked at registered agricultural lands. Farmers are also planting poppy in the desert, beyond the scope of his data.
The UNODC's estimated 2006 cultivation figure of 69,000 hectares includes desert areas. There are no estimates for the total area under cultivation in 2007.
The prognosis is especially troubling in view of the large-scale counter narcotics efforts being mounted by the Afghan government, with generous support from America and Britain. Together, the two countries have pledged over two billion US dollars to help Afghanistan deal with its drug problem, including beefing up the police and judiciary, developing alternative livelihoods, and, when all else fails, destroying the poppy crop of those who persist in planting it.
Farmers have no choice
In Helmand, at least, farmers have resisted all efforts to persuade them to switch crops.
"What am I supposed to plant? I have to support my family," said Haji Ramtullah, a farmer in Maarja, a district close to the provincial capital Lashkar Gah. "If there was some other work I would never grow poppy. But I can't make enough money from vegetables, and there aren't any jobs. We have no factories, we don't even make matches here."
Some British and American counter-narcotics specialists have remarked privately that Helmand's farmers grow poppy out of greed rather than necessity. But Ramtullah insists he is barely eking out a living.
"We grow poppy, but the drug smugglers take it from us. We sell it cheaply, then they take it over the border into Pakistan. They make twice as much as we do," he said.
This is borne out by the UNODC report, which traces the bulk of profits to a few well-connected "drug lords". Most farmers, according to the report, are making a subsistence-level stipend from the crop.
"I have just two jeribs [approximately one acre] of land," complained Abdul Satar, also from Maarja. "I can grow 20 kilos of poppy, and make just about 100,000 afghani [2,000 dollars], which is barely enough to support my family."
The government has promised to help farmers find other means of earning a living, but farmers and officials alike grumble that support has been slow in coming.
"The government is telling us not to grow poppy but they're not helping us," said Joma Khan, a farmer from Nadali district. "They promised to give us saffron seeds, but they never delivered. If they want us to grow cotton or vegetables, they'll have to help us find markets."
Agriculture official Ghulam confirmed that there was too little government support to keep farmers from turning to poppy.
"Last year we gave seeds and fertiliser to 17,000 families," he said.
"This was not enough. This year we will distribute 582 tonnes of seeds."
But farmers complain that vegetables and grains require too much water for Helmand's parched climate, and the market for such produce is not big enough to make it viable.
"If I grow vegetables I won't even get back the money I put into it," said a farmer with 30 acres near Lashkar Gah. "That's why everyone is growing poppy."
Campaign backfires
One pillar of the counter-narcotics effort has been an information campaign designed to tell farmers that growing poppy is "haram", or contrary to Islam. The provincial government in Helmand has sought to enlist the help of religious leaders who can use their highly respected position to spread the word.
In some instances, this has backfired. While mullahs affiliated with the government have helped spread the message, some figures in the religious community have not been so cooperative.
"Poppy is the answer of the south," said one mullah who did not want to be named. "Foreigners make wine and send it out to the world. We have poppy. They kill our people, then tell us not to grow poppy. But we will not obey their orders. We will not be their slaves."
Even those who accept that producing opium violates the tenets of Islam can see alternative. "I know it is haram, but I have to feed my family," said Joma Khan.
Eradication teams
The first week in February saw persistent attacks on eradication teams sent out from Kabul.
"When the anti-poppy police came, they were based one kilometer away from my house," said Rahmatullah, a farmer from the Nadali district. "There was always fighting. I think it was the Taleban. Farmers aren't strong enough to fight the police."
But another farmer confirmed that locals were engaged in the attacks as well, "Some of the farmers have joined with the Taleban since the police came in. I am happy about it - if everyone is busy fighting, I can grow my poppy in peace."
Whoever is leading the fight, the Taleban are quick to reap the benefits.
"Most of the attacks are by local people," said a Taleban spokesman in Nadali district. "But the Taleban are helping them. This is a good opportunity for the Taleban to win local support. We can continue our jihad, and local people can keep their lands. Our Taleban are ready to go anywhere in Helmand to help people fight the eradication campaign."
According to General Daud Daud, deputy interior minister in charge of counter-narcotics, there are approximately 500 police in Helmand who were sent from the capital to spearhead eradication efforts.
"The richer farmers can pay bribes to avoid eradication, while the poorer ones can't," said Abdul Manan, head of the government's counter-narcotics department in Helmand.
Glut in the market
Yields have been so high that there is a risk of market saturation. According to UNODC, last year's harvest exceeded world demand for opium poppy by almost 30 per cent.
Another record year could send the market price of the raw material plummeting.
This explains why some drug traders are applauding the anti-poppy campaign.
"I'll be very happy if the eradicators are successful," said one trafficker in Lashkar Gah. "I have lots of poppy stored. If they don't destroy poppy, I'm afraid the price will come down."
- IWPR report
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
ISLAMABAD DIARY
Jonaid Iqbal
Pakistan has had security concerns from the day it was born. Indian leaders not happy with the creation of two dominions of Pakistan and India on August 1947 began a war cry that the division of 'mother India' was a temporary phenomenon, and Pakistan was bound to return to it in less than six months. That, of course did not happen, given the grit of Quaid-i-Azam M.A. Jinnah and other leaders of the new state to preserve freedom and give a working shape to it. Under the Independence Act of July 1947, Indian States then enjoying independent status under British sovereign power were urged to keep in mind the aspirations of their local people before acceding to either of the two dominions.
However, India kept up applying force on rulers of paramount states and compelled them to join India. The Kashmir issue - hitherto unresolved - had its beginning in this Indian highhanded act.
One of the tricks that India has been trying since the past 60 years is to put a stranglehold to deny water resources to Pakistan. All the big rivers drain into India and because of this natural factor, that large country simply remains unmindful of foreign sources of these rivers and lays claims to all river waters as its own.
Indus Water treaty
The Indus river system, one of the major systems in the world, comprises the main Indus and its five important tributaries of Rivers Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, and Beas. All these five rivers originate in the Himalayas. River Indus - lifeblood for the country -- flows through Pak provinces of Punjab and Sindh and falls in the Arabian Sea. A temporary accord was signed between Pakistan and India in 1948 to regulate the usage of the Indus System. But it found itself victim of India's hegemonic policies, and cut of with water during dry months and also letting loose so much water during wet months to flood Pakistan Punjab.
Pakistan tried to find a solution of water sharing and concluded the Indus Water treaty with India, back in 1960s. The treaty's main provisions included, the usage of waters of the three Eastern Rivers was given to India, and the usage of waters of the three Western rivers was given exclusively to Pakistan. However India, as the upper riparian state, was allowed a restrictive use of their waters.
The treaty had international ramification and got endorsement with World Bank acting as one of the guarantors of this treaty. However, the Kashmir imbroglio came into the way.
World Bank expert
India unilaterally decided to set up a run-of-river, 450MW hydroelectric plant at Baglihar in Jammu & Kashmir, utilizing the waters of river Chenab. Pakistan raised objections as the lower riparian state. But talks at the settlement of the row did not succeed.
At Pakistan's request the World Bank appointed a neutral expert to look at the problem. Prof Raymond Lafitte, the World Bank expert, appointed in May 2005, decided the case in favour of Pakistan on Monday. After vetting three out of four objections from Pakistan on the design of Baglihar Hydroelectric Plant on river Chenab in the Indian occupied Kashmir the expert asked New Delhi to accept them as a moral obligation.
The neutral expert found that India's calculations on free board were inaccurate. He decided that the crest level of the dam should be kept at the lowest and directed India to reduce the free board from 4.5 meters to three meters-a 33 per cent reduction "This is the moral, legal and political obligation of India to accept the World Bank's decision on the Baglihar dispute. India got nothing from violating the Indus Water Treaty of 1960," said Pakistan Water and Power Minister, Liaquat Ali Jatoi. He also asked India to respect the decision, as it is vital for the peace process.
Prof Raymond Lafitte however did not support Pakistan's viewpoint on the issue of the spillway. But Minister Jatoi said various technical and legal aspects in Pakistan are studying the project. 'We have the right to take up the spillway issue anytime at an appropriate forum," Mr. Jatoi said at an Islamabad news conference, "We may here recall the case of Farakka Dam, a legacy from Pakistan days -- that like the Kashmir issue with its resultant effect on water sharing on lower and upper riparian states -- still remains unresolved. The Farakka Dam leaves Bangladesh dry and parched with India overdrawing water from River Ganges."
For India this water woe between the two countries simply does not exist, even though Bangladesh has made loud protests over India's building another irritation in the new Indian 5,1630 million Tipaimukh Dam project over River Borak, that will have additional adverse effects of the Farraka Barrage in a big way. India has erected 35 dams and barrages after the construction of the Farakka Barrage along Bangladesh borders without any discussion with Dhaka with which it shares 54 common rivers. Bangladesh, crisscrossed by rivers, had nearly 1,000 rivers before the Farakka Barrage, but the number now has come down to 250.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
|
