Afghan war expands despite opposition by U.S. majority
2011Gerry Foley 2011-01Read it in the scan (PDF at ETOL), page 1 →
The words are the paper's own, from its digital file; the division into articles was made by machine, so a box or caption can end up inside the article next to it.
Scan page 1
(Above) Dec. 10 protest in Islamabad against U.S. drone attacks, responsible for many deaths of Pakistani civilians.
INSIDE SOCIALIST ACTION: Protest grand jury hearings! — 2 Attacks on U.S. public sector — 3 The Obama administration’s year-end review of the state of its war effort in Afghanistan, of course, endeavored to be positive, citing some progress. However, it had to be guarded, admitting that whatever gains have been made are “fragile” and “reversible.” Just how fragile has been indicated by a number of articles in major press organs and a UN report.
The New York Times pointed out Dec. 15: “The growing fragility of the north highlights the limitations of the American effort here, hampered by waning political support at home and a fixed number of troops. The Pentagon’s year-end review will emphasize hard-won progress in the south, the heartland of the insurgency, where the military has concentrated most troops. But those advances have come at the expense of security in the north and east, with some questioning the wisdom of the focus on the south and whether the coalition can control the entire country.”
The article described a situation of rampant gangsterism in the north by a tangle of armed groups supposedly allied with the Kabul government but not controlled by it. In this area, where the Pushtuns, the historic base of support of the Taliban, are in a minority, the dominant ethnic groups there have been hostile to the Taliban. But The Times article explained that the local populations are so tired of being plundered and intimidated by the various militias and warlords that they are beginning to see the Taliban as the lesser evil. Despite the brutality of the Taliban when they ruled Afghanistan, they gained a reputation at least for being honest and disciplined.
What the article in question did not consider, but what would be much more threatening for the U.S.-led war effort in the long run, are the indications that the resistance to the occupation is becoming more broadly nationalistic and less limited to Islamists or Taliban.
(continued on page 11, in “Too much ‘sentiment’ but not enough story”)
----- pull-quotes -----
Workers fight back in Europe — 4 WikiLeaks — 6 Canada news — 8
Canada & Latin America — 9 Films: Made in Dagenham — 10 Georgia prisoners strike — 12