How Serious should the Russians be about American Efforts in Afghanistan and Elsewhere?
Thursday, June 17, 2010 at 4:18PM I'm tired of hearing Western bloggers and commentators lecturing Russia on how it should act in relation to the American military effort in Afghanistan, or pressuring Iran to revoke its nuclear program. This post will explain why...
Russia is being accused of being two-faced, hypocritical, short sighted etc. in its support for US efforts in the Middle East and Central Asia. Russia is said to have bribed the former president of Kyrgyzstan Bakiev to expel the Americans from their air-base in Manas. When Bakiev opted for the increase in rent on the Manas air-base instead of expulsion, the Russians instigated a coup against Bakiev. Personally I am more in favour of a simple explanation. Bakiev's regime was rotten to the core and people just rebelled against it. Anyway, at the time the topic of American air-base was still hot, there was a lot of moral lecturing. For instance I recall being told by Craig Pirrong of 'Streetwise Professor' that Russians should support American efforts in Marja, where a military operation against the Taliban was on at the time. In his words the place is major site for heroin production and most of that heroin is going to Russia and American's want to burn down the fields.
Well, Craig isn't much optimistic about the war now, I feel he isn't that way only because Obama is the Commander in Chief. Let's give him something more to be dismayed about. The mission of the US military in Marja might had been sold to the gullible public as 'War on Drugs' but its outcome was so not so epic however. The Americans had problems erradicating the opium crop once they seized Marja, so much for the cheap-talk. Of more recent note is this RT report, where Madsen mentions that the Russians are not the only people suffering from the drug surge. The Chinese apparently are getting so high, they start remembering the Opium Wars.
Are the Americans guilty? Given that the Taliban almost eradicated the opium production and it surged to unprecedented heights, once the Taliban was deposed, we might say they are. But as a counter-argument it could be said that the rise in opium production was a consequence of the American intervention and it wasn't directly caused by it. The Americans do not seem to be doing enough to mitigate the consequences of their actions and keep a government in power, by all accounts implicated in the business. I don't buy the argument that this is all Taliban's work. The Taliban might profit indirectly from the trade by, for example, extortion. However I do not see how it can have access to international markets, especially to the north of their traditional, Southern-Afghan domains. If it wants to export its produce to Russia, it must do so through middle men, these being American allies, such as Hamid Karzai's brother Ahmed Wali Karzai. Some commentators have expressed the opinion that the only thing US and their allies are in Afghanistan for, are the drugs. I am not ready to go their way since that is too much in the realm of conspiracy theories and speculation, but they seem to have a point seeing all the information available.
Now given that the American presence in Central Asia is not only a security threat to Russia by the virtue of being in the traditional its sphere of influence, but also by providing a steady supply of drugs for the Russian market, do these Russophobes think that it is wise to lecture Russians on how they should treat American interests? They can debate how much success the recent agreements between Russia and the US will have and how serious Russia is about them. As you can see Russia does not have to be serious at all about Afghanistan or Iran or anything else unless the US makes large concessions.
Reader Comments (4)
Leos--
Thanks for the mention (I don't think "plug" is the appropriate term to describe your reference) but I think your memory is failing you. The point of the post that you link to today is that I have been skeptical about Obama's "strategy" for Afghanistan since day 1. I said, earlier in the year, and late last year, that the US had to either go large or go home, and that some half-assed strategy was doomed to failure; I actually leaned towards "go home." That prediction re doomed is proving all too true.
Re drugs and Russia, what I said was that Russia wanted it both ways--to impede the US if Afghanistan, and to have the supplies of drugs cut off. Sorry, can't have it both ways. Yes, the hypocrisy charge is quite fitting.
I did not make the statements about Marja you attribute to me. Also, the Americans are leery of burning down the poppy fields, like the Russians are demanding, precisely because that would likely feed the insurgency. So the part of your post about the failure in Marja isn't quite accurate either.
In a nutshell: the Russians want the US to target drugs, the US doesn't want to target drugs because it undermines the broader war effort. I don't support half-assed war efforts, regardless of the drug angle.
As a general matter, I oppose wars on drugs, including in the US. The laws against drugs create many of the collateral costs of drug use, e.g., violence, lawlessness. I place the main culpability for drug abuse problems on the abusers--whether in Russia or in the US. If Russia has a drug problem, bitching about Afghanistan feeding it is an attempt to dodge responsibility for the individual failings of the addicts, and the broader social failings that contribute to the problem. Ditto for bitching about poor Peruvians growing coca that winds up in the noses of Americans.
Yes you did make that statement on your website, I cannot at present take time and find it but my memory serves me well. ;-) If destruction of poppy fields will fuel the insurgency, well too bad isn't it? Why then market the Marja operation with big words? A conservative government such as the Taliban would deal away with the problem that is mostly fueled by corrupt warlords.
Social problems fuel the drug problem, that is true. But you would also agree that availability of drugs is no less of a problem. Sniffing coke is the pastime of the wealthy, crack cocaine ravages the ghetto. No drugs mean, less addicts simply because there isn't anything to do and what is available is either too costly or too terrifying.
I understand that drug war is fruitless, especially when all energies are focused on the easy targets, i.e. pot smokers. However I still think crack or heroin is something to battle against.
If anyone missed, this piece is of possible interest:
Poppy Diplomacy
http://www.russiaprofile.org/page.php?pageid=International&articleid=a1276193638
It is obvious the US and NATO orchestrated the incident in Kyrgyzstan using Afghanistan as a regional Columbia with drug profits to destabilise Central Asia and spread it to Russia and regions of China which I have been saying for over a year since Obamas BS surge which was pretty obvious given Obamas staff appointees like Holbrooke, General Jones and the dark lord himself as Obamas foreign policy advisor Zbignew Brzezinski.
I have been saying this for over a year now on Evgeny Khrushchev's blog in every single new article that is what was going to happen.
http://rt.com/About_Us/Blogs/friendly-fire.html
It was said the situation happened with first an attack on an ethnic Uzbek or Kyrg then the spreading of a rumour just like what happened in 2004 with the organised pogrom against the Serbs in Kosovo and in 2009 in Xinjing in China as well as rampaging gangs destroying property as in Tibet.
Luckily Russia did not fall for the trap of sending in troops to try and control the situation and get bogged down in a situation like Afghanistan in 79 or Chechnya in 94.
But what are Russia’s options?
The best option is for Russia and the SCO to launch an investigation into who organised and orchestrated the attack which off course like in every other event they wont’ do.
@Craig Pirrong
“In a nutshell: the Russians want the US to target drugs, the US doesn't want to target drugs because it undermines the broader war effort. I don't support half-assed war efforts, regardless of the drug angle.”
If the US and Britain were serious about the “resurgent” Taliban then why is British forces helping cultivate the growth of Opium in British held provinces?
Why are all the major organised crimes figures like Igor Borisovich Rabaev running Afghan drug operations from the Afghanistan into Central Asia operate freely from the US with CIA and western intelligence ties?
http://www.madcowprod.com/10252006.html
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20100610/159377545.html