Archive for the 'Afghanistan' Category

Sep 17 2007

Canada - Time to exit NATO

Cyrano’s Journal Online and its semi-autonomous subsections (Thomas Paine’s Corner, The Greanville Journal, CJO Avenger, and VoxPop) would be delighted to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to subscribe, type “CJO subscription” in the subject line and send your email to

nato_victim2

“They are regarded as “accidents”. They are concealed in a criminal way by “the big circus of the information” which sends its correspondents to follow the tracks of this and that occidental vanished person, but doesn’t make a move or even turn its face to report what happens everyday in Afghanistan: dozens, hundreds of children like those burnt alive by our humanitarian operation.”

(Photo and caption source: http://www.rawa.org/nato_victim.htm)

By Jim Miles

9/17/07

NATO has recently had one of its regular meetings of the “Military Committee” in Victoria, B.C., Canada, with appropriate demonstrations against it for Canada’s role within NATO and Afghanistan. Phil Lyons, the organizer of the demonstration, which ended peacefully, says “NATO is now a weapon of American Imperialists.” Another demonstrator asks, “I don’t understand why NATO exists,” then answers his own question, perhaps without realizing it, that “NATO is a war tool the West uses to intimidate other nations into submission.” [1]

They are correct regardless of the high-sounding rhetoric that emanates from the government about international humanitarian rights and the war on terrorism.

NATO as it currently stands has a dual command structure, SACT and SACEUR.
SACT is the acronym for the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, the transformation being that of making NATO forces into a U.S. styled rapid deployment force anywhere in the world. SACT will be dual-hatted (meaning the same guy has both positions) as Commander, US Joint Forces Command. This one person is U.S. Air Force Gen. Lance L. Smith, who is headquartered in Norfolk Virginia. SACEUR is the acronym for Supreme Allied Command Europe and is be dual-hatted as Commander, US European Command, General John Craddock, United States Army who is appointed by the US President. His headquarters are in Mons, Belgium.

Continue Reading »

No responses yet

Sep 07 2007

The politics of blind hatred: Who are the fanatics?

Cyrano’s Journal Online and its semi-autonomous subsections (Thomas Paine’s Corner, The Greanville Journal, CJO Avenger, and VoxPop) would be delighted to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to subscribe, type “CJO subscription” in the subject line and send your email to

iraqpain

“The total of dead and displaced comes to 20 percent of the Iraqi population. If this is not fanaticism on the part of the Bush administration, what is it? Certainly it is not reason, tolerance, and deliberation.”

BY PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Dateline: September 5, 2007

President Jimmy Carter was demonized for pointing out in his book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, that there are actually two sides to the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Distinguished American scholars, such as John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt have suffered the same fate for documenting the excessive influence the Israel Lobby has on US foreign policy.

Americans would be astonished at the criticisms in the Israeli press of the Israeli government’s policies toward the Palestinians and Arabs generally. In Israel facts are still part of the discussion. If the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, could replace Fox “News,” CNN, New York Times and Washington Post, Americans would know the truth about US and Israeli policies in the MIddle East and their likely consequences.

On September 1, Haaretz reported that Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the president of the Union for Reform Judaism, which represents 900 Congregations and 1.5 million Jews, “accused American media, politicians and religious groups of demonizing Islam” and turning Muslims into “satanic figures.”

Rabbi Yoffie is certainly correct. In America there is only one side to the issue. An entire industry has been created that is devoted to demonizing Islam. Books abound that misrepresent Islam as the greatest possible threat to Western Civilization and seek to instill fear and hatred of Muslims in Americans. For example, Norman Podhoretz proclaims “World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism.” Daniel Pipes shrieks that “Militant Islam Reaches America.” Lee Harris warns of “The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam’s Threat to the West.”

Think tanks have well-funded Middle East programs, the purpose of which is to spread Islamophobia. Fear and loathing pour out of the Middle East Forum and the American Enterprise Institute.

Continue Reading »

2 responses so far

Aug 21 2007

Iraq Progress Report: A Time to Assess and Reflect

Cyrano’s Journal Online and its semi-autonomous subsections (Thomas Paine’s Corner, The Greanville Journal, CJO Avenger, and VoxPop) would be delighted to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to subscribe, type “CJO subscription” in the subject line and send your email to

image1

“Their main goal, in fact, may be no different than other resistance groups - to drive out a repressive occupier (the British in the South in their case) and reclaim their sovereignty. Afterwards they can sort out how to run their country.”

By Stephen Lendman

8/21/07

The Bush administration is required to submit three progress reports on Iraq to Congress in September after it returns from its August recess. The US Comptroller General will issue one around September 1 on how well so-called congressional benchmarks have been met. Near the end of the month, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) conservative think tank will report on “The readiness of the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) to assume responsibility for maintaining the territorial integrity of Iraq, denying international terrorists a safe haven, bringing greater security to Iraq’s 18 provinces in the next 12 to 18 months, and bringing an end to sectarian violence to achieve national reconciliation.”

Then, on or about September 15, General David Petraeus, US “Multi-National Force” - Iraq (MNF-I) commander will submit his assessment of progress before multi-billions more funding are released for a war the Pentagon and most others in Washington know is unwinnable and lost. No matter, his report (and the others) will state progress has been made and the “surge” is working even though details will be sketchy in what’s expected to be a vaguely worded deceptive snapshot of contrived positive trends. It’ll fool no one, but Congress will be asked to accept it (and the others) on faith that more time, money, sustained troop levels and patience are needed.

Continue Reading »

No responses yet

Aug 03 2007

US War On Terror And Muslim Response

Cyrano’s Journal Online and its semi-autonomous subsections (Thomas Paine’s Corner, The Greanville Journal, CJO Avenger, and VoxPop) would be delighted to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to subscribe, type “CJO subscription” in the subject line and send your email to

keypic2

By Usman Khalid

8/3/07

The entire world was shocked beyond belief when the Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon building were struck on 9/11 by US planes hijacked by Arab young men. There was sympathy for the victims and justifiable anger in America. But the US response in invading the already devastated country of Afghanistan was excessive. More important, the USA did not obtain the endorsement of the UN Security Council and the invasion violated International Law. A military attack is permissible only in response to an invasion or imminent aggression. The Afghans did not invade the US nor were capable of doing so. That the 9/11 attacks had been planned and executed by Arab mujahideen in Afghanistan, did call for action, perhaps even punishment, but not the wanton bombing that resulted in the death of over 40,000 mostly innocent non-combatants.

The invasion of Afghanistan set the stage for the “US war on terror” that is still going on. There is little point in quarrelling about this name which many consider misleading. What is important is that it is a new type of war, with new rules. When President Bush said, “You are either with us (the USA) or with the terrorist”, he propounded a new doctrine of war the chief features of which are: 1) strategic ‘pre-emption’ and 2) ‘unilateralism’. Both of these features constitute a violation of international law. America has assumed the right to invade or bomb any country which it accuses of providing refuge or assistance to terrorists. America makes demands to hand over to them persons it accuses of being terrorists. A country that refuses on the plea that it does not have an extradition treaty with America, or that legal procedures should be followed before extradition, or that they cannot hand over a person to be sent to a dubious jurisdiction like Guantanamo Bay, or that the accusation made by America does not constitute a crime in their country, earns the wrath of the USA. Most countries take the threats from America seriously and comply. Those countries that resist are demonised, isolated and sometimes even invaded. Three countries have been invaded since 9/11 - Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon – and thousands have been incarcerated in many countries without trial or handed over to America by their own governments because of dire American threats.

Continue Reading »

2 responses so far

Jun 23 2007

Reviewing Michel Chossudovsky’s America’s War on Terrorism

By Stephen Lendman

6/23/07

Michel Chossudovsky is a noted academic, author, activist and relentless researcher concentrating on America’s imperial crusade to control planet earth for its markets, resources and cheap exploitable labor. He’s a Canadian economist by profession having taught at the University of Ottawa as well as at academic institutions in Western Europe, Latin America and Southeast Asia. In addition, he’s been an economic adviser to developing countries’ governments and a consultant for many international organizations, including the UN Development Programme (UNDP), UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, International Labour Organization (ILO), and World Health Organization (WHO). He’s also the editor of the Centre for Research on Globalization and its web site, Global Research.ca.

“America’s War on Terrorism” - An Overview

Chossudovsky’s book is a greatly expanded version of his 2002 book titled, “War and Globalization: The Truth behind September 11.” The current newly titled 2005 edition (post-9/11 and the 2003 Iraq invasion and occupation) includes 12 new chapters with those in the original edition updated. The author states the book’s purpose is “to refute the official narrative and reveal - using detailed evidence and documentation (not speculation based on opinion alone)” - the true nature of America’s “war on terrorism,” that’s as relevant now as when the book was first published.

Chossudovsky calls it a complete fabrication “based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden (from a cave in Afghanistan and hospital bed in Pakistan) outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus.” He calls it, instead, what, in fact, it is - a pretext for permanent “New World Order” wars of conquest serving the interests of Wall Street and the financial community, the US military-industrial complex, Big Oil, and all other corporate interests profiting hugely from a massive scheme harming the public interest, in the name of protecting it, and potentially all humanity unless it’s stopped in time.

Continue Reading »

One response so far

Jun 09 2007

Losing Afghanistan: Firepower Doesn’t Always Win Wars

By Ramzy Baroud

6/8/07

In a statement made available through the country’s Foreign Office, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Khursheed Mahmood Kasuri chastised the “international community” for the “abandonment” of Afghanistan following the withdrawal of Soviet forces in 1989. In his estimation, it was this attitude that created the conditions which eventually culminated in the rise of the Taliban, the hosts of al-Qaeda.

The statement was reportedly made at the G-8 Foreign Ministers’ recent conference in Potsdam, Germany, according to Pakistan’s Daily Times. Kasuri was, expectedly, packaging his critique within a context specific to Pakistan’s own concerns: namely the 2.4 million Afghani refugees - according to UNHCR figures – and who have crossed the border into Pakistan seeking shelter and relative safety. Moreover, Pakistan, under consistent censure for allegedly failing to hunt down Taliban and al-Qaeda militants operating around its Western border, deployed 90,000 soldiers into those regions; border skirmishes, sporadic gun battles but increasingly sustained bombardment campaigns of tribal areas – suspected of being safe haven for al-Qaeda militants – have left thousands dead and wounded since the American war on Afghanistan in October 2001.

The tension created by Pakistan’s somewhat proxy role in reining in US foes is complicating the government’s mission in asserting itself as an independent entity whose main concern is the welfare of its own people. But tension in Pakistan, which runs through tribal and political lines, is hardly comparable to the simmering situation in Afghanistan itself, where anger directed at the Kabul government and its Coalition benefactors is boiling to the point that another violent upsurge is imminent.

Hamid Karazi, crown president of Afghanistan in charade elections to rule over a disjointed country and discontented population is still incapable of exercising his power beyond the municipal borders of the capital; but even that level of control is gradually more difficult to maintain as a spate of suicide bombers is promising to turn Kabul into another Baghdad. But since his ascent to power in October 2004, Karzai has little to show for, save endless pledges of financial support he solicited, 40 billion USD to be exact, out of which little arrived, and the money that was made available is hardly improving people’s lives – corruption in Afghanistan is, unsurprisingly, rife. Billions have been spent in Afghanistan nonetheless, by NATO/US forces on military equipment, whose firepower effectiveness is anything but debatable among Afghani civilians.

The BBC’s Alastair Leithead reported on May 31, “Afghans’ Anger over US Bombing” merely details one of many such incidents in which scores of innocent civilians are killed; such reports are ever more rare since they are simply not newsworthy – the worth of a news story from Afghanistan is measured by whether Coalition forces incurred causalities or not. The recent killings in the village of Shindand in the Zerkoh Valley, Western Afghanistan was harrowing by any standards. 57 were reportedly killed by American bombardment; half of the dead were women and children, according to Leithead; the bombardment also destroyed 100 homes, humble dwellings that are unlikely to be rebuilt soon.

“The bombardments were going on day and night. Those who tried to get out somewhere safe were being bombed. They didn’t care if it was women, children or old men,” said one of the survivors. But who would believe Mohammad Zarif Achakzai, who fled his mud house with his family under the relentless bombardment? Brig Gen Joseph Votel has simply dismissed the reports of civilian causalities. “We have no reports that confirm to us that non-combatants were injured or killed out in Shindand,” he said. And that is that.

Shindand is not under Taliban control, at least not yet. Much of the country, mostly in the south but increasingly elsewhere is falling under the control of Taliban extremists. The Taliban offers job security to the men and an opportunity for revenge and even martyrdom; in many parts of Afghanistan, such offers are exceedingly appealing.

Fearless British journalist Chris Sands of the Independent, one of very few journalists reporting from Taliban controlled areas, tells me that it’s only a matter of time before Afghanistan turns into an Iraq-like inferno. Indeed, Taliban’s regrouping efforts have been astonishingly successful as of late. Taliban militants have managed to ambush and kill 16 government police officers just hours after killing seven Coalition soldiers – including five Americans – by shooting down their chopper over the Helmand province on May 30. These confirmed numbers are often balanced out with unconfirmed government report of many Taliban’s militants killed by government forces; it’s often the case that these reports overlook the much higher number of civilian casualties.

Foreign powers are clearly failing in Afghanistan; they neither won hearts and minds nor contributed to the stability and rebuilding of the country in any meaningful way – 60 percent of the country’s economy is now dependent on narcotics exports. In fact, Afghanistan represents a perfect case of the proverbial “cut and run” that President George Bush avows not to commit in Iraq. Needless to say, the only assignment that the US and its allies seem seriously committed to is that of maintaining its military regime, predicated on the utter reliance of firepower regardless of the outcome.

Afghanistan’s two foreign military missions: Nato’s International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), with its 37,000 troops and the US-led Coalition: Operation Enduring Freedom are affectively losing their pseudo control over the country. Taliban is gaining strength and is regenerating, not because of their remarkable theological alternative to democracy, but precisely because all of the rosy promises made late 2001 and early 2002 yielded a most repressive regime, marred with corruption, insecurity, warlords, and incessant Coalition attacks on civilian localities throughout the country. When Afghans turn back into supporting the Taliban, one can only imagine how desperate they’ve become.

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Kasuri is obviously right, though his intentions might be self-serving; “abandonment” is a befitting term to describe the so-called international community’s attitude towards Afghanistan; that abandonment brought the Taliban to power following the chaos resulting from the ousting of the Soviets and their puppet regime in 1989 – subsequent civil war in Afghanistan then killed more than 50,000 people in Kabul alone – is shaping a bizarrely similar scenario that is giving rise to the same loathed grouping; The Taliban could soon find itself in a strong bargaining position, that even the Americans themselves cannot ignore; the Taliban’s “Spring Offensive” might’ve been delayed, but the balance is clearly tipping in favor of the Taliban, in a war that promises more of the same sorrows.

-Ramzy Baroud is a Palestinian author and journalist. His latest volume: The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People’s Struggle (Pluto Press: London) is available at Amazon.com. He is the editor of PalestineChronicle.com and can be contacted at

7 responses so far

May 30 2007

New Opium Crops - In Iraq

Published by cyrano2 under War on Drugs, Iraq, Afghanistan

By Rowan Wolf

5/30/07

One would have thought this would have been big news, but somehow it has largley escaped the U.S. corporate media. Patrick Cockburn, however, writes Opium: Iraq’s deadly new export. While apparently in the beginnings of cultivation, the poverty and chaos which has enveloped Iraq is spawning opium fields in southern Iraq. Iraq has historically been one of the opium highways for Afghanistan’s trade.

Now Iraq is turning to opium cultivation for the same reason that Afghanistan returned to it - poverty, profit, and chaos:

As in Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban in 2001, these conditions of primal anarchy are ideal for criminal gangs and drug smugglers and producers. The difference is that Afghanistan had long been a major producer of opium and possessed numerous laboratories experienced in turning opium into heroin. The Taliban, on the orders of its leader, Mullah Omar, had stopped its cultivation by farmers in the parts of Afghanistan it controlled. Farmers near the southern city of Kandahar grubbed up cauliflowers and planted poppies instead as soon as the US started bombing.

The one factor currently militating against criminal gangs organising poppy cultivation in Iraq on a wide scale is that they are already making large profits from smuggling drugs from Iran. This is easy to do because of Iraq’s enormous and largely unguarded land borders with neighbouring states. Iraqis themselves are not significant consumers of heroin or other drugs.

There are well established links between the illicit drug trade, U.S. foreign policy, and global financial institutions. While the discussions of these are intricate and complex, the summation of them is not. The CIA - and more recently Special Forces - have utilized the heroin and cocaine trades to finance “black ops.” Corporations have equally benefited by laundering vast amounts of drug money through financial institutions and Wall Street.

One of the implicit “benefits” of massive instability resulting from conflict and poverty is the encouragement of drug production. The desperation created in nations such as Afghanistan and Iraq fuels the increase of illicit drug manufacture. It has been argued by some that the reason for the U.S. Southeast Asia intervention (Vietnam War) was to control the “Golden Triangle. Certainly, once the Taliban stopped virtually all of the opium production in Afghanistan, Myanmar/Burma once more emerged as the leading source of opium. The invasion of Afghanistan, and removal of the Taliban, has seen opium production in Afghanistan grow each year - it is now at record highs. It is hardly likely that this is simply coincidence.

It is no surprise then that Iraq would join the opium trail. The business is “good” for all “interests.” Crime rings, war lords, and extremist groups get a massive surge of resources. The CIA and Special Forces get funding for illicit operations. Arms dealers (including the U.S. which is the world’s largest arms dealer) are assured ongoing demand. Corporations get massive infusions of cash to extend their operations and line their pockets. Meanwhile, the “war on drugs” facilitates a growing militarized police state. With the privatization of jails and prisons, the growing populations of those incarcerated in the “war” creates a profitable labor force, while tax payers pay the bill for the whole thing. This was detailed in the case of Iran/Contra by Gary Webb in his series in the San Jose Mercury News and then in his book “.”

Tangled webs that ensure future conflict - and profit. So goes Iraq.

Other Related Articles

From The Wilderness Archive: CIA and Drugs

The Bush-Cheney Drug Empire. Michael Ruppert, 10/24/2000.

CIA, Drugs, and Wall Street. Michael Ruppert, 6/29/1999.

U.S. : Afghan poppy production doubles. Reuters, 11/28/03.

One response so far