9/11 Started 20 Years of Failure in Afghanistan

By Henry Srebrnik, [Saint John, NB] Telegraph-Journal

On September 11, 2001, 19 militants associated with the extremist group al-Qaeda hijacked four airplanes and carried out suicide attacks against targets in the United States.

Two of the planes were flown into the twin towers of the World Trade Centre in New York City, a third plane hit the Pentagon just outside Washington, D.C., and the fourth plane crashed in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Almost 3,000 people were killed in the attacks, which triggered major U.S. initiatives to combat terrorism.

Mohamed el-Amir Awad el-Sayed Atta was the brains of the operation and might arguably be considered the most important person of the 21^st century thus far.

Virtually everyone on the planet who was older than 10 at the time remembers exactly where they were and what they were doing on that day. It was, in that sense, a “world-historical” event, similar to the start of the two world wars, and we had entered a new zeitgeist.

That morning, I had boarded an airplane in Winnipeg, en route to Toronto, in order to fly back to Charlottetown, following a three-day academic conference. About 40 minutes into the flight, the pilot announced that all aircraft in North America were being ordered to land at the nearest major airport.

He gave no explanation, but everyone realized something serious had happened. We touched down at Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. We then heard the astonishing news.

We were put up at a Holiday Inn for the next three days and nights and provided with various necessities (because our baggage initially remained on the plane) by the Red Cross.

The international bridge connecting the city to its namesake on the upper peninsula of the state of Michigan was already closed, guarded by soldiers with machine guns. We all got to know each other while in the hotel and watched the unbelievable coverage on television.

Our local Charlottetown CBC radio station interviewed me by phone about how we “airplane people” were faring. On Sept. 14, I finally caught a plane to Montreal and returned home, having missed the first few days of the term.

The term “Islamism” was still not much in use at the time, but through a strange coincidence, I had published an article in a Calgary newspaper, dated August 30, about the rise and spread of this ideology, entitled “Fundamentalist Islamism: A Form of “Religio-Racism.” After all, there had been numerous terrorist attacks around the world for at least a decade prior to 9/11.

 “It is this fundamentalist vision, with its totalitarian theory of absolute truth and religious domination, which theorizes non-believers as ‘others,’ to whom no mercy need be shown,” I wrote. “Islamists support the idea of ultimate world domination through war: the non-Islamic world is identified as dar e l-harb, those areas still to be conquered.” I then described their activities in Africa, the Middle East, the Caucasus and Central Asia, Southeast Asia, South America, the Balkans, and Western Europe. 

This paragraph, given recent events, stands out in particular: “Afghanistan itself is now ruled by arguably the world’s most repressive regime, the fanatical Taliban, who oppose all political rights to non-Muslims minorities, such as Hindus.”

As we know, because this regime was harboring Osama bin-Laden and his al-Qaeda organization, the terrorist group behind 9/11, U.S. President George W. Bush launched an attack on Afghanistan as part of what would be termed the “War on Terror.” It would be followed two years later by an invasion of Iraq, based on questionable information that Saddam Hussein’s regime, too, was somehow involved with Islamists.

President Joe Biden’s ignominious abandonment of Afghanistan, which is now once again in the clutches of a Taliban stronger than ever, forms a sad ending to Bush’s “mission accomplished” in Afghanistan and Iraq. The dates 9/11/01 and 8/31/21 might be considered bookends. 

The United States has lost trillions of dollars, more than 7,000 soldiers killed, and the destabilization of the entire greater Middle East and Central Asia, in this misguided mission. (Canada saw 159 troops killed in Afghanistan, the largest number for any single Canadian military mission since the Korean War.)

Not only did neither of these wars succeed in ending the terrorist threat, but they weakened America economically and politically, and led to the strengthening of her rivals – China, Russia, and, most worrisome, Iran. The Tehran regime now virtually calls the shots – literally -- in Iraq and will doubtless gain political advantages in Afghanistan.

The sad truth, often forgotten both by the idealistic left and those on the hawkish right, is that you can’t build democratic institutions (involving clearly dubious elections) in places where the indigenous political cultures don’t support the mission.

 

The Palestinian Territories are Far from Democratic

By Henry Srebrnik, [Moncton, NB] Times & Transcript

When the “squad,” that group of left-wing Democratic Party legislators in the U.S. Congress who in their heart of hearts would like to see Israel disappear, begin to criticize the PLO regime on the West Bank, you know things have become bad.

They censured the Palestinian Authority (PA) amid Ramallah’s crackdown on rights activists and critics. This came after 28 people were arrested in a crackdown on peaceful protest Aug. 21-22.

Among them was Fadi Quran, the local Campaign Director from Avaaz, a U.S.-based nonprofit organization that promotes global activism. He called the Palestinian Authority “an illegitimate government.”

They had gathered to hold protests memorializing well-known PA critic Nizar Banat, who died in the custody of Ramallah’s security forces in June.

“Locking up peaceful protesters is a textbook human rights abuse and the hallmark of authoritarian regimes,” tweeted Rep. Ilhan Omar. Palestinian-American Rep. Rashida Tlaib directed her disapproval at the PA’s leader. “Dear President Mahmoud Abbas,” she wrote. “Shame on you for suppressing Palestinian voices who are trying to seek liberation from not only the Israeli apartheid government, but from your corrupt leadership.”

Rep. Cori Bush added that “We stand with Palestinians against the violence of the Palestinian Authority’s authoritarianism. Freedom for political prisoners now.”

Nearly two dozen Palestinian civil society groups issued a statement on Aug. 23 warning of “a dangerous decline in rights and public freedoms,” and holding Prime Minister Mohammed Shtayyeh responsible for “his failure to protect the rights of citizens.”

Why has this been happening? It appears that the status of President Abbas and the PA continue to deteriorate amid allegations of PA corruption. The PA is perceived by many Palestinians in the territories as unfit and bound to collapse.

On April 29, Abbas postponed elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council, which were due to be held on May 22. Abbas has been wary of elections since 2006, when his arch rival, Hamas, defeated his Fatah faction of the PLO, winning 74 of 132 seats in the Council.

Palestinian analysts said the president baulked when it looked like his Fatah movement was heading for defeat. The cancellation exposed what many Palestinians regard as proof of the futility of the policy pursued by Abbas since he was elected president in 2005. He has described security cooperation with Israel as essential to the PA’s rule, but the Palestinian public now regards this policy as weak and submissive.

The death of Banat on June 24, under interrogation in a security facility, only aggravated the rage. Banat, an independent opposition figure who frequently disseminated video clips critical of the PA, attracted many followers. His family has described his death as an “assassination.”

In Palestinian popular opinion, Hamas is the main beneficiary of these developments. It is now regarded as a more authentic representative of the Palestinian interest than the PLO, and as unafraid to fight against Israel.

Pollster Khalil Shikaki reported that Hamas is currently perceived as capable of changing the asymmetric relations between Israel and the Palestinians. Abbas has in effect conceded leadership of the conflict over the holy sites in Jerusalem to his Gaza-based rivals.

One of the ways that Hamas has chosen to challenge and weaken the PA is by publicly associating with the “axis of resistance” led by Iran and its proxies, and by strident declarations of coordination between battlefronts against Israel in the south and the north.

But the PLO does have its supporters. The extensive construction in the West Bank in 2007-2013, when Salam Fayyad was PA Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, the Ramallah government constructed homes, expanded investments in the economy, and created thousands of jobs.

A fairly large middle class was created during those years, which enjoyed economic stability and regular income that enabled it to plan its future, obtain bank credit, and meet financial obligations.

Abbas is given credit for this, which complicates the task of those seeking to depose him. Also, Palestinians view the institution of the Palestinian Authority as a national achievement, but only as a preliminary stage on the way to an independent state. Even Hamas, which opposed the 1993 Oslo Accords that set it up, now regards the PA as an institution that should be preserved.

 

Russia Continues Involvement in Syria

By Henry Srebrnik, [Charlottown, PEI] Guardian

With western countries largely preoccupied with the coronavirus pandemic and the fiasco in Afghanistan, the civil war in Syria has fallen off the radar. But not for Russia.

Russia’s military involvement in Syria from September 2015 on led to the collapse of the rebels opposing the regime and secured the continued rule of Syrian President Bashar alAssad.

The opposition couldn’t withstand the unrestrained use of military force, mostly from the air, backed by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the Shiite militias that the Iranians brought with them into Syria.

The brutality demonstrated by Russian President Vladimir Putin in order to achieve his goals in Syria stood in direct contrast to the lack of interest, indecision, and perhaps even weakness shown by the United States over the past decade with respect to the Syrian crisis.

Russia’s involvement has strengthened its image in the eyes of the region, where governments have been deeply impressed by the determination and destructiveness Moscow used to promote its objectives, as well as its readiness to help an ally in trouble.

On the other hand, American credibility never recovered after President Barack Obama blinked when Assad’s regime crossed Washington’s “red line” by using poison gas against his own people in August 2013, killing more than 1,400.

Moscow wants to lead Syria’s reconstruction process, while gaining possession of economic assets. The Mediterranean port of Tartus has been leased to

Russia by the Syrian government for 49 years for both military and economic purposes. The deal gives the Kremlin sovereign jurisdiction over the base.

Russia is expanding the navy base and planning to construct a floating dock to boost the port’s ship repair facilities, according to Russian military officials. Upgrading the repair facilities will allow the Russian navy to avoid dispatching ships to naval installations in the Black Sea for maintenance.

The agreement also allows Russia to keep a dozen warships, including nuclear-powered vessels, at Tartus, the only navy facility the Kremlin possesses outside the former Soviet Union.

The Russian Ministry of Defense is currently working on expanding the capacities of Syria’s Khmeimim air base in Latakia as part of Russia’s plans to entrench its presence in the eastern Mediterranean in the long run.

It is working on making it a centre to facilitate logistical and strategic transfers from Russia to Syria, and from there to any other base in the Middle East such as al-Jufra base in Libya.

The expansion also carries a message to the new U.S. administration -- that there will be no immediate withdrawal of the Russians and that Syria is a major area of influence for them.

The Russians have also taken steps to obtain contracts in the fields of construction, transport, electricity and water, industry, and agriculture. They have invested special effort in the attempt to acquire concessions to search for gas from the fields along the Syrian Mediterranean coast, and from the oil and gas fields to the east of Syria.

But Syria is a ruined country, with some three quarters of its economic infrastructure destroyed. Since Assad’s troops fired the first shots at peaceful protesters in the southern city of Daraa in the spring of 2011, around 6.6 million people have been displaced within Syria. A similar number have been forced to flee the country. The number of dead may be as high as 600,000.

In the past year, food prices in the country have gone up 247 per cent. According to the World Food Program, 12.4 million people in Syria, or about 70 per cent of the population, are going hungry.

There are over one million Syrian refugees in Lebanon, making up around a quarter of the country’s people. In Jordan, with a population of about 10 million, there are 1.3 million Syrian refugees, and in Turkey, there are more than 3.5 million. And while the West has forgotten about it, the carnage continues.

 

America is Divided Against Itself

 By Henry Srebrnik, [Moncton, NB] Times & Transcript

I’m shocked at how quickly Americans who just months ago were praising him have turned against Joe Biden over the Afghanistan pullout. Clearly it’s displaced anger.

American editor and novelist Benjamin Kerstein, in an article in Quillette magazine published in August, suggested that “America may simply be a society so traumatized by recent history that it can no longer contend with reality. 9/11 and the 2008 financial meltdown would have been bad enough, but now a once-in-a-century pandemic has claimed over 600,000 lives.”

Anxieties have turned into collective irrationality. A significant segment of both the American Left and Right seem to have given up on the republic and its institutions. They now hate each other.

Automation and globalization have slashed the returns to blue-collar, unskilled work. Stagnant wages for such groups, combined with the increased cost of housing, have affected poorer Americans severely. 

At the same time, a super-class of married, two-income families that congregate in cities or exclusive suburbs emerged. They are balkanizing America with their divisive “woke” ideology. 

The largest corporations are embracing and advancing that social agenda, even as wealth distribution becomes even more skewed, with uppermost one per cent pulling away from all the rest.

Social media, the world of entertainment, legacy media, and the universities are part of the ideological world that shapes public policy. This has erased the distinction between the public and private spheres. They can wield the powers of government without legal limits, as if they were dealing with their own private affairs.

Angelo Codevilla, a professor emeritus of International Relations at Boston University, suggests extending the Bill of Rights to those organizations. “You can’t have it both ways: You can’t have private privilege and at the same time have no public responsibility.”

The elites rationalized their impoverishment of the white working class by claiming that they were racists and that the United States is suffused with white supremacy. That’s why the rhetoric now coming out of the universities sees conservatives as racist for no other reason than voting Republican.

Democratic Party strategists, beginning in the 1990s, figured that they’d soon have a permanent hold on power thanks to urban intellectuals, young single women, racial and ethnic groups, and the LGBTQ community.

America is no longer a nation of one unique people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion. Nearly four in 10 Americans trace their ancestry to Asia, Africa, and Latin America. It is a multiracial, multilingual, multicultural society – this, in a world where countless countries are being torn apart over race, religion, and roots.

Of course a diverse, multi-racial nation has much to recommend it, and might well be more free, vibrant, and prosperous than a mono-racial one. But this does not change the age-old human impulse to separate into in-groups and out-groups.

A hundred years ago, President Theodore Roosevelt announced a plan for a “New Nationalism.” He said that “The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing as a nation at all, would be to have it become a tangle of squabbling nationalities.”

Large multicultural and multi-ethnic democracies like the United States have in the past inevitably collapsed into smaller, more ethnically defined regions. The western part of the Roman Empire became the nations of Western Europe, the Ottoman Empire the countries of the Middle East and North Africa, and so on. Can America be the first nation in the history of humanity to avoid this fate?

There is a solution, and it doesn’t involve the return of a discredited white ethnic supremacy. It is cultural homogeneity and civic nationalism, and America used to have it, with its melting pot, patriotism, belief in American exceptionalism, love of country, flag and anthem, pledge of allegiance, American apple pie and all such ties that bind.

But in trying to deconstruct those ties of nationality which hold the centre together, by celebrating a more strident form of multiculturalism with no concession to American values or social mores, and denigrates American culture and history, left-wing liberals have been dismantling the very thing which keeps group hostility at bay. Little wonder then that America is descending towards dystopia.

Politics in Suriname Reflect the Country's Diversity

 

By Henry Srebrnik, [Moncton, NB] Times & Transcript

Consociational democracy is found in countries that are deeply divided into distinct religious, ethnic, racial, or regional segments. Its two central characteristics are government by grand coalition and segmental autonomy.

Such countries, known as plural societies, have little overarching national unity. Political elites from the ethnic segments rely on patron-client networks to maintain support, while inter-elite relations are strongly adversarial.

Power-sharing has primarily been facilitated by the need for each ethnic group to retain access to state resources, which remains the driving force of government formation.

Suriname, wedged between Guyana and French Guiana in South America, is such a country. It was governed as a Dutch colony until independence in 1975. Due to its colonial history, which centred around a plantation economy based on slavery, indentured labour, and ethnic and racial admixture (or “creolization”), the country is culturally regarded as part of the Caribbean.

It is the smallest country in South America, with a population of 575,000. The largest ethnic group are descendants of South Asians, known as Hindostanis, who form about 27.4 per cent of the population, followed by Maroons, at 21.7 per cent, whose ancestors are mostly runaway slaves that fled to the interior during Dutch rule.

Creoles, at 15.7 per cent, are descended from Africans and Dutch Europeans. Finally, Javanese, at 14 per cent, originate on the island of Java\ in the former Dutch East Indies (modern Indonesia).

Political mobilisation has occurred on an ethnic basis, with the major parties all representing, and catering to, specific ethnic groups. But a coup d’état in 1980 resulted in the installment of a military regime spearheaded by Desi Bouterse, a Creole, leading to a seven-year abrogation of democratic rule.

The military takeover was initially greeted with some enthusiasm, primarily due to his vow to end the tradition of ethnic politics which was associated with economic stagnation and  political deadlock.

 However, after six years the regime had become notorious for its human rights abuses and involvement in drug trafficking. On top of that, in 1986 a bloody Interior War erupted between the military and the Jungle Commando, a Maroon rebel group headed by Bouterse’s former bodyguard Ronnie Brunswijk. Domestic and international pressures forced Bouterse to initiate a process of political liberalisation, leading to the drafting of a new constitution in 1987.

It essentially restored the old institutional framework but provided for a more powerful president elected by and from among parliament. Free and fair elections in 1987 produced a landslide victory for the old ethnic parties, while Bouterse’s newly established pan-ethnic National Democratic Party (NDP) suffered a dramatic defeat.

Suriname thus reverted to power-sharing politics and grand inter-ethnic coalition governments. However, the 2010 elections resulted in a shocking victory for Bouterse’s NDP.

Even though the party dominated the Surinamese government for ten years, its pan-ethnic nature to some extent ensured a continuation of the power-sharing tradition, since all ethnic groups retained at least some access to state positions and resources.

For example, after the 2010 election an astonishing coalition was formed between Bouterse and Ronnie Brunswijk, the leader of the Maroon-based General Liberation and Development Party (ABOP), who had been Bouterse’s main enemy during Suriname’s Interior War.

The main fault line in contemporary Surinamese politics runs between the traditional ethnic parties and Bouterse’s pan-ethnic NDP. However, the NDP is broadly (and increasingly) regarded as a Creole-dominated party, and Hindostanis in particular complained about discrimination by an NDP government.

The outcome of the May 2020 elections saw a shift back to Suriname’s multi-party power-sharing traditions. The victorious Hindostani-dominated Progressive Reform Party (VHP) under Chan Santokhi, winner of 20 of the 51 seats in parliament, formed a coalition with the Maroon ABOP led by Brunswijk, the Creole National Party of Suriname (NPS), and the Javanese Glorious Empire (PL) parties.

The defeated NDP retained 16 seats. This has triggered fears of political victimisation among NDP supporters.

Surinamese politics remain very antagonistic and polarised. In the end, however, the pragmatic need for parties to obtain resources for their own ethnic group trumps the hostility.

“We’re looking forward to a better future, because we are two leaders who have been entrusted to lead this nation together,” Santokhi said of himself and Brunswijk in an interview.

 

The Israeli-Jordanian Relationship is Complex

 

By Henry Srebrnik, [Charlottown, PEI] Guardian

Few Jordanians shed a tear when Benjamin Netanyahu’s run as Israeli prime minister came to an end earlier this year. Jordan’s former information minister, Mohammad Momani, said “any Israeli premier other than Netanyahu would be better for Jordan.”

Over the last few years, policies by Netanyahu’s government confounded and strained the ties between the two countries. Now there have been signs of improved relations.

In one of his first gestures as Israel’s new prime minister, Naftali Bennett met with King Abdullah II in early July and agreed to double the supply of water it sends the Hashemite Kingdom from the Sea of Galilee.

Israel agreed to increase the amount of water it shares annually with Jordan to 50 million cubic metres, nearly double the 30 million cubic metres Israel usually provides.

Jordan, which is suffering from a severe drought, is one of the driest countries on earth and its water shortages are expected to worsen with climate change.

King Abdullah has maintained diplomatic and security ties with Israel throughout his 22-year tenure, but he remains sensitive to his country’s large Palestinian population and its politics.

The Jordanian defeat in the 1967 Arab-Israeli War led to the loss of the West Bank and east Jerusalem, including the Old City with its Muslim holy places. These had been incorporated into the kingdom in 1948 following the creation of the Jewish state.

Israel pledged to respect Jordan’s “special role” in overseeing Jerusalem’s Muslim and Christian holy sites. It needs Amman’s co-operation to ensure stability in that troubled city.

Nearly 60 per cent of Jordan’s population is of Palestinian descent, so Abdullah’s public relationship with Israel is mostly marked by his support of the Palestinian cause. The Jordanian government has attempted to deflect from many of his country’s woes by condemning the Jewish state.

At times, the kingdom has also temporarily withdrawn its ambassador in Tel Aviv for consultations. But the 1994 peace treaty between the two countries has endured. Jordan’s criticisms of and rhetoric on the Palestinian issue do not shake the fundamentals of its relationship with Israel.

Last year, Jordan began receiving its first natural gas supplies from Israel after a $10 billion deal was signed in 2016. Bennett and Abdullah also reached agreement on trade cooperation, mainly involving Jordanian exports to the Palestinian Authority. The cap on Jordanian exports to the West Bank will be raised from $160 million to $700 million. Intelligence cooperation between Israel and Jordan have also continued at a high level.

Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid called Jordan “an important neighbor and partner,” saying Israel “will broaden economic cooperation for the good of the two countries.”

The Jordanian monarch said he “came out of those meetings feeling very encouraged, and I think we’ve seen in the past couple of weeks, not only a better understanding between Israel and Jordan, but the voices coming out of both Israel and Palestine that we need to move forward and reset that relationship.”

Jordan’s demand for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital, has long been a core feature of its foreign policy. But although he is a relative newcomer, it is highly improbable that Bennett will end Israeli control over the West Bank and evacuate large settlements to appease Abdullah.

However, if Israel were to take a far-reaching step, such as annexing large parts of the West Bank, Jordan would likely annul its diplomatic ties with Israel.

Abdullah understands he needed a functioning relationship with Israel to keep approximately $1.5 billion in annual U.S. aid flowing, especially as Jordan experiences a record public debt of $45 billion.

The U.S. and the monarchy signed a new security pact in March.

Abdullah also met with U.S. President Joe Biden later in July. The economic crisis and even an attempted coup d’état by Abdullah’s half-brother last April, made this meeting more important than ever.

Biden voiced his support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Jordan’s engagement with the new Israeli government.

But should the king become less popular, Israel would need to gird itself for potentially dramatic changes in what has long been its most stable neighbour.

 

U.S. Caught Unprepared by Taliban's Advance

By Henry Srebrnik, [Moncton, NB] Times & Transcript

As the Taliban retakes control of Afghanistan, American policy makers are left looking on in dismay. President Joe Biden’s aides thought that, even after American troops left the country, its government would have the luxury of time to keep the rebels at bay.

Intelligence assessments, we now know, wildly overestimated the capabilities of an Afghan army that disintegrated, often before shots were even fired.

Joe Biden was just as clueless as his advisors. “There’s going to be no circumstance where you see people being lifted off the roof of an embassy of the United States in Afghanistan,” he announced on July 8. “The likelihood there’s going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely.”

The surprise is that they’re all surprised. I didn't realize how out of touch with reality American policy makers and officials are. They seem to have had no idea Afghanistan was a corrupt “dead state walking.”

I know that sounds harsh, but what else can you call a country that collapses virtually overnight, like a house of cards, with virtually no resistance to a rag-tag army whose weaponry was no match for the western-installed government.

The Taliban, with no armored vehicles, no heavy artillery, no air force, took over as fast as their vehicles enabled them to travel. And everywhere there were Afghans waiting to welcome them. They obviously had been surreptitiously preparing and were in place ready to rise up.

Taliban opponents were left in the dust despite being the recipients, according to various sources, of upwards of about one trillion U.S. dollars in military and other aid.

Engaging in some hyperbole, I have remarked many times that within 24 hours of the western withdrawal, the Taliban would destroy the girls’ schools, NGO offices, civil society groups' buildings, and all the other attempts at “democratic nation-building” Washington had been engaged in for two decades. Unfortunately, I may be proved right.

Have you ever heard the phrase “fifth column?” The term comes from the Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939.  As four of the Nationalist columns moved on Madrid, a fascist general referred to his militant supporters within the capital as his “fifth column,” intent on undermining the Republic’s government from within, awaiting only the arrival of the rebels.

And so it was in Afghanistan, as we watched newscasts of President Ashraf Ghani fleeing Kabul in an airplane. He maintained he left the country to avoid bloodshed as the Taliban entered the capital Kabul.

This is the same president who a month earlier had declared that “I will never kneel before such a destructive force. We will either sit knee-to-knee for real negotiations at the table or break their knees on the battlefield.”

But perhaps he then recalled the fate of the last Afghan president, Mohammad Najibullah, who was in office when the Taliban captured Kabul 25 years ago. They abducted him from UN custody in September 1996, tortured him to death, and then dragged his dead body through the streets of the city.

And while we’re speaking of déjà vu scenes, there were also pictures of helicopters evacuating Americans from the U.S. Embassy. Some of us still remember pictures and newsreels of people fleeing Saigon on helicopters in April 1975 as the Viet Cong entered the city to end another ignominious war.

Why didn’t America win the war in Afghanistan? Why weren’t they able to completely rout the Taliban, create an effective, independent government, train and sustain a competent Afghan army, and then leave? 

Some Republicans believe it was due to “woke generals” who were allegedly better at playing progressive political games than fighting America’s enemies. They blame President Joe Biden – unfairly, in my opinion.

The Taliban is a predominantly Pashtun, Islamic fundamentalist group that ruled Afghanistan from 1996 until 2001. The founder, Mullah Mohammad Omar, launched the movement in 1994 to secure the city of Kandahar, which was plagued by crime and violence. It has had far more support than most of us would like to admit.

It is stronger now than at any point in the last twenty years. This coming Sept. 11 will find it once again in control of Afghanistan, as was the case 20 years ago.

Jordan Celebrates its Centenary Amidst Unrest

 

By Henry Srebrnik, [Moncton, NB] Times & Transcript

 Jordan recently launched its centennial celebrations, defying the skeptics who over the years had predicted the kingdom’s demise on countless occasions. Jordan, it was thought, was an artificial creation that was bound to collapse sooner or later.

Many doubted whether Jordan would survive the end of King Hussein’s reign after his 46 years in power. But Hussein’s son, King Abdallah II, who ascended the throne in 1999, has now ruled for 22 years.

Jordan’s ability to retain its sovereignty is usually attributed to its Hashemite rulers, whose legitimacy has rested on their descent from the Prophet Muhammad. As well, Jordan is ethnically and religiously homogenous, being 95 per cent Sunni Muslim and Arab.

The kingdom of 10 million has enjoyed institutional and organisational continuity, in the hands of an effective governing elite. But Abdallah received all his formal education in England and the United States. His upbringing did not include intimacy with the all-important East Bank tribal leaders and their politics, which were second nature to Hussein.

Is the kingdom now threatened by the violent currents that have swept over the Middle East in recent decades? During the “Arab Spring” numerous protest movements were emerged from the younger generation, calling for democratic reforms.

Since then, an atmosphere of disquiet has prevailed. In the summer of 2018, the country shook again with popular protest, this time against a new income tax. A year later, unemployed marchers descended on the capital, Amman, followed by a teachers’ strike which went on for a month.

The pandemic has further weakened Jordan’s already fragile economy. The critical tourism industry, in particular, was disrupted by the pandemic The national debt before the COVID-covid 19 crisis was already at 95 per cent of the GDP.

According to the World Bank, the Jordanian economy shrank 1.6 per cent over the course of the last year while unemployment has risen to nearly 25 per cent. Youth joblessness is even worse, at around 50 per cent. Power outages are now a regular occurrence, food prices are soaring, and there are frequent shortages of fuel.

In early April, the kingdom’s ongoing domestic crisis came to a head in a clash of sibling rivalry within the royal family, between King Abdallah and his younger half-brother, Hamzah.

There had been a tense relationship between Abdallah and Hamzah for many years. On his deathbed King Hussein had instructed Abdallah to appoint Hamzah as his Crown Prince when he became king. But Abdallah removed Hamzah in November 2004 to pave the way for his own son, Prince Hussein, whom he appointed as heir to the throne in July 2009.

This past April, Hamzah was placed under a form of house arrest, while a score of others were arrested from Jordan’s most powerful tribes and clans. Hamzah denied involvement in any plot and signed a letter of allegiance to King Abdallah and Crown Prince Hussein.

The great majority of the political elite, backed by the security establishment, had rallied round the king. Abdallah published a statement two days later announcing that the unfortunate problems within the family had been resolved.

Still, in the first two weeks of June, a handful of tribes launched attacks on the Jordanian police in Amman that lasted six days, including attacks on the highway near the capital’s airport.

So Jordan is not as stable as it once was. It has been described as a “soft dictatorship” with minimal democracy, despite elections and a parliament. A revolving door of prime ministers have no actual authority, and the monarchy maintains its grip via a powerful and pervasive internal security apparatus.

Jordanian officials can basically detain anyone they want, at any time, for as long as they want, without any judicial process whatsoever, if such people protest, independently unionize, or strike.

Among those detained have been thousands of women accused by their male guardians of disobedience, leaving the home without permission, or having sex outside of marriage.

Jordan remains heavily dependent on foreign aid, most of which it receives from Washington, amounting to around $1.5 billion annually. Abdullah met U.S. President Joe Biden on July 19. The economic crisis, a severe drought, and the suspected coup d’état attempt made this meeting more important than ever.