Corruption in Afghanistan: It's Even Worse Than You Think

It is amusing to me that a UN official is complaining about corruption in a country ravaged by colonialism, many civil wars, foreign occupation and domination (for more than a century), poverty...and a country that is not even "socially and culturally" a homogenous country yet - but a conglomeration of tribes (some warring and some collaborating occassionally).

People in these various ethnic communities, much like American businessmen and other professionals (who are also a tribe, and sometimes even act like mobs, with powerful influence over policies that serve their interests and pockets), tend to survive by loyalties, affiliations and narrow associations. That is how they've been for centuries - and surprisingly it has protected them well from marauders, invaders and conquerors for more than a thousand years. It is not perfect or just...but then again what is just when your land, resources, culture, water, basic dignity and freedom are constantly interfered with?

And look who is talking? A UN official - from an organization with many members that have endemic corruption in their countries though they may operate more efficiently. Give me a break! Some of you guys are either dumb, naive or playing another game with Afghanistan - using current policies to promote your own agenda - under the guise of bashing Karzai or Obama. And the agenda might be a Rightwing one!

One should never condone corruption or ignore it. But to go on and on about some $50 corruption in a poor country in the middle of so many complex geo-political situations, in a pretty unique and serious region of the world, is both amusing, amazing and ridiculous.

In stead of focusing the small money, lets see where the big money is going - the millions, the billions and the trillions? And you'll find it is going to the guys who fund the personnel with the helmets, guns and tanks - many of whom don't know what they are fighting and are hurting civilians more so than the really really bad guys. And spy idiots, these days, spend more time following innocent people: peace activists, thinkers, ordinary bloggers, eccentric people, politically unique or liberal people and smart commentators. Why? Because it is easy to spy on them, take their knowledge and use it conveniently for their own benefit...and even scapegoat them when things get difficult for the spy guys and their agenda (which is nothing more than keeping their old game going).

It is easy to blame Karzai, Obama, one person or two people (though I am not absolving them of everything or anything). There are many around them and inside their system who are the really big players. There are even so-called liberal guys who come on TV (like LINK TV) to bash Obama constantly - but never focussing on the big fries who have been in the system much longer than Obama (who came on less than a year ago). He is one guy at the top - trying to stay alive to do a few things, who is also very likely to be shot by thousand other nuts inside the house (literally). And it is amusing that complaints are comming from mediocre journalists, writers and bloggers who don't do much but whine, whine and whine, then blame, blame and blame. Many of you guys did not even have the courage to do the right thing or even say the right thing when you had power and privelege, but want a new President, or a small group of people, to wave the magic wand...and even stop earthquakes in Haiti. Are people that stupid, or is the media that cunning?

And now there are a few boys, who because they are NOT making their millions, are suddenly feeling poor and victimized...Give it a break! If anyone questions they'd have acid thrown on their face...And in some places, like the SE, subtle and obvious forms of racism have started rearing its ugly head. There is now a tendency to attack a few successful or modest middle class people, immigrants, minorities and even women - many overqualified and actually thoughtful, sensible and sensitive.

In many poor places, with no order or consistent reliable institutions that people can rely on, there is likely to be corruption. You don't just complain about it - like the UN! You build institutions that are reliable and are consistently fair and objective (as much as possible) in their services to ordinary people. That cannot happen overnight in a place where people have narrow loyalties and affiliations - including the NGOs, aid agencies and many others (some of whom keep themselves employed by constantly telling one side that the glass is half empty and the glass is half full to another side - when it comes protecting or promoting themselves. Very cunning and convenient indeed!

Besides, a UN representative should not be talking! The UN itself, for a long time, was made up of guys in three piece suits from elite patriarchal communities who represented Western interests or Anglo theories (or models of development built on aggressive business priorities), and notorious for talking a lot while doing little. This is the reason why they rely on American expertise and efficiency so much. Lets face it...America is one of the most action centered society and is efficient (though not always effective). UN is neither efficient nor effective - but talks a lot (though its perspecitve may be necessary to balance power).

This Costa guy, the author interviewed, should know something about corruption elsewhere...Ask him to investigate Latin and South America and see how far he goes on how far corruption goes in this part of the world.

When there are no reliable dependable working institutions corruption, thuggery, intimidation and croyinism may become a problem, or even endemic (that people are forced to adapt to and cope with). That is not good! But it takes time, effort and work-in-progress to build that kind of reliable institutions of justice. Look at how "aid and services" are getting from the airport to the people in Haiti with all that has been sent? NOT! Even something simple as a military run rescue mission or aid program is not going well. Imagine trying to do this with no or few organizations and constant violence!

So cut the crap! What is the agenda behind this article - other than to balme Karzai, Obama and other people. Do you guys want the money...should it go to the guys selling McNuggets? What is it? I never see you guys dealing with social issues as something bigger than one or two people - as if one or two guys alone can solve all of human problems. Are you stupid, childish or just an outright Rightwing propaganda penetrating liberal media - pretending to care about social issues while really protecting businesses with big agendas and pocketbooks?

Try to see how many communities, and Chambers of Commerces (not all but some), play these same tribalistic croynisitic good-ole-boys' games of corruption right here (in our backyard) - yet they do it legally and in the grey shade of ethics. Does that not count as corruption?

If some poor police officer in Afghanistan is taking $2 to avoid enforcing the traffic law that should not be the priority of the UN (a mediocre bulky agency that could not stop the genocides in Africa). But if he is ignoring a major accident that was caused by a reckless driver with power and influence than that is problem and should be condemned. If he is taking $250 (a lot of money in a poor country) to do his basic job then he should be prosecuted. Know what is a serious crime, what is a serious threat to establishing justice and institutions of law, order and fairness...and what is not!

These articles are too simplistic, lack context and come with an easy "good and evil" judgements. And with Obama being Black there are many Whites, Latinos and even some Asians on an attack binge these days. That is obvious on American TV. There is nothing wrong with valid or appropriate criticism - but some of this looks like an ethnic and a political bias that deliberately skews facts and truth. Or, maybe it is just one more shoddy journalism!

Remember, when examining other cultures, with an unique history and problems, much of it created by centuries of colonialism, foreign domination, control and intrusion, get your facts right, get your context right and get your analysis right (with some admission that you too could be coming from a possible position of ignorance, bias or both).

Helloo...what about INVASION? I knew it -- we should have sent guys in there with books on business ethics and dealings, instead of guns. Sob! How were we to know that the rest of the world would be concerned with the prevalence of corruption? Noooooo.....

You live and learn and then you die and forget it all. Life is only a dream and the only reality is your own inevitable death.

You call it corruption in the western world - but it's not so very different from the "taxes", "user fees" and lobbyist "contributions" that westerners pay out on a daily basis.

Try getting services from your local government if you haven't paid your taxes, a ticket to see a pop star without a Ticketmaster "service fee" ... or try talking to you senator or congressman if you didn't contribute to their campaign chest?

To say that the "problem" is "corruption" is to look at Afghanistan as a Western country with Western eyes. Historically, this approach has never worked in Afghanistan before and it's unlikely that it will work this time. Afghanistan functioned reasonably well prior to the Russian invasion - it wasn't perfect but then neither is the Western world perfect either.

The goal should be to return Afghanistan to the Afghans and let them sort their country out - it won't be a "Western" solution but then, would you want the Afghans trying to sort out Americas problems at the moment?