Joel Brinkley

Hamid Karzai’s demands may create a horrid future in Afghanistan

Updated: 2013-10-26T23:53:44Z

By JOEL BRINKLEY

Tribune Content Agency

The Afghan people’s most dangerous foe is not the Taliban. It’s not Pakistan or al-Qaida. No, it’s their president, Hamid Karzai.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry flew to Kabul earlier this month and spent more than 24 hours with Karzai, trying to work out an agreement that would allow a modest contingent of U.S. troops to remain in the country after 2014, to continue protecting Afghans from their enemies.

The two men said they came to agreement on several important issues. But the pact remains hung up on one key point: Karzai’s insistence that American servicemen accused of a crime be tried in Afghan courts. Kerry made it clear the United States will not accept that — as it shouldn’t.

Karzai already knew that. After all, the long-term military-assistance deal with Iraq foundered on exactly that point two years ago. (And look at Iraq today, consumed by the worst sectarian violence the nation has seen in years.) But how does that disagreement make Karzai Afghanistan’s greatest enemy?

First of all, he knows full well that 80 percent to 90 percent of Afghanistan’s annual budget income is foreign aid from the United States and other NATO nations.

Afghanistan manufactures almost nothing of value except opium poppies, used to make 90 percent of the world’s heroin. But income from that goes to drug traffickers and tithing for the Taliban.

So when the U.S. and NATO leave and stop providing copious aid, the Afghan economy will simply collapse. There’s little debate about that.

Serious as that prospect is, that’s hardly the only problem. Mullah Mohammed Omar, the reclusive head of the Taliban, issued a warning last week, saying his forces will continue aggressive attacks if Western forces stay on past next year’s withdrawal date. But without the security agreement, many Afghans fear the Taliban won’t simply carry out terror attacks. They'll retake most of the country.

The United Nations reports that more than a half-million Afghans have already been abandoning their homes, farms, orchards or businesses in recent months. They’re fleeing to the Kabul suburbs or other countries — presumably near-certain the Taliban will return.

Despite all that, Karzai seems to be reneging on at least one point he and Kerry already agreed on. In a radio speech last week, Karzai said “our demands” include an end to “unilateral military operations by foreign troops,” a key point that was said to have been settled. The U.S. wants to maintain the authority to attack any al-Qaida sites the military may find.

As for the remaining sticking point, legal jurisdiction for American soldiers accused of crimes, Karzai told Kerry he will convene a loya jirga, an assembly of tribal elders, handpicked by Karzai, to decide that. Later, Karzai also suggested that he thought the next government should decide whether to accept the agreement. It’s supposed to take office in April. But the U.S. says it needs an answer by the end of this month.

What if the tribal elders or the next government insist, as Karzai has, that Americans accused of a crime be tried in Afghan courts? Kerry said he is “adamant” they be tried in U.S. courts, adding: “And Afghan leaders have a choice: Either that’s the way it is, or there won’t be any forces there of any kind.”

And no wonder. A Transparency International survey last summer found that the police and courts are the most corrupt institutions in the state.

Azizullah Ludin, head of the state’s High Office of Oversight and Anti-Corruption, told TOLOnews, an Afghan TV station: “I can say that corruption exists in the Afghan judiciary to the extent that if someone has taken your cat, and you want to go to court to get your cat back, then you have to give up your cow for your cat.”

Karzai and his carefully chosen loya jirga would be fools to reject America’s offer. They would be condemning the nation and its people to a fate horrid beyond imagining.

Former New York Times correspondent Joel Brinkley is the Hearst professional in residence at Stanford University

Deal Saver Subscribe today!

Comments

The Kansas City Star is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Kansas City Star uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here