It is interesting to see that until a couple of years the simple story of 9/11 was accepted by almost all as the "truth" (with few exceptions of course, who at that time would be labeled 'crazy' at best or 'pro-terrorists' at worst)...About nine years later, Washington Post publishes this article questioning the accepted truth of that time. And skimming through the 100+ comments following the article, the majority seems to be sympathetic with the critics. What was is that made the story more believable then as opposed to now? Why do intelligent people fail to be critical and get swayed by the status quo? Maybe it is the risk of sticking one's neck out by being the first to break apart from the conventional norms.
Let's see if this effort succeeds in exposing more truth or gets tabled...
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
Afghanistan the site of another Co War?
I call it a Co War, as it's not quite the cold war that we traditionally know it, but there are enough resemblances to remind us of one. In the traditional sense of the term, Cold War referred to the war between global superpower fought not on each others' soil, but some other third party such as Vietnam, Afghanistan, Korea, Nicaragua, Angola, etc.
The pattern that is emerging in Afghanistan in the last one and a half years differs for two reasons, a) it is not between superpowers, but it is between two nuclear armed states and apparently stern enemies and b) it is not quite two-sided yet, no am I looking forward to it becoming so.
The Indian Embassy in Kabul was first targeted in July 2008. Right about four months later, they decided to strike again in October 2009...exactly four months later, Indian officials were the prime target again today (Friday morning) in Kabul city. The collateral damage in each attack obviously goes much beyond the target groups, with Afghan civilians making the greatest and easiest victims. Today's attack, based on the current reports, apparently took the lives of at least nine Indians, one French, one Italian and five Afghans, with about 30 people injured.
The question that always comes to my mind is whether we will ever learn, come to our senses and stop the violence.
The pattern that is emerging in Afghanistan in the last one and a half years differs for two reasons, a) it is not between superpowers, but it is between two nuclear armed states and apparently stern enemies and b) it is not quite two-sided yet, no am I looking forward to it becoming so.
The Indian Embassy in Kabul was first targeted in July 2008. Right about four months later, they decided to strike again in October 2009...exactly four months later, Indian officials were the prime target again today (Friday morning) in Kabul city. The collateral damage in each attack obviously goes much beyond the target groups, with Afghan civilians making the greatest and easiest victims. Today's attack, based on the current reports, apparently took the lives of at least nine Indians, one French, one Italian and five Afghans, with about 30 people injured.
The question that always comes to my mind is whether we will ever learn, come to our senses and stop the violence.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
hegemony
The best definition of hegemony I have ran into so far:
"Hegemony is like a pillow: it absorbs blows and sooner or later the would-be assailant would find it comfortable to rest upon." (Gramsci in Cox, 1996)
:)
"Hegemony is like a pillow: it absorbs blows and sooner or later the would-be assailant would find it comfortable to rest upon." (Gramsci in Cox, 1996)
:)
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Evaluating Impact
What is the impact of scientific developments on human life? Consider the example of telephones, or more current modes of communication, skype, e-chat, etc.
There have been many advances in the empirical methodology of impact assessment over the course of history, especially in the last few decades with the rise of more sophisticated statistical modeling and methods of program evaluation.
Some observers problematise such advancements by highlighting their inability to take into account broader consequences, not just immediate, of each intervention. One example would be to ask what the new intervention has replaced and are we suffering some loss of value by switching to the new...consider the rise of formal insurance and the fall of societal networks of support...or the rise of e-interaction replacing more human and face to face interactions. Others discuss the inability of these methods to account for more long term effects...cell phones make life a lot easier, but do we know if it has any negative long term consequences for things that we value, such as quality of our lives?
We can go on and on with more examples and critics, but what I learned new and found worth sharing is what Sigmund Freud calls "cheap enjoyment" in his famous book "Civilization and its Discontents" which he describes as in an anecdote as "the enjoyment obtained by putting a bare leg from under the bedclothes on a cold winter night and drawing it in again."
How does this complicate the impact assessment thesis? Well, pulling the bedclothes over you has no value if you take into account removing it yourself in the first place! Maybe it is just me that finds this exciting as it was totally new perspective for me.
There have been many advances in the empirical methodology of impact assessment over the course of history, especially in the last few decades with the rise of more sophisticated statistical modeling and methods of program evaluation.
Some observers problematise such advancements by highlighting their inability to take into account broader consequences, not just immediate, of each intervention. One example would be to ask what the new intervention has replaced and are we suffering some loss of value by switching to the new...consider the rise of formal insurance and the fall of societal networks of support...or the rise of e-interaction replacing more human and face to face interactions. Others discuss the inability of these methods to account for more long term effects...cell phones make life a lot easier, but do we know if it has any negative long term consequences for things that we value, such as quality of our lives?
We can go on and on with more examples and critics, but what I learned new and found worth sharing is what Sigmund Freud calls "cheap enjoyment" in his famous book "Civilization and its Discontents" which he describes as in an anecdote as "the enjoyment obtained by putting a bare leg from under the bedclothes on a cold winter night and drawing it in again."
How does this complicate the impact assessment thesis? Well, pulling the bedclothes over you has no value if you take into account removing it yourself in the first place! Maybe it is just me that finds this exciting as it was totally new perspective for me.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Charlie Wilson: hero or villain?
Charlie Wilson, the US Congressman who played a key role in supporting the Mujahideen, now known as a threat to international security, died today in his hometown Texas.
He has repeatedly expressed his sadness over the US dropping the ball in Afghanistan after the fall of the Soviet in a war that ordinary Afghans paid the price for and are still suffering as a result. But what does this concern mean? I wonder if he would have extended his support to the same people he supported about 20 years back...now that their enemy is not the enemy of the US!
It is amazing what gets recorded in history...and you might rightly ask whose history. It was millions of Afghans who lost their lives fighting the Soviet invasion, yet the documentary, Charlie Wilson's war, ends with answer to the question "Who defeated the Soviets?" with "Charlie did!"
He has repeatedly expressed his sadness over the US dropping the ball in Afghanistan after the fall of the Soviet in a war that ordinary Afghans paid the price for and are still suffering as a result. But what does this concern mean? I wonder if he would have extended his support to the same people he supported about 20 years back...now that their enemy is not the enemy of the US!
It is amazing what gets recorded in history...and you might rightly ask whose history. It was millions of Afghans who lost their lives fighting the Soviet invasion, yet the documentary, Charlie Wilson's war, ends with answer to the question "Who defeated the Soviets?" with "Charlie did!"
Friday, February 5, 2010
Guest bloggers
As part of our efforts to promote a peaceful non-military solution to the war in Afghanistan, I was screening our documentary, Afghan Exist Strategy, to a group of middle school students in Denver. The following is their reactions after seeing the film and my brief presentation on Afghanistan.
Guest blogger 1:
The cost to build a modernized school in a developing foreign country would be about $10,000. Last year alone, Americans spent:
- $10,000 on make up
- $100,000 on gold
- $200,000 on cigarettes
So it is totally possible to end poverty, through education in a matter of a generation, as long as we change out outlook on life. If we use our education and share it with the world poverty as we know it today can be forever changed for our and future generations.
Guest blogger 2:
When I saw that video I thought of all the people who are affected, and how Americans think of the people of Afghanistan as bad people, and we need to stop judging them. We can’t grasp the concept of what the people are going through over in Afghanistan. We need to help tell our peers what is going on and raise awareness, so that we aren’t so quick to judge, and actually try to help.
Guest blogger 3:
Suicide is an action that is frowned upon in almost every society. There are only two cultures that actually accept it as a way of life: the samurai and the Taliban. For some reason, they see taking your own life as honorable. The Taliban actually recruits young boys and men to train and attack positions with bombs and explosives. But why is this lifestyle so appealing? It all has to do with money. Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world and as time and money are poured into helping the people of this struggling society, things just seem to get worse.
The images that are fed to the masses by the media don’t even scratch the surface of what really goes on. You don’t see the struggles that Afghans power through every day. Today, I have seen and learned information that just blew my mind. I had on idea how hard it was to just to get a days pay in order to support your own family. I am glad to hear that the society in Afghanistan is rebuilding itself but I just wish the news media could report this instead of a sorrowful suicide bombing.
In conclusion, I feel that as soon as the world begins to learn about the true story of the Afghan people, life in this torn country may be able to finally return to normal. It must be known that the only reason a life in the Taliban is so popular is because it is the only way out for many struggling Afghans. The only true solution to this predicament all lies in the creation of jobs in this terror-stricken society.
Guest blogger 1:
The cost to build a modernized school in a developing foreign country would be about $10,000. Last year alone, Americans spent:
- $10,000 on make up
- $100,000 on gold
- $200,000 on cigarettes
So it is totally possible to end poverty, through education in a matter of a generation, as long as we change out outlook on life. If we use our education and share it with the world poverty as we know it today can be forever changed for our and future generations.
Guest blogger 2:
When I saw that video I thought of all the people who are affected, and how Americans think of the people of Afghanistan as bad people, and we need to stop judging them. We can’t grasp the concept of what the people are going through over in Afghanistan. We need to help tell our peers what is going on and raise awareness, so that we aren’t so quick to judge, and actually try to help.
Guest blogger 3:
Suicide is an action that is frowned upon in almost every society. There are only two cultures that actually accept it as a way of life: the samurai and the Taliban. For some reason, they see taking your own life as honorable. The Taliban actually recruits young boys and men to train and attack positions with bombs and explosives. But why is this lifestyle so appealing? It all has to do with money. Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world and as time and money are poured into helping the people of this struggling society, things just seem to get worse.
The images that are fed to the masses by the media don’t even scratch the surface of what really goes on. You don’t see the struggles that Afghans power through every day. Today, I have seen and learned information that just blew my mind. I had on idea how hard it was to just to get a days pay in order to support your own family. I am glad to hear that the society in Afghanistan is rebuilding itself but I just wish the news media could report this instead of a sorrowful suicide bombing.
In conclusion, I feel that as soon as the world begins to learn about the true story of the Afghan people, life in this torn country may be able to finally return to normal. It must be known that the only reason a life in the Taliban is so popular is because it is the only way out for many struggling Afghans. The only true solution to this predicament all lies in the creation of jobs in this terror-stricken society.
Why the proposed reconciliation program is flawed?
In recent weeks, the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, has been vehemently pursuing a reconciliation plan with the Taliban, offering them jobs and housing if they decide to put down their arms and join the civilian life.
While the efforts and intentions are to be applauded, the plan is fundamentally flawed and needs to be much more critically deliberated before being rolled out. I can’t help but lament on at least two critical questions in this regard.
Firstly, what does the Afghan government (and the international community) offer the current masses of impoverished and war-ravaged civilians in Afghanistan to make it an enticing promise for Taliban fighters to lay down their arms for? Do the civilians live a life that is enviable by anyone in the country, the least of whom would be Taliban who not only enjoy much better pay, but also power and even social prestige (perhaps only self-perceived) for bravely defending their land against the “infidels” and foreign invaders? Maybe I am wrong, but I always thought for anyone to voluntarily enter into an agreement, it must at least make them slightly better off than before, otherwise, it is not worth the change in lifestyle.
The brutal fact is that the majority of Afghan civilians live in such poor conditions that their lives are hardly enviable. The luckiest among them have a stable government job, which pays at most about Rs.5000 a month ($100), which is a lot less than an unskilled labor would get by doing odd jobs, and certainly a lot less than Taliban get as fighters, which many believe to be close to at least $300 a month. So why give up $300 a month and the authority that comes having an AK47 on your shoulder for a lifestyle that can barely feed your family and puts you at the bottom of the society?
The second question that comes to mind is, why reward bad behavior? We already know that a lot of the Taliban fighters fight, not for ideological reasons, but for economic reasons. We also saw the emergence of the “occasional” Taliban and then the “weekend” Taliban who may actually be working for the government during the week. Are we sending a signal to those who have not joined yet to do so so that they are eligible for our promise of jobs and housing? Why not focus on those desperate young men and give them jobs and opportunities BEFORE they join the Taliban, with a lot less monetary incentives?
In fact, this last point is exactly what we have been pushing for through our JobsforAfghans initiative. The masses of unemployed Afghans are willing to work for about $5 a day and we are totally ignoring them, until they become a threat and join the Taliban or other forms of illicit earning out of desperation. It is a lot cheaper and easier to convince those on the brink of poverty and on the verge of joining the Taliban to “work for peace” than those who have crossed this line. And if we can show, in practice, that we are able to change the lives of our civilians for the better, we do not need to extend invitations and promises of this and that to the non-ideologically driven Taliban; they will come and “work for peace” themselves…again emphasizing IF we make the lifestyle of those who are already working for peace at least livable, if not enviable.
While the efforts and intentions are to be applauded, the plan is fundamentally flawed and needs to be much more critically deliberated before being rolled out. I can’t help but lament on at least two critical questions in this regard.
Firstly, what does the Afghan government (and the international community) offer the current masses of impoverished and war-ravaged civilians in Afghanistan to make it an enticing promise for Taliban fighters to lay down their arms for? Do the civilians live a life that is enviable by anyone in the country, the least of whom would be Taliban who not only enjoy much better pay, but also power and even social prestige (perhaps only self-perceived) for bravely defending their land against the “infidels” and foreign invaders? Maybe I am wrong, but I always thought for anyone to voluntarily enter into an agreement, it must at least make them slightly better off than before, otherwise, it is not worth the change in lifestyle.
The brutal fact is that the majority of Afghan civilians live in such poor conditions that their lives are hardly enviable. The luckiest among them have a stable government job, which pays at most about Rs.5000 a month ($100), which is a lot less than an unskilled labor would get by doing odd jobs, and certainly a lot less than Taliban get as fighters, which many believe to be close to at least $300 a month. So why give up $300 a month and the authority that comes having an AK47 on your shoulder for a lifestyle that can barely feed your family and puts you at the bottom of the society?
The second question that comes to mind is, why reward bad behavior? We already know that a lot of the Taliban fighters fight, not for ideological reasons, but for economic reasons. We also saw the emergence of the “occasional” Taliban and then the “weekend” Taliban who may actually be working for the government during the week. Are we sending a signal to those who have not joined yet to do so so that they are eligible for our promise of jobs and housing? Why not focus on those desperate young men and give them jobs and opportunities BEFORE they join the Taliban, with a lot less monetary incentives?
In fact, this last point is exactly what we have been pushing for through our JobsforAfghans initiative. The masses of unemployed Afghans are willing to work for about $5 a day and we are totally ignoring them, until they become a threat and join the Taliban or other forms of illicit earning out of desperation. It is a lot cheaper and easier to convince those on the brink of poverty and on the verge of joining the Taliban to “work for peace” than those who have crossed this line. And if we can show, in practice, that we are able to change the lives of our civilians for the better, we do not need to extend invitations and promises of this and that to the non-ideologically driven Taliban; they will come and “work for peace” themselves…again emphasizing IF we make the lifestyle of those who are already working for peace at least livable, if not enviable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
