Ok, so Karzai has issued a "last warning" after the tragic raid/strike that lead to 14 Afghans being killed by NATO forces. I understand he is engaged in position-taking for the domestic audience. I understand that it is unfortunate that the international forces have made mistakes in this war. Still, I would like Karzai to point out occasionally that the Taliban has killed three times as many civilians and its strategies aim at baiting the ISAF forces into killing civilians.
But go ahead, President Karzai, do what comes next: if this is the last warning, then that means that next time, he will do what? Ask NATO to leave? If so, then I guess that means it is time to go. If Afghanistan is a sovereignty entity, then if the President asks the NATO forces to leave, then they should go.
Karzai has been a very important source of mission failure, so if he wants to have the entire thing on his shoulders, then we all can save money and lives by leaving. Again, I fear what will happen to the Afghans who did rely upon us, but if the elected (however flawed the election was) government wants us to leave, then we leave.
Otherwise, what happens after a last warning? Another one? Or, he could suck it up just a bit and act like a leader and take some responsibility. But that would be way out of character.
We have run out of time and out of choices.
"Elected" government? Good one.
ReplyDelete"If" a sovereign entity? That's the big question. Either we run the place without interference from narco-warlords and help get them back on their feet (in the most basic sense), or we hand the entire shit-show back to them and leave. Can't try for middle ground anymore - too costly in many senses.
The "are you patriots or pussies?" line doesn't work in Afghanistan.