Why Obama Can't Leave Afghanistan

Link

Why Obama Can't Leave Afghanistan
[color:0090=#666]June 6, 2009

No American President could leave Afghanistan—even if they thought our chances there were poor. What would happen if Obama just brought our troops home?
'
(1) The Taliban would take over most of the country for sure—they almost have now.

(2) They would invite al Qaeda in again—they are still protecting them.

(3) Al Qaeda would attack the U.S. and Europe more vigorously—they are now the brains behind the Taliban, and would then virtually have their own country.

This is the clincher. With more freedom to operate, they'd probably have a 50/50 chance of scoring another 9/11 or worse. If that happened, Democratic party would be dead. If that were not enough, a Taliban controlled Afghanistan would be a perpetual threat to Pakistan, and might eventually take some nukes.

Afghanistan: The Solution


As is often said, there is no silver bullet. But there is a surprisingly powerful strategic move, that would change the game—in our favor. It's not cheap, but it would save us a lot of money because losing for $65 B/year is not cheap either.

[color:c55a=#600]The key: Buy wheat for $1.50/kg, and sell wheat flour for $0.25/kg

What's the cost? Afghanistan only grows half its wheat now, but assume it grew it all and we bought it all. 5 billion kilograms = $6.25 B/year net cost.

Opium? Opium is only 2 or 3 times more profitable per acre than wheat, at the normal price of wheat, $0.25/kg. But that's the wrong measure. Land is not the main cost of opium. Labor is. Figuring labor, it's much closer. In fact (PDF report Table 1) richer farmers with a little flexibility only grow about 40% poppies in the area where opium is most profitable. Even a $0.50 price of wheat, for a short time in 2008, made a noticeable dent in opium. A $1.50 sustained price would knock out most opium.

Drug lords? Everywhere in the world where there is massive illegal drug trade, there is massive violence, instability, and corruption. No opium, no drug trade. This is already happening in the north (most of Afghanistan). It can happen in the south.

Taliban? The Taliban skims about 10% off of the $3B/year opium trade, and that would rapidly diminish. But they can tax other things if they want. Their support comes from the poorest layer of society. Average income is $1/day, so the average for the poorest half of society is probably about $0.50 or less. This comes to about $3B. In other words, this purchase would more than double their income. (Opium farmers only make $0.7B.) The choice between doubled income and a repressive religion you don't like is easy.

Development The traditional development establishment is right; many more things matter. But this would make all of them much easier. And much would just happen. That has been seen. When people get more money, they buy farm animals, plant more kinds of crops, and agricultural trade takes off—even without expert assistance.

Security Less Taliban, fewer drug lords, much more appreciation of the foreigners. All this makes security far easier for the U.S. to provide directly or by training Afghanis.
Why hasn't this been done? Consider the excellent effort of the British development team, DFID, which is spending about $4 million in Helmand province, the heart of Taliban opium, which accounts for 65% of Afghanistan's opium. They are using wheat to replace opium, and getting more done for their money that the Buy-Wheat approach. But they tell us "The dividend will be reaped in the medium to long term, and will require ... massive, coordinated and continuous investment. ...This provides a daunting challenge for the government. ... There are no shortcuts."

Given their extreme budget constraints they are right. But given 1000 times more money—which is still 15 times less than the military budget. There are shortcuts! And given the rapid advance of the Taliban, "no shortcut" means defeat. It is time to think different, as we say in America.

Hamid Karzai the president of Afghanistan had recently said that american can't leave Afghanistan as the work has not yet been completed by us forces, Taliban controls 40% of Afghanistan and U.S forces are fighting hard to occupy the area controlled by taliban. A perptual threat to the future of afghanistan, It's not just the threat to future of Afghanistan but a threat to america as well.

Even america understand's that,If it leave Afghanistan now it will be a certain victory for Taliban and it will be easy task for them to defeat the under prepared afghan forces.

You can read the full article of Hamid Karzai at : http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/02/12/afghanistan.karzai.gps/index.html