Morning Star Online
Subscribers log in here
Free access
Sport
Culture
Star comment




Download today's front page - pdf file

Laughable rhetoric

WHEN an occupying military power knows that it has the backing of the most powerful global information outlets, it can indulge itself in the most laughable rhetoric.

And this was underlined in the wake of the killing of an Afghan woman and two children by rockets fired by British forces in Helmand province.

Although these civilian casualties were caused by troops who came from thousands of miles away to occupy the country, an International Security Assistance Force spokesman had the temerity to say: "The enemies of Afghanistan have yet again shown a complete disregard for the lives of the innocent who they claim to fight for."

That is precisely what the Afghans who oppose imperialist occupation would say and with far greater reason.

Yet the pro-occupation international media continues to relay propaganda about Taliban forces launching attacks from among civilians, even though they would know that this would result in bloody responses from the occupying forces against their own families.

The allegation beggars belief, as does puppet governor Gulab Mangal's comment that "support for the Taliban in Helmand is reducing."

Resistance to occupation in the entire south and east of Afghanistan has escalated in recent years and the steady increase in British military casualties illustrates this.

The British troops sent to Afghanistan have been lied to over their role.

They are in an unwinnable conflict and are kept there as tokens of new Labour's subservience to the White House.

They should be brought home immediately, leaving the Afghan people to work out their future without outside interference.

US stooge

OUTGOING Pakistani military dictator Pervez Musharraf has always been a loyal toady of US imperialism and his resignation will suit Washington as much as it does the general himself.

Gen Musharraf's expectation is that his stepping down will short-circuit the growing public clamour for his impeachment, while the US will hope for no in-depth investigation of the dirty alliance it foisted on him.

That means that the role of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence in setting up the Taliban in the early 1990s will not be investigated.
Nor will the activities of the ISI during his time as Pakistani military commander.

It will also mean that Washington's support for the general, especially since 2001 when he executed a political back-flip to join the White House "war on terror," will not be subject to inquiry.

Gen Musharraf has all along been susceptible to US power, which is why he dropped the Taliban and was passive in the face of US bombing raids on Pakistani tribal areas abutting the border with Afghanistan.

Despite this influence and its constant rhetoric about democracy, freedom and the rule of law, the Bush administration was unbothered by the general's political dictatorship and his assaults on the judiciary.

Washington's readiness to see him stand down only came about when it could see the scale of opposition building up against him and the dictatorship.

Development of democracy in Pakistan will depend on the level to which political forces are able to resist US tutelage and assert popular sovereignty.