Surprise!

by Matthew Kuhl on 10/27/2009 · 14 comments

So, Ahmed Wali Karzai, brother of Hamid Karzai and suspected drug lord, may also be a good friend of the CIA. I was shocked, shocked, I tell you, to learn this. I can’t really say why, but perhaps it’s the Agency’s history of backing the thug who gets our stuff done (Guatemala, Iran, Cuba, Indochina, Taiwan, South Korea, yadda yadda yadda), without caring too much about any side activities.

This raises some thorny issues. According to the article (co-authored by Dexter Filkins, by the by), some coalition officials object to sponsoring, well…a drug lord, at the same time that opium is proving to be such a problem. While reports of opium’s importance to the Taliban are likely exaggerated, the lawlessness that comes as the result of this flourishing traffic can’t be a good thing. Also, he probably helped rig the presidential election.

I’m just a naive college student, though, so maybe someone more worldly and experienced could explain to me why this is a Good Thing for the Good War.

{ 14 comments }

1 Alex Visotzky 10/28/2009 at 4:46 am

How is this news?

2 TK 10/28/2009 at 4:58 am

I’m tempted to agree. I almost think this may not be news at all to Afghanis, especially those living in and around Kandahar. Something tells me people knew who was feeding western spy agencies men for their missions.

Perhaps I’m off here, though. I am emailing with a journalist friend in Waziristan trying to get more details…

3 Dafydd 10/28/2009 at 5:55 am

This is in the New York Times today. That means this news has (finally) reached the mainstream US media.

That is the news.

4 Allahi 10/28/2009 at 6:13 am

You know, it almost seems like the strategic decision to back corrupt, thuggish warlords is like a drug to which the CIA is hopelessly addicted. No matter how many times it comes back to bite them in the ass, or end up proving completely disastrous and counterproductive for them and their interests in the long-run…they just can’t stay clean. They keep going back to it again and again. Because, you know, it feels so good at the time.

Sigh. Perhaps someday someone will be able to mount an intervention…

5 Allahi 10/28/2009 at 6:18 am

Should also add that I agree with Alex and TK above — the fact that this doesn’t really seem all that surprising or newsworthy pretty much says it all.

6 1110 10/28/2009 at 7:20 am

This has less to do with Ahmed Wali and more to do with his brother Hamid. Read it with 7 Nov-runoff-tinted glasses and you’ll see the deeper issue.

7 yup 10/28/2009 at 8:57 am

agreed, 1110.

8 fpfj 10/28/2009 at 10:07 am

Yeah, already suspected this.

You guys at Registan really don’t believe in the links between opium/crime & the Taliban but I don’t really know why? I have read through some of your arguments – and haven’t been convinced. Is there something that you’re not sharing, that you know? I’m not trying to be an inflammatory – just curious.

9 Joshua Foust 10/28/2009 at 2:48 pm

It’s not about the links between opium and crime — there are plenty of those — but rather the links between opium and insurgency. Those aren’t the same thing, and while there certainly are links between the drug lords and the insurgents of various stripes, there is not a causal relationship. I argue that focusing so relentlessly on opium instead of more fundamental problems is mistaking symptoms for causes, not that it’s not a problem to begin with.

For example, to me the bigger issue is that, since we added 50 or so drug smugglers to our “shoot on sight” list, we’ve placed ourselves in the position of murdering Ahmed Wali Karzai’s business competition. If we had instead ignored the opium side of things and focused instead on the insurgency and the economic/social/political issues and underpin an opium culture, there’d be far less moral incoherence in coopting AWK to suit our purposes.

10 fpfj 10/29/2009 at 5:50 am

Joshua, what I meant was the link between the Taliban and crime (including opium-related as well as other things like kidnapping).

It doesn’t seem to be a ‘relentless focus’ on opium, rather, the links between the insurgents and criminal elements are there and should be dealt with. I’m defining criminal elements as more than the drug lords, though they are there also.

I see your point about the drug smugglers but is the answer ignoring them or is the answer dealing with them and AWK also?

11 fpfj 10/28/2009 at 10:09 am

To clarify: I suspected the links between the CIA and Karzai’s brother. But all of them had some sort of connection to the CIA during the fight against the Soviets, right? Most Afghan Mujahideen have been quite open about it.

12 karaka 10/28/2009 at 5:01 pm

But all of them had some sort of connection to the CIA during the fight against the Soviets, right?

That’s my recollection.

This has less to do with Ahmed Wali and more to do with his brother Hamid. Read it with 7 Nov-runoff-tinted glasses and you’ll see the deeper issue.

Though it does have epic timing, when you consider those runoff-tinted glasses. Makes me wonder if someone was sitting on the story, because as has been noted, it’s not really a surprise.

13 Sam 10/29/2009 at 9:57 am

Some of you may recall that the NYT’s Carlotta Gall, among other serious foreign correspondents, had been put under great pressure in the past to avoid reporting on allegations of AWK’s shenanigans. Most Afghans simply treat his misdeeds as fact, but it hasn’t been widely discussed in the West, most likely because it would further erode the already weak public (Western) support for Karzai.

At any rate, the link between AWK and various shady OGA forces operating out of Camp Gecko/Maholic has been the subject of much gossip. Amnesty International did a report earlier this year pointing out the problematic nature of the Gecko OGA operations, which are totally outside the OEF/NATO chain of command. As far as I know the problem persists, and is likely to get worse.

14 Prithvi 10/30/2009 at 10:52 am

Ah hah! But according to US sources, Ahmed Wali Karzai’s links to the drug trade are not conclusive.

Carry on, James Jesus Angleton.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: