Would you believe that USSR and USA were after Afghanistan for opium?
 |
| Popy cultivation in Afghanistan. |
Afghanistan would have been a far better place for human existence, if the world around was ready to accept USSR having close relationship with Afghanistan.
Afghanistan could have been a developing country with lot of employment and business opportunities. Worse, it could have been another communist country with it’s people leaving a peaceful life and free from hard core fanatics. And this world could have been a better place, if Osama Bin Laden was not born on earth.
If you were to read this article after an year, then you will find mistakes in things that you agree with now. Similarly, we will find several mistakes, if we were to look at the world history. Today’s world is a result of those rights and wrongs.
History, or the evolution of mankind tells that all the wars waged by us were for exhibiting our might, to establish one’s dominance and for wealth. Some wicked rulers like Hitler who were sadists, waged war on others and killed innocent people for pleasure. British Empire is one good example of those who wanted to establish their dominance for wealth. They were motivated by wealth and not religion. We find several other rulers in the world history, who were motivated by religion or an ideology and wanted to dominate others. Churchmen killing Geli Leo is an example of religious dominance over free thinking and scientific research.
Akbar and Babar who invaded India has forcefully converted many into Islam through violence, looted all the wealth in temples and demolished them. On the other hand, British colonies were not meant for religious conversion, although missionaries preached Bible through school education, medical camps, etc. In world history, Islam is the only religion which used violence for mass conversion.
Communism came into existence from Carl Marx and few leaders after him like Stalin and Lenin. Communism was accepted by people who were oppressed and deprived. At that point of time, Communism was a solution for their problems and was able to liberate people from their sufferings. There were violent struggles, which led to revolutions and renaissance. Communism had it’s own drawbacks, like it is against wealth creation, it’s against selfishness and human greed. Selfishness, greed and the urge for comfort are the reason for all the inventions we see around. Human greed and selfishness is something which will never change and calling it bourgeois is not acceptable to all.
Communism failed in various parts of the world for the same reason. Other than that, one would see state sponsored atrocities, human rights violation and violence in Communist countries, which were once liberated by communism. Soviet gulags and thousands who are imprisoned in China are classical examples. Communism, which makes people raise their voice against injustice will incarcerate people for raising their voice against the wrongs of communist.
Communist China is able to progress in today’s world, because they are more capitalist in economy management and are too good in communist politics. Or that is the way to follow in this changing world. All that sufferings of Soviet gulags and the slavery imposed by Communism made Russia a superpower. Now it is ruled by Vladimir Putin a billionaire and it is no more a Communist country.
Where as Capitalism is something natural and not based on a theory. It is continuation of feudal system, slavery and Monarchy which existed in the past with improvement and consistent progress in human maturity, behaviour and concern for others who coexist.
The major ideological war in the world so far was between Capitalism and Communism. Things that we glorified once will become a blunder of all time later. Today’s Afghanistan is a result of one such blunder. In Afghanistan, it was a war between Capitalism and Communism, where Capitalist countries supported religious fanatics. Such wars will not bring any glory to this world, than increasing the human sufferings.
Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan on 24 December 1979, for upholding the Soviet-Afghan friendship treaty of 1978. It is not that Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan all of a sudden for exploiting Afghanistan and it’s people. Afghanistan received economic and military aid worth billions between 1955 and 1978. Both Afghanistan and Soviet Union had permanent friendly relationship. Afghanistan received large scale economic assistance, military equipment training and military hardware from Soviet Union from early 1920.
Marxist people’s democratic party in Afghanistan began extensive land and social reforms, suppressing opposition from domestic Mujahideen. Such reforms were bitterly resented by the devoutly Muslims. Mujahideen preached Sharia laws, such as public execution of convicted murderers and adulterers and amputation for those found guilty of theft. Men were required to grow beards and women had to wear the all-covering Burka. Women were restricted from going out to work. They disapproved girls aged 10 and above going to school. Even music and movies were prohibited. The newly materialised ‘Taliban’ (PASHTO: “Students”),a puritanical Islam group was led by former Mujahideen commander, ‘Mohammed Omar’. ‘Talibans’ were agitated by the repressive nature of Marxist people’s democratic party and started ‘Jihad’ (holy war for religion).
Afghan insurgents began to receive massive amount of support through aid, finance and military training from USA and UK through neighbouring Pakistan. Special ‘Air service officers’ were sent to impart their learned expertise to Afghans on sabotage, reconnaissance, attack planning, how to use explosive devices and heavy artillery. They were also heavily financed by China and the Arab monarchies. The Afghan Mujahideens got substantial number of shoulder-fired surface to air missile, which enabled them to shoot down Soviet planes and helicopters on a regular basis.
Soviet troops fought against Afghan insurgents for ten years and decided to withdraw troops. The final troop withdrawal ended on 15 February 1989. 15000 Soviet soldiers were killed and about 35000 were wounded. It caused mass destruction in Afghanistan, besides killing thousands of insurgents and civilians.
Soviet Union could have taken complete control over Afghanistan in few years. It could have resulted in stable government, economy and development. But the World around choose to victimise Afghanistan to end cold war. It became a proxy war to end cold war.
The failure of Soviet Union made Afghanistan a breeding ground for terrorism. There wasn’t any effort to improve economy in Afghanistan. The ‘Taliban’s’ banked heavily on poppy cultivation and Afghanistan is responsible for more than 80% of global opium production. The opium production and distribution is bigger threat to the world than the arms and ammunition in Afghanistan’s arsenal. Other than opium cultivation, it was Gemstones-Rubies, emeralds which funded ‘Talibans’.
Bin Laden organized the “Al-Qaeda” to carry out armed “Jihad” against other countries, primarily against the United States. As rightly said by a number of commentators that Al-Qaeda attacks on USA, including 9/11 was a “blowback”. The United States invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 to oust the ‘Taliban’, who were harbouring Osama Bin Laden and other Al-Qaeda members linked to the 9/11 attacks.
The world appreciated USA for hunting down Osama Bin Laden and other members linked to 9/11 attacks. But even United States failed to restore peace in Afghanistan. Once US Secretary of state’s Hillary Clinton said to Pakistan that ‘a snake in your backyard won’t bite only neighbors’, while talking about Haqqani network responsible for attacks in Afghanistan, being unaware of the fact that both ‘Taliban’, and ‘Pakistan militants’ were their snakes at some point of time.
According to the US department of defence, the total military expenditure in Afghanistan is $825 billion from October 2001 till December 2020 and another $130 billion spent on reconstruction project. USA also spent more than $20 billion to assist Afghan Mujahideens against USSR. It was a tactical approach by USA and UK during cold war. It was much more than a proxy war, where they used Afghanistan as battlefield and used Mujahideen men to fight with USSR. They were successful in defeating USSR and ending the cold war, but it backfired.
Soviet geoscientists performed a systematic exploratory work throughout Afghanistan in early 1960 and 1970 to ascertain the availability of minerals. Afghanistan has minerals like Iron, Cooper, Lithium, rare earth elements, Cobalt, Bauxite, Mercury, Uranium and Chromium in abundance. Other than Soviets, several other countries like USA, UK, Germany have conducted geological studies to know mineral reserve in Afghanistan. In 2007, Jiang Xi copper the then biggest refined copper producer in China, partnered with Metallurgical corporation of China and signed a $2.83 billion deal with the then Afghan government to mine for 30 years. They couldn’t proceed with their plans due to the unrest in Afghanistan and Afghans blamed China for espionage.
Afghanistan waged war with Russia for ten years, then another twelve years of self-destruction followed by US military operation for twenty years. The present situation in Afghanistan can escalate to bloodshed like Yemen or Syria. And it is too difficult for Afghanistan alone to bring economic stability and peace in the region.
The twenty years of US military operation in Afghanistan killed 2401 US servicemen. It was a failure. It could have been a success story, if United States was able to bring Afghanistan under its control in initial few years, where US will help reconstruction works, economic development and security, for which Afghanistan will pay by extracting minerals. Now this option is open for Russia, USA, France, China and any nation, in the best interest of Afghanistan and the world.
USA and USSR weren’t after Afghanistan for opium, but they were lost in Afghanistan in a bad trip, which they didn’t enjoy.
INDIA:
Democratic India of convenience:
It’s been seven years of BJP rule in India and people cannot think of an alternative which can do better. People in India often elect a new government, once they are sick and tired of incumbent party.
Since Independence, people were made to believe that the ‘Indian National Congress’ and its allies are secular. Similarly, ‘Sangh Parivar’ and their allies as communal or pro-Hindu, who alone can safeguard interests of Hindus. Above said ‘Communals’ and ‘Seculars’ are happy about this belief and are beneficiaries of this divide. Someone against these ideas and those who express a different view or opinion will be profiled as Maoist, Extremist, Communist, Naxalite and even as terrorist. Such profiling limits the scope for improvement in politics and economy. People from Minority community feel insecure about electing parties other than so called ‘Seculars’. ‘Liberals’ will find it difficult to support a cause initiated by so called ‘Hindutva’ leaders. This concept of being ‘Secular’ or ‘pro-Hindu’ will come into picture only when there is an issue, which can influence sentiments of the masses. If not, it is wealth, power and influence that matters and not caste, creed, religion and justice.
As far as reforms are concerned, both opposition and the ruling government at any given time will do their best to retain the system which allows exploitation. And if at all there is a change in the system, then it could only mean a change in the way masses are exploited. Such reforms often comes at no additional cost to the exchequer. These are schemes to change the beneficiary of exploitation and are ornamental schemes meant for advertising the achievements of ruling government. The opposition which cooperates or engages in diverting the attention of public and media will expect the same, when they are in power. Government welfare schemes like Mudra and MSME loans offered in 20 lakh crores Athmanibar Bharath scheme are actually loans, given to only manufacturing units. Most of these manufacturing units are setup in property owned by MSMEs and are eligible for loan even without a special scheme from government. The same is not extended to those who need to depend on Government scheme. New farm law is a scheme which comes at a negligible cost to exchequer and will change the beneficiary of exploitation . Refer the article published in flamesofdissent.com by clicking the following link👉 Seventy years of farmer’s cry, which went unheard.
Such regime from any Political party will attract resentment. So, the government will come up with some populist schemes, months before election as a compensation for not fulfilling their obligation. It is a strategy used to win elections. People will get used to those schemes. Such schemes and the situation which makes government to offer such schemes will adversely affect development.
Some of those populist schemes are Food Security Act 2013 launched by former UPA government months before 2014 general election, Farm loan waiver offered by various state and union governments and the PM KISAN YOJANA, which came into effect on 1 December 2018, launched by Modi government, months before 2019 general election. These are examples of populist schemes from government to win elections. I don’t blame the present NDA government or the previous UPA government for schemes like, ‘Food Security Act 2013’ or for ‘PM KISAN YOJANA’. But I blame them for not creating a mechanism, which enables us to earn enough, where we really don’t have to be a burden for government who provide ₹2000 to farmers, thrice a year and give food stuffs at a subsidised rate.
New farm law made news globally and grabbed attention of international communities. Farmer’s indefinite protest, the violence, police brutality and union government’s negligence are making news, even after a year since the law came into effect.
Union finance minister ‘Nirmala Sitaraman’, once said in parliament that the government will spend money on infrastructure to help farmers. Other NDA leaders also made such promises to silence media and public when farmer’s protest was making news everyday. But there wasn’t any significant development so far.
Union government has spent a total of ₹767,156,228 for PM KISAN YOJANA. The below pictures are from government website, which shows the amount spent and the area covered under this scheme.
 |
| Picture from government’s website that shows the amount of money distributed to farmers under PM KISAN YOJANA. |
Farmers wouldn’t have committed suicide for not getting ₹6000 a year from Union government. But they do commit suicide when they cannot fulfil their obligations like their girl child’s wedding, when they are unable to repay loans from banks and private lenders. Farmers in India are hardworking people and do not spend their hard earned money for pomp and pleasure. It is just that they do not get the price their produces deserve. Even the government’s minimum support price (MSP) fails to cover majority of farm produces like fruits and vegetables. MSP covers only few pulses and cereals. Major cause for farmers losses are not cyclone, flood or scarcity of rainfall. Crop insurance is a solution for such losses, but not for ‘buyers market’, where farmers will not get the price their produces deserve. The new farm law only replaces the middlemen, where as big corporates will exploit farmers instead of present Mandi owners.
An acre of land in some peri-urban area near Capital city of every state, a warehouse constructed in it and few thousand plastic bins, is all it takes for government to bring an end to this issue. It is better, if the cooperative society or the wholesale market is under union government with few permanent employees and manual labourers on contract basis. Government can give franchise for someone in each cities and small towns. Franchise holders should have a store room or small warehouse to collect farm produces directly from farmers after Weighing it. Then the franchise holder will fill them into plastic bins. Franchise holders will sell to local vendors at price decided by the government market and update the warehouse in Capital city of their respective State about the stocks. Trucks can be hired on contract basis for transportation of farm produces and empty bins, to and from main warehouse. The small vendors, Shop owners, super markets and those who sell on cart in metropolitan cities like Bangalore, Chennai or Mumbai will buy directly from the Government warehouse in the peri-urban area near Capital city of respective states. Anything in Surplus quantities can be exported, if it’s not perishable. It is not easy as said, but small private players are already doing it.
Narendra Modi’s name will remain in the hearts of farmers in India forever. ‘Narendra Modi’ being the name for warehouse across India as well as for the scheme will make it even better. The money spent on ‘PM KISAN YOJANA’ so far and the money union government plans to spend till 2024 should be good to fund this scheme, which will regulate the price for agricultural produces in India. There can’t be a better economic reform India can think of.
Please follow and like us:
