An Acceptable Dictator
I adore the term acceptable dictator. Every time I hear it, or the term friendly dictator, it’s as if the voice of Henry Kissinger is saying it in my head – who knows a thing or two about friendly dictators. Then again, the fact that that happens is somewhat creepy.
But I’m jumping the gun. First, a little back story…
Though little known, or reported, Afghanistan’s Hamid Karzai, after his falling out with the Taliban, spent much of his energies on the reinstatement of Zahir Shah while in self imposed exile in Pakistan. This, of course, is the very same man that was later singled out to become the legitimate face of ‘Afghan democracy’ – which should be rather telling regarding Karzai’s personal ambitions given the fact that he went from promoting the return of a Monarch to the West’s champion of democratic freedom almost overnight.
Since becoming the President of Afghanistan, Karzai has been labeled the Mayor of Kabul, primarily because the influence of his government extends little further than its outskirts without the existence of foreign occupational forces which, in truth, ensure the continued existence of Afghanistan’s fledgling shake-and-bake democracy.
But with Karzai has come the reality that the West could do better, that a far more pliable leader would be more advantageous to Western objectives – even if that leader were not a democratic one, an assertion recently made by Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, the British Ambassador. From Elaine Sciolino in today’s New York Times…
“A coded French diplomatic cable leaked to a French newspaper quotes the British ambassador in Afghanistan as predicting that the NATO-led military campaign against the Taliban will fail. That was not all. The best solution for the country, the ambassador said, would be installing an “acceptable dictator,” according to the newspaper.
“The current situation is bad, the security situation is getting worse, so is corruption, and the government has lost all trust,” the British envoy, Sherard Cowper-Coles, was quoted as saying by the author of the cable, François Fitou, the French deputy ambassador to Kabul.
The two-page cable — which was sent to the Élysée Palace and the French Foreign Ministry on Sept. 2, and was leaked to the investigative and satirical weekly Le Canard Enchaîné, which printed excerpts in its Wednesday issue — said that the NATO-led military presence was making it harder to stabilize the country.
“The presence of the coalition, in particular its military presence, is part of the problem, not part of its solution,” Sir Sherard was quoted as saying. “Foreign forces are the lifeline of a regime that would rapidly collapse without them. As such, they slow down and complicate a possible emergence from the crisis.”
Within 5 to 10 years, the only “realistic” way to unite Afghanistan would be for it to be “governed by an acceptable dictator,” the cable said, adding, “We should think of preparing our public opinion” for such an outcome.”
There’s Kissinger’s voice in my head again.
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Saturday, October 4th, 2008 at 1:11 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
So they are saying that some countries in this part of the world actually do not work so well with democracy and require a dictator?
Interesting, so I guess the whole war in Iraq to liberate the people and install a democracy may not be quite what the masses wanted?
Interesting thought, I wonder what the US would think of Sir Sherard’s thoughs on this.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Hussein was useful until he wasn’t useful.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Useful idiot!
October 4th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Help me understand this better. Isn’t it a bit hypocritical of the U.S. to distinguish between leaders they consider dictators who are acceptable, and those who are not, based on their self-interest?
Dictators are dictators –and when you allow any of them to govern, you take the risk they become political basket cases armed with nuclear weapons.
BTW, I love oxymorons:
Passive aggressive
Peace force
Peace offensive
Peacekeeper missile
And my favorite… unbiased opinion.
October 4th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
The whole Afgan/Iran/Iraq situation has almost become comical now. It might be because i’m a woman, but every time I see any of these world leaders (who are mostly if not entirely men) talk I keep hearing in my head “Well mine is bigger then yours“.
They look and sound like little boys who want to win the game. Unfortunately it looks to me like no one else wants to play the game anymore.
October 4th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Yep, it’s the way of the world.
Install a leader in a nation that you like, until the regime is of no further use, then help install another.
And who said colonization was dead?
October 4th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Shades of 63, I wonder if Karzai is going to end up full of holes in the back of an APC like Vietnams’ Diem.
October 4th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
I had a plan for Afghanistan. I even sent to a Senator.
America should have invested a hundred billions dollars to spur alternative energy companies, particularly solar, to develop mobile power stations using Afghanistan as the testing area for developing reliable systems. With power, infrastructure like pumping systems for irrigation and sanitation could have been quickly installed. Providing energy, food and plumbing, the West could have demonstrated how a higher standard of living could be achieved. Once reliable power was established, then these companies would have had to invest in creating a manufacturing base for solar systems and other alternative energy systems in Afghanistan. We had 2 years to implement before the Nacro state regained its dominance and security deteriorated. This strategy would have only worked if the Iraqi War had been put on hold for 3 to 4 years and America’s military focus had stayed on Afghanistan. I still can not believe America forgot what it had learned in Vietnam; that without winning the hearts and minds of the people, no victory or success was possible. Now, as greed has almost toppled America’s economy, greed in Afghanistan for greater profit from poppies infects the social fabric with lawlessness and anti-social activities. As fear and instability grows, the Taliban has followed the way of the North Vietnamese, providing a form of security the people of Afghanistan understand. Not perfect but familiar. At least it is better than promises.
Will it not be amazing if history records the fact that a small country like Afghanistan forced two Super Powers to pack up and leave.
October 4th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
How about a Benevolent Dictator For Life (BDFL)?
So … how many deaths and how many dollars and how many years did it take to reach that conclusion?
How long before the next superpower decides to take on Afghanistan and impose another form of government?
This cyclical history of ours makes me dizzy.
October 4th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
[quote comment="67690"]
How long before the next superpower decides to take on Afghanistan and impose another form of government.[/quote]
That’s it! The West have the ideas wrong.
Here me out on this…
Two superpowers, the foremost superpowers, failed at controlling a land and installing an ideology different from the land’s owner’s familiarity with force.
What if we try a new approach. A small country goes in and without force attempts to negotiate and arrange an ideology the people want? Perhaps they could follow Salros’ idea of alternative energy testing?
October 4th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
and for godsake make everybody learn ENGLISH!
October 4th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Shapeshifters, Vultures feasting off the remains of a rotten corpse till nothings left but decayd bones. Sad this world has come to the bottom line, a profit in the eyes of another selfish maggot with too much power and not enough balls to take hold of truth. It must be automatic to ignore the suffering they inflict upon those less fortunate. Arrogant with ignorance. Change will come be it peacefully or by force. It all makes up the universe we live in. The karma that defines us and hunts you down with everyday closer to the flames of judgement.
October 4th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
[quote comment="67689"]
Will it not be amazing if history records the fact that a small country like Afghanistan forced two Super Powers to pack up and leave.[/quote]
They had help the first time from the U.S government, who backed the Taliban in it’s efforts to oust Russia. This time I believe Russia is getting it’s revenge.
October 5th, 2008 at 7:04 am
I said a long LONG time ago, this would happen. As long as the Tribal Leaders are in place, no regime in Afghanistan will succeed.
October 5th, 2008 at 7:21 am
I’m hoping people aren’t actually considering this as a solution to Afghanistan’s problems. Besides, how long do you think an ‘acceptable dictator’ would be ‘acceptable’? I would only call it a matter of time before he started doing whatever the hell he wanted. That amount of power shouldn’t belong to just one person. I don’t think anyone on this Earth could be a dictator and be strong enough to resist corruption.
October 5th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
While I desperately want to beleive that Europe and by extension us, have moved beyond the old way of colonizing and controlling other nations… this cable seems to bludgen my hope to death in a flurry of French newspapers.
October 6th, 2008 at 12:04 am
I think there’s a point where whether Hussein was useful or not useful to the U.S. becomes moot. He was an exceptionally brutal dictator, and I haven’t seen a solution as to how we should’ve handled him.
Do we leave people to get mercilessly slaughtered at the hands of a Butcher? Or do we intervene, successfully? Obviously the War on Iraq hasn’t been so successful, but we’re dealing with hypotheticals, and relevant ones.
The anti-war crowd appears to lack a feasible solution to this dilemma, is all. Not that I wouldn’t be glad to hear one.
October 7th, 2008 at 9:06 am