This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

Afghanistan: new hope for its economy, slowing poppy trade? — Brooklynian

Afghanistan: new hope for its economy, slowing poppy trade?

jeffrey
jeffrey
edited November -1 in Brooklyn Politics
One may only hope that this provides more opportunities for jobs, infrastructure and other economic development in some areas that offer little opportunity other than the opium poppy trade for subsistence.

"U.S. Identifies Vast Riches of Minerals in Afghanistan"
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html?no_interstitial
WASHINGTON — The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.

The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.
...
The value of the newly discovered mineral deposits dwarfs the size of Afghanistan’s existing war-bedraggled economy, which is based largely on opium production and narcotics trafficking as well as aid from the United States and other industrialized countries. Afghanistan’s gross domestic product is only about $12 billion.
Or it's just a ploy to get a better look at 'dem caves. :lol:

Unfortunately, as the article suggests, this is likely to throw gasoline on the fire in terms of complicating the war over there, redoubling the Taliban's efforts to control more of the country, and potentially raising new concerns of bribery, cronyism and other corruption in the Karzai administration with even the slightest misstep (only feeding the Taliban's recruiting and support).

But I guess this seals it...our commitment to having large forces of troops on the ground there will be stronger than ever and now extremely long-term.

Comments

  • boygabriel
    boygabriel
    Thoughtful critique from Marc Ambinder:
    The story is accurate, but the news is not that new; let's think a bit harder about the context.
    The way in which the story was presented -- with on-the-record quotations from the Commander in Chief of CENTCOM, no less -- and the weird promotion of a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense to Undersecretary of Defense suggest a broad and deliberate information operation designed to influence public opinion on the course of the war.
    Just sayin
  • jeffrey
    jeffrey
    Yeah, about 'dem caves...
  • boygabriel
    boygabriel
    The " discovery" of Afghanistan's minerals will sound pretty silly to old timers. When I was living in Kabul in the early 1970's the USG, the Russians, the World Bank, the UN and others were all highly focused on the wide range of Afghan mineral deposts. The Russian geological service was all over the North in the 60's and 70's.
    -John Stuart Blackton

    http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/06/14/minerals_in_afghanistan_mais_oui
  • jeffrey
    jeffrey
    Yeah, then the sh*t done blew up.

    Thanks, Russia. Really.

    But I guess we egged them on to it, so it's as much on us as anyone.
  • independent mind
    independent mind
    I'm sort of torn between 'they knew about the deposits all along' theory and the fact that it appears from the nytimes article at least, that they were using modern magnetometry technology to 'read' the subsurface deposits, and their proper extents--and this was really technology that has only become available in the last few years (?) Anyhow, I suspect that this is a combo propaganda/discovery of the new extent of the deposits or some such. Either way, it will be interesting to see the taliban try to gain control of high-tech mining operations.
  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    isn't the taliban decidedly anti-tech? actually "retro"?
  • boygabriel
    boygabriel
    it will be interesting to see the taliban try to gain control of high-tech mining operations.
    I, for one, can't wait to overpay private US contractors who do awful work and get rich off US tax payers.
  • jeffrey
    jeffrey
    China will be right there alongside fighting for mineral extraction contracting rights, as they have done all over Africa in the last decade.

    They need these materials too much not to fight tooth and nail to get them.

    So, in terms of the war for control of these areas...

    US/British companies + Afghan Gov't - versus - Taliban with Chinese support?
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    china's involvement in africa is much more beneficial than the western aid. if afghanstan goes the way of african chinese development is better than the current western aid to africa.

    http://www.chinatalkingpoints.com/deborah-brautigam-three-gifts-china-brings-to-africa/
  • jeffrey
    jeffrey
    The west has a terrible history in Africa. That is absolutely undeniable.

    But be careful that you are not ignoring cases of China making the same mistakes as the west has done in the past, of pumping up support to various abusive governments merely to feed its hungry machines.
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    chinese development is due to history of interference of locale governments. western aid always require the locale governments to do its bidding. its cultural as much as anything. you don't critique people you do business with. mind your own business and just do business.
  • boygabriel
    boygabriel
    armchair_warrior wrote: chinese development is due to history of interference of locale governments. western aid always require the locale governments to do its bidding. its cultural as much as anything. you don't critique people you do business with. mind your own business and just do business.
    One has moral obligations to not do business with, or in the case of China, provide protection in the UN, for nations committing atrocities or war crimes.

    You are not minding your own business when you help keep oppressive regimes in power. You are abetting misery.

    The US does it. So does China.
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    Boygabriel wrote: [quote=armchair_warrior]chinese development is due to history of interference of locale governments. western aid always require the locale governments to do its bidding. its cultural as much as anything. you don't critique people you do business with. mind your own business and just do business.
    One has moral obligations to not do business with, or in the case of China, provide protection in the UN, for nations committing atrocities or war crimes.

    You are not minding your own business when you help keep oppressive regimes in power. You are abetting misery.

    The US does it. So does China.


    the difference is china doesn't go around the world saying oh this and that democracy etc.. while it does something else. china doesn't pretend to be.
  • boygabriel
    boygabriel
    armchair_warrior wrote: the difference is china doesn't go around the world saying oh this and that democracy etc.. while it does something else. china doesn't pretend to be.
    I'm sure that matters a lot to the dead people in Sudan.

    China is capable of awful things, many of the same things you accuse the US of doing.

    You should admit to that sooner rather than later.
  • jeffrey
    jeffrey
    Yes, you do have a point there, armchair.

    China is pretty straight-up about supporting repression where it suits them.
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    Boygabriel wrote: [quote=armchair_warrior]the difference is china doesn't go around the world saying oh this and that democracy etc.. while it does something else. china doesn't pretend to be.
    I'm sure that matters a lot to the dead people in Sudan.

    China is capable of awful things, many of the same things you accuse the US of doing.

    You should admit to that sooner rather than later.

    lol there is nothing to admit its not a chinese problem, its a internal sudanese problem. without the chinese they would be killing each other regardless. the problem was there before. its like saying thailand is a american problem. the two doesn't correlate.
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    i just love pointing out western hypocrisy. people love bitch and moan about other people. the west as a whole might be democratic at home, but aboard, it doesn't act very democratic. from environmental to trade. in the environmental realm it is trying to force the rest of the world to use less per capital than it already has and have the balls to blame the 3rd world for using its fair share. which isn't fair at all. with trade it uses market share and subsides and of fiat printing of dollars or euro at will. and have the balls to accuse others of manipulating currency. us and europe is the largest currency manipulators.
  • jeffrey
    jeffrey
    Show me a huge and/or powerful country...

    ...and I'll show you one that plays dirty.

    It's not a regional issue. No country plays fair, or nice. Especially the big ones.
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    yeah but the west constantly goes oh you should do this and that and democracy and this and that. and yet does all the things they tell other people not to do lol. thats my complaint, from tibet to darfur to other places. stop bitching if you got the same problems as other people in your own backyards.

    my point is people should clean their own house first before pointing the finger at others.
  • jeffrey
    jeffrey
    I believe part of the issue post WWI and WWII is the huge, broad realization of interconnectedness.

    As in...countries in the world are no longer isolated and insulated from bad things happening out there.

    Some of these countries are part of the supply or production chain of others, and any small problem becomes really big really fast in distributed, leveraged economies.

    Problems in other areas threaten to screw up the balance of power there, creating other geopolitical, economic, military etc. repercussions.

    And then there are some seemingly God-forsaken places where the worst is allowed to happen, unless some choose to defend basic human decency (i.e. against genocide, where the wrong is indisputable no matter what belief system one ascribes oneself to).

    I'm a bit of an amateur at this part, but...aren't many Asian religions and belief systems concerned with the whole, the circular interconnectedness of all things, valuing the community over the individual?

    How is it that the views you are expressing appear to condemn the whole for the benefit of the self?

    That would appear to be at odds with what one often hears about Asian values and beliefs.
  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior
    the world is connected and thing as a whole thing works only when there is no artificial things stopping natural borders etc...

    lets look at human migrations and economies, best thing would be one world government and one currency. so a man isn't going to be worth more doing the same job as say in the west vs some guy in india doing the same job. but problem is we got culture and laws etc.. stopping the indian from coming to the west etc.. it doesn't work that much outside of that artificial boundary. the topic is pretty board. so just picking something to say :p.
  • independent mind
    independent mind
    jeffrey wrote: Show me a huge and/or powerful country...

    ...and I'll show you one that plays dirty.

    It's not a regional issue. No country plays fair, or nice. Especially the big ones.
    Exactly. And add to this the multinationals, which often have more power than countries in the global south.
  • boygabriel
    boygabriel
    armchair_warrior wrote: lol there is nothing to admit its not a chinese problem, its a internal sudanese problem. without the chinese they would be killing each other regardless. the problem was there before. its like saying thailand is a american problem. the two doesn't correlate.
    We both agree that China didn't start Sudan's civil war, so you stop repeating yourself.

    China does business with and gives arms to a government which GENOCIDES its own people.

    If you don't see the moral problems with this, you're more biased than I thought.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In

Categories