What a surprise - NOT
We can also bet our bottom dollar that it is not just US aid that is going that way
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
Waste and fraud in U.S. efforts to rebuild – oh, is that what it's being called – Afghanistan while fighting al Qaeda and the Taliban may have cost the American taxpayers billions of dollars, special investigator have said.
They are not, per chance, surprised, are they? I certainly am not and neither, I am sure, will be the majority of those in America and Europe who know how such things work.
Arnold Fields, special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction, said the cost of U.S. assistance funding diverted or squandered since 2002 could reach "well into the millions, if not billions, of dollars."
"There are no controls in place sufficient enough to ensure taxpayers' money is used for the (intended) purpose," said Fields, whose independent office was created in 2008 to energize oversight of what U.S. auditors have described as a giant, poorly coordinated aid effort that has sunk some $56 billion into Afghanistan since 2002.
Of that sum, some $29 billion has gone to building up Afghanistan's nascent security forces, many of whose members cannot read and are just learning to shoot.
Another $16 billion has gone to trying to develop this poor country, where life expectancy is just 45 years and only 28 percent of people are literate, and to strengthening governance, said Fields, a retired Marine Corps major general.
Experts believe it will take years to build an effective government that can provide basic services in Afghanistan, where corruption and the lack a functional justice system have driven many villagers into the arms of the Taliban.
Efforts to bolster Afghanistan's weak central government and in many cases its dysfunctional local leadership took center stage last week when a White House review of the nine-year-old war reported some military success but cautioned there was more to be done on improving governance and curbing corruption.
President Barack Obama is under pressure to show results in Afghanistan in the first half of 2011 so he can start bringing U.S. troops home in July.
U.S. and NATO partners hope Afghan forces will be able to take control by the end of 2014 as the West looks to curtail its involvement after nine years that at the present level of effort costs U.S. taxpayers at least $113 billion a year.
More than 700 foreign troops have been killed in 2010, the most violent year since the Taliban was toppled in 2001. Afghan casualties are far higher.
U.S. reconstruction activities are a major component in an even bigger outside assistance effort involving dozens of donor countries and hundreds of aid groups large and small.
Field's office, known as SIGAR, described in a report issued this fall a 'confusing labyrinth' of agencies and contractors in that aid effort.
We can also bet our bottom dollar that the same what has happened with American money and goods has happened to British and European funds and supplies.
Let us hope that weapons and weapon systems have not also gone astray without anyone having the faintest idea as to where they have gone and my hope is that we have not given any sophisticated technology to the Afghans, whether the government,t he police or the army.
That country is notorious for corruption and the entire government under it present president are just a liability as far as that is concerned. However, that country, and not just that country in that region alone, have always worked on bribes and corruption and a few years of NATO occupation and “guidance” will do nothing to have changed that.
Anyone also who believes that the NATO forces and foreign influence can “democratize” that country better start thinking again. Democracy and Afghanistan are about as far apart as the moon from the earth. And, why do we think that every part of the globe has to have American-style democracy?
© 2011
