By Justin Podur, Z Net

ISLAMABAD – The Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) is a women’s organization that runs underground schools and other projects, educates Afghan girls, runs a periodic journal, and agitates politically for women’s rights, human rights, secularism, and social justice in Afghanistan. From the 1979 Soviet invasion through to the 2006 closings of the camps, millions of Afghan refugees lived in Pakistan and many still do. While RAWA’s operations were always based primarily in Afghanistan, they have also had a strong presence in the Pakistan refugee community. I spoke to Mariam from RAWA in Islamabad when I was there in July 2008.

JUSTIN PODUR (JP): To begin, perhaps you could introduce readers to RAWA and its work in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

What's Going on in Afghanistan: An Interview with Sonali Kolhatkar
By Mike Whitney, CounterPunch, July 31, 2008.

Sonali Kolhatkar is the co-author, with James Ingalls, of Bleeding Afghanistan: Washington, Warlords, and the Propaganda of Silence (Seven Stories 2006). She is also the Co-Director of Afghan Women's Mission, a US-based non-profit organization that works in solidarity with the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA).

Mike Whitney: On a recent stopover in France, Barack Obama said, "We must win in Afghanistan. There is no other option." Recent polls, however, show that public support for the war in Afghanistan has fallen off sharply. In fact, many American's don't even know why we are still there. Is there a big difference between what "winning" means to the Bush administration and what it means to the people of Afghanistan? Also, have you seen any indication that the Bush administration intends to keep its promises and establish security, rebuild the country's infrastructure, spread democracy, remove the warlords, liberate women, and "modernize" Afghanistan or was that all just a public relations smokescreen to promote the invasion?

The U.S. Treats Afghans Like Roaches
by Glenn Ford, Black Agenda Radio commentary, July 23, 2008.

To be occupied by foreign soldiers is always a degradation, but some countries are singularly unsuited to lord it over other nations. The United States seems incapable of conforming to the most elemental standards of civilized behavior when occupying Muslim lands. Americans routinely commit horrific atrocities against populations they are legally obligated to protect from harm. Since the beginning of the U.S. occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, wedding parties have been especially attractive targets of U.S. airpower. "The crimes - mass murder from the air - point up the casually racist nature" of U.S. rule over non-European "others."

Afghanistan under the knife and hammer
by Richard Seymour, from Lenin's Tomb, July 3, 2008.

The procedure is quite simple. Choose a country in the world that seems to be suffering, in some way dysfunctional, ripe for 'intervention'. Perform some 'surgical' air strikes and, after a quick and painless stitch-up, auction it off to the highest bidders. Having done that, so the theory goes, you can return home and contemplate your good deeds. But, sticking with the medical metaphor for a second, you are not a doctor and you wouldn't know the hippocratic oath if it was printed in reverse lettering on your forehead. Whatever 'illness' you were supposedly dealing with has metastasized while the body is resisting your implants. In fact, the 'patient' keeps trying to kick your ass every time you come near him. Time to give up? Hell no. While Bush sends more troops to Afghanistan, Gordon Brown has insisted that there will be no 'artificial timetable' for British troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. Okay, but how about a real timetable?

Editorial, New Left Review

Rarely has there been such an enthusiastic display of international unity as that which greeted the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. Support for the war was universal in the chanceries of the West, even before its aims and parameters had been declared. nato governments rushed to assert themselves ‘all for one’. Blair jetted round the world, proselytizing the ‘doctrine of the international community’ and the opportunities for peace-keeping and nation-building in the Hindu Kush. Putin welcomed the extension of American bases along Russia’s southern borders. Every mainstream Western party endorsed the war; every media network—with bbc World and cnn in the lead—became its megaphone. For the German Greens, as for Laura Bush and Cherie Blair, it was a war for the liberation of the women of Afghanistan. [1] For the White House, a fight for civilization. For Iran, the impending defeat of the Wahhabi enemy.

One gem of a mission: Feds' push for mining investors in Afghanistan muddles military presence
Saul Chernos
http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=162242
Canada's mission in Afghanistan, it appears, may not be limited to hunting down insurgents or building roads.

(the author of this article has requested that we simply link to the Now Magazine site and not print the whole article here.)

By Malalai Joya, Rabble, March 4, 2008

After 9/11, unfortunately the United States and its allies like Canada pushed us from the frying pan into the fire, by putting in power the Northern Alliance criminals and warlords. As long as they follow this wrong policy, the situation in Afghanistan will become more disastrous.

Canada should not continue its current policy until 2011. Canada should act independently of the United States and find an alternative policy if they really want to be an honest friend of the Afghan people and improve this catastrophic situation.

Phony grassroots groups peddle Conservative propaganda
http://www.spinwatch.org/content/view/4705/9/
NUPGE, 28/2/2008
Canadians for Afghanistan and Friends of Science have connections to Harper's political agenda
Before he became prime minister, Stephen Harper headed the National Citizens Coalition (NCC), a pioneering wolf-in-sheep's-clothing outfit that championed conservative causes while posing as a grassroots organization.

The NCC was founded more than 40 years ago by the late Colin Brown, a cranky insurance millionaire who sensed populism could be faked and milked for political impact. He'd approve of the tactics Harper is using in Ottawa today.

By Kim Sengupta, Z Net, February, 04 2008

A young man, a student of journalism, is sentenced to death by an Islamic court for downloading a report from the internet. The sentence is then upheld by the country's rulers. This is Afghanistan - not in Taliban times but six years after "liberation" and under the democratic rule of the West's ally Hamid Karzai.

The fate of Sayed Pervez Kambaksh has led to domestic and international protests, and deepening concern about erosion of civil liberties in Afghanistan. He was accused of blasphemy after he downloaded a report from a Farsi website which stated that Muslim fundamentalists who claimed the Koran justified the oppression of women had misrepresented the views of the prophet Mohamed.

Manley panel gets it wrong
Report on Afghanistan the latest example of Ottawa hiding the truth from Canadians
By ERIC MARGOLIS
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Margolis_Eric/2008/01/27/pf-4796414.html
The report on Afghanistan delivered Monday by the Manley panel was deeply disappointing. Its totally predictable findings could have been written without the panel of instant Afghan experts wasting millions of tax dollars.

This whitewash was designed to provide political cover for the Harper government, which has hung its hat on the failing war in Afghanistan, and provide it an escape hatch if the kabob hits the fan. It's the latest example of the Liberals pathetic failure to demand Ottawa answer tough questions about the mess in Afghanistan.