<div>I recall in the 1990s being appalled at the treatment of women by the Taliban in Afghanistan, along with the destruction of the Buddhist statutes in 2001, but when I talked to people about the human rights abuses of the Taliban pre-9/11, most just yawned. I was amazed that the forces the US had supported to oppose the Soviet occupation were inflicting totalitarianism on Afghanistan, and the US seemed oddly disinterested. President Reagan in the 1980s had praised the mujahedine "freedom fighters," which the CIA supported, as they inflicted a "Vietnam" styled defeat on the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. But the Taliban's later abuses pre-911 were of no major interest in the US Machiavellian pursuit of foreign policy goals, well, except perhaps when they opposed the pipeline that US energy interests wanted to build through Afghanistan:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>As the book "Bin Laden: Forbidden Truth" <font size="4">by Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, describes (once, perhaps still, available at the Moscow Public Library):</font></div>
<div><font size="4"></font> </div>
<div><a href="http://www.serendipity.li/wot/bl_tft.htm#godoy">http://www.serendipity.li/wot/bl_tft.htm#godoy</a></div>
<div>
<p>"At one moment during the negotiations, the U.S. representatives told the Taliban, 'either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs,'" Brisard said in an interview in Paris. [This threat was made <b>before</b> September 11th.] </p>
<p>----------</p></div>
<div>The Taliban were also successful at times in slowing opium production in Afghanistan, which ironically increased after the US invasion. It has been suggested that one of the main reasons the Taliban had to be removed was interference with the very economically powerful opium/heroin trade, a source of funding for "black ops." </div>
<div> </div>
<div>We all know the official line as to why the US had to invade Afghanistan, to destroy safe havens for terrorists, and to capture Bin Laden, though Pakistan is as great or greater a problem in this regard, with nuclear weapons that could end up in extremists control. 9/11 could very well have happened even without the Taliban in power in Afghanistan; and I doubt that terrorist operations worldwide were hampered dramatically by the US occupation. Those involved in these operations simply moved elsewhere, with Pakistan next door as a safe haven the US would not invade. Someone knows where Bin Laden is, and Pakistan is a likely hiding place.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Info on Taliban successes in reducing opium production:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/EI17Ag01.html">http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/EI17Ag01.html</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Quote below from website above:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>That same year, only 35 tonnes of opium were estimated to have been collected in Taliban-held areas. In one year, Mullah Omar's edict cut production spectacularly, from 3,300 tonnes in 2000. The Taliban nearly rooted out opium production in the areas under their control, in contrast to the United Front-held areas. <br>
---------------------</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The current situation in Afghanistan/Pakistan, and the history of the rise of the Taliban and its support for Islamic extremism and those connected to 9/11, appears to be one of the most glaring examples of "blowback" in the history US foreign policy/military intervention.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Sometimes I wonder if history would have turned out for the better if the Soviets had succeeded in maintaining their puppet government in Afghanistan, and kept the Taliban out of power. Islamic extremism, and the human rights abuses of the Taliban, may been limited; and The Buddhist statues may have survived. Choices among evils... And pure speculation on my part.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ted Moffett<br> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 3/25/09, <b class="gmail_sendername"><a href="mailto:nickgier@roadrunner.com">nickgier@roadrunner.com</a></b> <<a href="mailto:nickgier@roadrunner.com">nickgier@roadrunner.com</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Greetings:<br><br>This is my radio commentary/column for this week. The full version with before and after images and the world's first oil paintings is attached.<br>
<br>Last November Gail and I saw the Bactrian Gold exhibit at the Asian Art Museum in San Francisco. It was once feared that these incredible treasures, intricate gold necklaces, bowls, and amulets from 2,200 BC to 200 AD, had either been taken off to Moscow by the Soviets during their invasion of the 1980s or had been melted down by jihadists to buy arms.<br>
<br>It turned out that director of the Kabul Museum had secretly sealed them in a vault in the Central Bank in 1989. The safe was drilled opened in 2004 and the Bactrian Gold is now on a triumphant world tour. The new government in Kabul sees this as a chance to reposition Afghanistan as the seat of great civilizations rather than a country known for opium production and radical Muslims.<br>
<br>I'm really torn. I don't want more of our soldiers to die in Afghanistan, but I don't want the Taliban to destroy the rest of Bactrian cultural heritage.<br><br>Nick Gier<br><br>THE BAMIYAN BUDDHAS: THE DESTRUCTION OF AFGHAN CULTURAL TREASURES<br>
<br>Eight years ago this month the Taliban demolished two giant Buddha statues in Afghanistan's Bamiyan Valley, 131 miles northwest of Kabul. The international community condemned the act, and the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference joined in the outrage.<br>
<br>Initially, Mohammed Omar, the Taliban leader, promised that he would preserve the monuments, the largest standing Buddhas in the world (one 174 feet; the other 125 feet). Omar was overruled by radical clerics who insisted that the statues were religious idols and had to be destroyed under Islamic law.<br>
<br>Alexander the Great left administrators and artists in the wake of his conquests in this region then known as Bactria. It was the descendants of Greek artists who convinced their Buddhist students to violate their guru's prohibition of depicting his face. The result was the stunning Gandhara school of Buddhist art, distinctive for the deep Greco-Roman folds in the clothing.<br>
<br>During the 7th Century AD the Bamiyan Valley was home to ten monasteries and over 1,000 monks. Many of the monks lived as hermits in caves in the cliffs where the statues were chiseled out of solid rock. The elaborate cave art is the first ever painted with oils, six centuries before Europeans perfected this medium.<br>
<br>In the 11th Century Muslim armies on their way to conquer India tried to destroy the statues, but they did not have the technology to do it. The artillery of the Nadar Shah (1698-1744), sometimes known as the Persian Napoleon, did damage them, but could not bring them down. The Taliban bombarded and dynamited the cliffs for a month before the deed was done.<br>
<br>When the Taliban came to power in 1996, the National Museum in Kabul, built by King Amanullah in 1922, was destroyed. Specific targets were images of the Buddha, which could have fetched good prices on the black market. The Taliban, however, were not interested in money; rather, they were intent on eradicating all traces of what they consider an idolatrous religion.<br>
<br>There were Buddhist centers of learning in ancient Pakistan, and, although the modern nation is 95 percent Muslim, the government has proudly preserved its Buddhist heritage. The current regime, however, has allowed the Taliban to impose shari'ah law in the Swat Valley, and a museum built for Buddhist artifacts was recently bombed by Muslim militants and 150 objects were destroyed.<br>
<br>With all this in mind, I am really torn about our current policy in Afghanistan. The Taliban has increased their control of the country from 50 percent in 2007 to 70 percent last year. Kabul is now essentially surrounded and militant attacks in the city have increased 35 percent over 2007.<br>
<br>President Obama has sent 17,000 more Marines to Afghanistan, even when he himself knows that military force alone will not solve the problems. In fact, a greater military presence will lead to more civilian casualties. Civilian deaths were up 40 percent from those in 2007, one half caused by coalition forces.<br>
<br>The Obama administration has said that it is open to the possibility of a negotiated settlement with the Taliban. The problem with a diplomatic solution is whether or not we can trust them, and the experience in the Swat Valley demonstrates that we cannot.<br>
<br>I agree with the editors of the New York Times: "We are deeply skeptical that there is any deal to be cut with the Taliban leaders, who . . . would undoubtedly insist on reimposing their repressive, medieval ways, including denying education and medical care to women."<br>
<br>I would simply add the real possibility that the Taliban would finish the destruction of Afghanistan's cultural treasures, and they would definitely block the Japanese and Swiss efforts to reconstruct the Bamiyan Buddhas.<br>
<br>Nick Gier taught religion and philosophy at the University of Idaho for 31 years.<br><br><br><br>=======================================================<br>List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>
<a href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a><br> mailto:<a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>=======================================================<br><br></blockquote>
</div><br>