We already have interesting confirmation of the hypothesis in the many posts and discussions in our first months of operation.  A discussion that developed in response to my post on the Afghan women’s soccer team, I think was particularly illuminating.

I started with an examination of an instance of the politics of small things. This opened a discussion of the big issues on the question of war and peace, and to my mind the discussion came to a strong insightful ending with a reply that used the perspective of everyday life to address the big issues under discussion.

There were notes on all sides of the issue, from Michael who critically but sympathetically reflected on the American position, to Alias who denounced the NATO effort in no uncertain terms, and opinions in between, including mine. But Mariam Yasin, offered another perspective completely. That of a person against all wars and as someone whose position in the conflict provides a unique perspective:

“There are too many stories of family and my family’s acquaintances killed by Americans, Soviets, and Taliban. This is not to mention the dispersal of Afghans; Afghans just want to be left alone. My family’s house was not shelled by Taliban, but by the Americans and coalition forces. Fortunately no one was hurt that time.”

She made telling observations in her two replies:

“Though I would have to agree that women have regained new means of re-entering social and political life in Afghanistan, I believe there is too much ignored by the strong focus on women and women’s rights…

The struggles faced by Afghan men are ignored and effaced because, as we know, Afghan men are terrorists. However, their mere “inclusion” in society and presence in public life is also a matter of life and death. Those without beards, for instance, risk imprisonment or even immediate execution. Men and boys brave all sorts of dangers to work for whatever meager wages they can manage.

Why don’t we actually speak more about the Bible verses marked on the sides of American weapons or on the targeting sights? Why don’t we speak of the American boys handed guns with the knowledge that they will most likely be shooting people? What does such an act do to American society? Why does the government offer the poor and disenfranchised a chance at an education only if they go to war? Are there those who believe that Afghan children, who have grown up and are growing up through nearly four decades of war, will forget the invasion, occupation, and death?”

The discussion proceeded with an agreement that the policy choices presented a real dilemma.  Mariam agreed.  But she underscored her fundamental position based on her many observations of significant details.

“The only way “out” that I see is a withdrawal of all external intervention in Afghan (Central Asian and Arab) affairs–this includes the so-called Taliban…

For Afghanistan to recover, there needs to be a political and military withdrawal of American and coalition forces. The destruction of the Taliban–politically and culturally–will take place, I have no doubt….”

An interesting perspective, she presents.  Concerned about women’s rights but noting how Afghan men have been demonized.  Very much against the Taliban, but with a strong conviction that they as a foreign import would have been rejected by Afghan’s without outside assistance.  It seems too good to be true, from an American strategic and tactical point of view.  Win the war, by withdrawing.  But as someone who is not able to say as Mariam confidently does, that I am against all wars, my intuition as a pragmatic pacifist, tells me that she might just be right.  There is little evidence that the military option of “the war on terrorism” has been a success or is likely to lead to such success.  The knowledge and the insights of a critical involved person paying close attention to the details of the Afghan experience, such as Mariam, warrants careful deliberate consideration.