For a deep dive into how the US fanned the flames of corruption in Afghanistan, tough to beat the 2016 @SIGARHQ report, which got little attention at the time:
And then there was the Kabul Bank fiasco. Nearly $1 billion, whisked away from Afghan depositors for crooked, politically connected Afghan elites. It was all a giant Ponzi scheme.
But did that change anything when it came to US support? Nope.
Over and over, the US chose “security” over anti-corruption action in Afghanistan.
As @SIGARHQ wrote, “security and political goals consistently trumped strong anti-corruption actions.”
This quote sums up so much of the US failure in Afghanistan: “We just assume America wants the corruption. We have no other way of explaining… how America has behaved itself.”
None of this should necessarily be surprising. Time and again in Afghanistan, the US said it was prioritizing security over efforts to combat corruption.
'For almost two decades now, billions of dollars in corruption proceeds have been funneled from Afghanistan... to Dubai.' carnegieendowment.org/2020/07/07/kab…
A stupendous US media failure: when this 2016 @SIGARHQ report on the US fueling Afghan corruption came out, there was a grand total of *one* mainstream outlet (ABC) that covered it.
Also good time to revisit how corruption related to the Afghan war decimated US standing elsewhere: rferl.org/a/Congressiona…
'Ultimately, both [South Vietnam and Afghanistan] fell because they had been hollowed out by corruption, an ancient disease of governance to which America’s nation-building projects are prone.' economist.com/international/…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Trump was the first leader to emerge from a "pro-kleptocracy" industry (luxury real estate)—which shows just how much corruption has changed in the past century.
And now, US presidential corruption is something for all kleptocrats of the world to enjoy.
NEW: I wrote about one of the greatest traitors the US has ever produced, a man who deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as Benedict Arnold: Robert E. Lee.
—Disavowed his oath of loyalty to the US
—Led a movement that slaughtered hundreds of thousands of US troops
—All so that he could no longer be American
—All so that he and other insurrections could continue/expand enslavement of Black Americans
Robert E. Lee's treason is there for all of us to see.
As Ulysses S. Grant wrote, Lee chose to lead a movement that was “one of the worst [causes] for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse.”
'Ideally, she says, the world would not see the Soviet Union first and foremost as an ideological project that “fell apart” due to economic woe, but also as a colonial empire that many peoples fought to topple' calvertjournal.com/features/show/…
Wanted: Survey of how the Soviet collapse has (slowly, fitfully) been increasingly understood in the West as an outcome of colonization out of Moscow, rather than just economic failures.
There's still a strange/giant gap in Western discourse on legacies of European colonization, which shunts Central Asia or the Caucasus to the side. Or, hell, places like Chechnya or Tuva.
NEW: America’s sanctions policies are long overdue for a reevaluation. But while some elements should be scrapped, programs targeting kleptocrats and their networks should remain—and be strengthened across the board.
(One fantastic place for the US and allies to start expanding targeted sanctions against specific kleptocrats? Central Asia—including a certain former dictator of Kazakhstan.)
One lesson from the War on Terror that’s been overlooked (or forgotten) is just how effective financial measures were at disabling terror networks—and how those (unsurprisingly) follow similar pathways to the kleptocratic networks now operating.
One potential silver lining of the U.S. pulling out of Afghanistan: Maybe Washington will finally—finally—be willing to actually go after kleptocrats and regimes in Central Asia, rather than prioritize security relations over absolutely everything.
In five years, a grand total of *two* Central Asian figures have been sanctioned under Global Magnitsky. No one from Turkmenistan. No one from Tajikistan. No one from Kazakhstan.
That's insane!
If the Biden admin wants to prove it's serious about elevating corruption to a core national security threat, it should also absolutely start launching sanctions salvos against leading corrupt regime insiders in the region.
Sarah Chayes had an entire book years ago on how elite corruption in Afghanistan—and Washington's unwillingness to do anything about it—severely undercut the U.S.'s mission there: nytimes.com/2015/02/22/boo…
Deprioritizing fighting corruption will always, eventually, blow up in our faces.