The Times reports that the cost of "rebuilding" Afghanistan has now exceeded that of the post WW2 Marshall Plan for rebuilding Europe. The US has forked out £61.5 billion since 2002 and the UK(which actually spent its Marshall Plan money on social engineering in setting up the NHS rather than actual engineering) has thrown in £890 million.
Those sums are on top of the actual military operations on which the US has spent a staggering £296 billion and the UK £22 billion.
In both cases one is entitled to ask "For what?"
In both cases the answer has to be "Nothing" or at best "Very, very, little".
Between the western allies, actually mainly the US and UK, we have destroyed Afghanistan's infrastructure, failed to put in place a stable non corrupt and Taliban-proof government and in the process lost and had maimed for life large numbers of our own soldiers.
With all the redevelopment money spent we might expect to see a new, disciplined, well trained and effective armed and police forces, a network of excellent highways, new, well equipped school,hospitals and power stations as well as replacements for shattered homes. In other words a fine new model state working robustly and able to stave off any future attempts by the Taliban or others to put the clock back.
Instead the US watchdog on Government spending is said by the Times to have reported that most of the projects are undermined by poor planning,shoddy construction, mechanical failures and inadequate oversight. In other words there is precious little to show for the billions and what there is is unlikely to last long before collapsing or breaking down, probably for ever. The same continues to go for most misguided foreign aid but that's another story. Our legacy in both human and physical terms will be dismal.
As we have said before, anyone with any idea of Afghan history, its social /tribal history or anything to do with it would have said that at the beginning and never have embarked on this adventure. Even a flight over the country tells most people that idealistic visions of democratic, or indeed any unified, rule have any chance of realisation. Despite that the UK ,led by the US and the Bush/Blair relationship, did. In the British parliament barely a voice against was raised against it by anyone in any party. Most were actively supportive with the grave tones and seriously furrowed brows which are intended to denote deep understanding and wisdom at such times. Even now most of our politicians, terrified of accusations that they have thrown away hundreds of British and many more Afghan lives for nothing,- as they have,- remain in denial. They mutter things about it all having been worth it. It hasn't. Worse, having created this mess (Yes, Mr Blair) we will now blame the Afghans for not resolving it and we will walk away leaving them to their fate.
Those sums are on top of the actual military operations on which the US has spent a staggering £296 billion and the UK £22 billion.
In both cases one is entitled to ask "For what?"
In both cases the answer has to be "Nothing" or at best "Very, very, little".
Between the western allies, actually mainly the US and UK, we have destroyed Afghanistan's infrastructure, failed to put in place a stable non corrupt and Taliban-proof government and in the process lost and had maimed for life large numbers of our own soldiers.
With all the redevelopment money spent we might expect to see a new, disciplined, well trained and effective armed and police forces, a network of excellent highways, new, well equipped school,hospitals and power stations as well as replacements for shattered homes. In other words a fine new model state working robustly and able to stave off any future attempts by the Taliban or others to put the clock back.
Instead the US watchdog on Government spending is said by the Times to have reported that most of the projects are undermined by poor planning,shoddy construction, mechanical failures and inadequate oversight. In other words there is precious little to show for the billions and what there is is unlikely to last long before collapsing or breaking down, probably for ever. The same continues to go for most misguided foreign aid but that's another story. Our legacy in both human and physical terms will be dismal.
As we have said before, anyone with any idea of Afghan history, its social /tribal history or anything to do with it would have said that at the beginning and never have embarked on this adventure. Even a flight over the country tells most people that idealistic visions of democratic, or indeed any unified, rule have any chance of realisation. Despite that the UK ,led by the US and the Bush/Blair relationship, did. In the British parliament barely a voice against was raised against it by anyone in any party. Most were actively supportive with the grave tones and seriously furrowed brows which are intended to denote deep understanding and wisdom at such times. Even now most of our politicians, terrified of accusations that they have thrown away hundreds of British and many more Afghan lives for nothing,- as they have,- remain in denial. They mutter things about it all having been worth it. It hasn't. Worse, having created this mess (Yes, Mr Blair) we will now blame the Afghans for not resolving it and we will walk away leaving them to their fate.
