Half a trillion dollars of broken Afghan dreams (Reuters)

KABUL (Reuters) – In the decade since U.S.-led troops streamed into Afghanistan, girls have gone back to school, elections have been held, clinics have been built and shops and media empires have sprung up. There is even a property boom in Kabul.

To the nations that poured money, lives and hope into rebuilding the country, after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States propelled it back onto the international agenda, progress like this is proof of time and money well spent.

"We just have to continue the process, and recognize again: you don't build Rome or Kabul in a day, or a decade," U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker said in a recent interview, discussing improvements in education and healthcare.

But corruption is rampant, violence is spreading fast even in once-peaceful areas, and every month an average of over 200 civilians die in the conflict.

Safety fears stop people traveling to hospitals, or even to schools -- so much so that some conservative Afghans still hark back to the security and values that the Taliban offered.

And looming over any development gains is the prospect, for a country that has already endured nearly 30 years of war, of a slide back into chaos once foreign troops hand over to Afghan forces -- which they have promised to do by the end of 2014.

"The most striking thing that stands out, whatever people feel about what has happened, whether it was good or bad, is they aren't sure about their future," said Martine van Bijlert, co-director of the Afghanistan Analysts' network.

"There have of course been achievements, but it doesn't balance out the sense that everything could fall apart. And there is a strong sense that the achievements are not proportionate to all the money and focus that has been given to Afghanistan."

At stake is not just Afghanistan's future, but U.S. security. A country engulfed in civil war could easily become a refuge again for groups looking to attack America.

"HERE FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT"

The rivers of cash that have flooded through Afghanistan have left many wondering why they still live in one of the poorest countries in the world, and questioning where it went.

"The foreigners are here for their own benefit. They came here by force and they will leave here by force," said Sayed Mujtaba Mahmoddi, a Kabul university student who says the September 11 attacks have overall been bad for his country.

"Afghanistan has developed a lot during the past years, but the development does not match the money spent. So I think the international mafia, together with the Afghan government, spent all this money improperly."

For the nearly $450 billion Congress estimates the U.S. alone has spent waging war there, every Afghan man, woman and child could have been handed $15,000. That sum is 10 years' earnings for an average Afghan, according to U.N. estimates.

Life expectancy is under 45 years, and around a quarter of children don't even live to see their fifth birthday. Even for those who survive, expectations are low.

Just one in four adults can read or write and, while unemployment is hard to measure in a rural country beset by an insurgency, it is believed to run as high as 40 percent.

The West's aid and military spending, while well-intentioned, was overwhelming for Afghanistan -- with its security problems, tiny pool of educated workers, and infrastructure devastated by years of war.

"The enormous ambition to get quick results has led us to pour in more external resources than society can absorb," said one senior Western diplomat working in Kabul.

So instead of funding growth, much of it has been diverted -- into the pockets of both the elite and insurgents -- helping to fuel a culture of rampant corruption. Everything from justice to electricity supply is tangled up in demands for bribes

Graft costs Afghans $2.5 billion a year, according to U.N. estimates; Transparency International rated it the world's third most corrupt country, behind only Myanmar and Somalia.

DEATH AND HATRED

For some, the war has spelt not just uncertainty, but catastrophe. Abdullah, from eastern Nangarhar province, dreamt of being an interpreter and got good grades until U.S. soldiers arrived at night and shot his father and elder brother.

Village elders and a local member of parliament say the men were not insurgents; now Abdullah, who was also detained briefly, works in a brick kiln to support his family.

"The U.S. troops freed me and they said that your brother and your father were innocent. What they said to me did not satisfy me. If I had the power I would behead them all," he told Reuters in the courtyard of the family's mud house.

Nationwide, the toll on civilians is getting higher. The first six months of this year were the deadliest since the overthrow of the Taliban; 368 were killed in May alone.

The vast majority of the deaths were caused by insurgents, but it is the foreign killings that most often spark outrage.

"Afghans don't expect not to be killed by the Taliban, but they do expect not to be killed by international forces," said Heather Barr, of Human Rights Watch Afghanistan.

"So even if only 20 percent of the deaths are caused by foreigners, it can still be a public relations loss."

Not only does that anger sap support for the war among voters back home, it is also helping prolong the conflict.

There is a common perception that Western forces seeking quick results have been used by commanders to settle personal scores, or by given false tips by informers seeking payment.

"They have killed and detained many innocent people; they raided and searched ordinary people's houses based on wrong intelligence," said Afghan political analyst Waheed Mojda.

"As a result people...felt that sooner or later we will get killed or detained by foreign troops so they decided to get guns and fight against the foreign troops."

A decade ago, after 9/11, many welcomed those troops for helping overthrow the Taliban.

But although the West rushed into Afghanistan with money, forces and talented officials, years of relative neglect meant they lacked one critical commodity: understanding of the complexities of the country they wanted to transform.

"The huge optimism, the sense of a clean state, the idea that you could build a country and a government from zero -- that was the biggest mistake," van Bijlert said.

(Additional reporting by Mirwais Harooni)

View the original article here

UK's Cameron: will mend "broken society" after riots (Reuters)

WITNEY, England (Reuters) – Prime Minister David Cameron Monday promised a law and order "fightback" and robust action to mend what he called Britain's broken society after riots and looting last week shocked Britons and tarnished its reputation abroad.

But he faced renewed questions over how far his plans to cut government spending may further alienate the young and the poor.

In a speech full of tough language likely to please his traditional Conservative supporters, Cameron vowed more "no-nonsense policing" and tougher sentencing to tackle gang culture and known troublemakers, and said he would to do more to promote families, boost discipline in schools and encourage hard work.

In north London, where riots began nine days ago, many welcomed his hard line -- but young people ushered in to hear his speech in rural Oxfordshire doubted it would do much to close a growing gap between rich and poor, or heal troubled communities facing his government's deep public spending cuts.

"We have been too unwilling for too long to talk about what is right and wrong," Cameron said in a speech at a youth center in his mostly affluent constituency of Witney, near Oxford.

More than 2,800 people have been arrested since a protest over a fatal shooting by police on August 4 prompted rioting and looting in the poor London district of Tottenham. That spread across the capital and sparked violence in other English cities.

Cameron, who returned from holiday abroad last week after days of unrest, is seeking to tap into widespread public anger over the violence. They came 15 months after he took office at the head of a center-right coalition committed to cuts in welfare and other spending that critics say will hit the poor.

FEARS

"I think he's right," Nicola Pastore, 26, told Reuters as she pushed a pram in Tottenham. "I don't think the police have enough control. My kids are scared to go to sleep at night."

Cameron, who faces criticism for plans to cut spending on police and for his management of the crisis, said the riots had been a "wake-up call" for Britain, whose reputation abroad was tarnished by the images of groups rampaging through its cities.

Behind him as he spoke was a graffiti-style mural centered on characters in the kind of hoods and masks worn by many looters.

The stakes are high for Cameron. Any repeat of last week's lawlessness, in which shops were smashed and set on fire and five people died, will sap public confidence in his government.

However, analysts say the 44-year-old premier, a former public relations executive from a wealthy establishment background, could benefit politically if he provides the tough law and order response some voters are seeking.

Cameron has taken a hard line in rhetoric. His speech on Monday talked of the dangers of indiscipline in schools and family breakdown, succor to traditional Conservatives who feel their young leader has been too liberal on social issues.

CUTS

Cameron and his center-left Liberal Democrat coalition partners will review their program over the coming weeks, looking at issues like welfare and substance addiction in an effort to promote more stable communities.

But the prime minister has ruled out easing spending cuts which some critics on the left say are fuelling tensions in Britain's cities, where the gap between rich and poor is gaping.

Planned austerity has put Cameron on a collision course with the police, still smarting over his criticism of their initial response to the riots. [ID:nL5E7JE04J] Police chiefs say a 20 percent cut in their budget over the next four years will make it harder for them to maintain law and order.

London's Conservative mayor, Boris Johnson, has also said now is not the time for cuts to spending on police.

But Cameron has refused to budge on plans to ease austerity measures, believing jittery financial markets will take fright at any sign of backtracking on plans to erase by 2015 a budget deficit that peaked at over 10 percent of national output.

DOUBTS

At Witney Ecumenical Youth Trust, where Cameron gave his speech, young people questioned how spending cuts squared with his plans to deal with social problems, and felt his speech created even more of a sense of 'them and us'.

Cameron was subjected to hostile whistling on arrival. After his televised speech, he took questions from journalists until a reporter chided him for not responding directly to young people in the audience. The prime minister later left to the sounds of hecklers clucking like chickens to accuse him of cowardice.

"He tried putting it across like everyone who's had a broken family was wrong. It's like he's having a dig at us," said Jesse Day, 19. She and her friends stressed the importance of community organizations like theirs -- a charity which relies on donations and which almost closed a few months ago.

"He says he wants people to get in touch with their families. But for some people, their families aren't there and the youth centre's the only people to talk to," said Ryan Clayton, 15. "But he's shutting all the youth centers."

Others in Witney welcomed Cameron's emphasis on behavior.

"I agree entirely," said 74-year-old Colin Bayliss.

"Discipline's gone out the window. The family identity has gone out the window. There's more single parents around. More people need to take responsibility for their families and their children."

Opposition Labor leader Ed Miliband said a lack of morality was not confined to a "feral underclass" but was also displayed by risk-taking bankers, legislators who fiddled their expenses and newspaper reporters who hacked telephones for stories -- all major topics of debate in Britain in the past couple of years.

"When we talk about the sick behavior of those without power, let's also talk about the sick behavior of those with it," he said in a speech at his old school in London Monday.

It was a line echoed by Cameron. Leaders are conscious that voters, disillusioned by what many see as a failure to punish bankers they hold responsible for the financial crisis, could take unkindly to being lectured by politicians, the press and police, all institutions hit by scandal in the recent past.

(Additional reporting by Keith Weir, Adrian Croft and Avril Ormsby; Editing by Jodie Ginsberg and Alastair Macdonald)

View the original article here