LONG AND
WINDING ROADS
HUFFINGTON
10.14.12
PAULA BRONSTEIN /GETTY IMAGES
U.S. special
envoy Richard
Holbrooke,
right, stands
next to U.S.
General Stanley
McChrystal,
head of the
U.S. and NATO
forces in
Afghanistan,
before the
arrival of
Hillary Clinton
in Kabul in
2009.
leave the locals more disenchanted.
“If anything surprised me, it was the
extent to which, especially in the south,
our resources were seen to be creating
the distance between the people and the
government,” Wilder said, during an interview at his new office at the U.S. Institute of Peace, a congressionally funded
think tank that promotes non-violent
conflict resolution. “I just thought, maybe
we should be spending less money.”
For years, military leaders and policymakers in Washington had been operating under the assumption that reconstruction was an essential part of
the counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan, and if they could just get the
projects right, stability would soon follow. So far, the U.S. has plowed nearly
$90 billion into the effort — including
spending on infrastructure, combating
narcotics and training Afghan security
forces — and spent hundreds of billions
more on warfighting.
There’s no doubt that the people of
Afghanistan harbor deep resentment
toward some actions of the American
military, such as the night raids and unlawful detentions that broke apart families and the drone and airstrikes that
killed civilians. “Airstrikes have long
been one of the biggest grievances of the
Afghan public,” says Erica Gaston,