Papua is one of the most underdeveloped regions in this country. And my question is who is actually responsible for creating that poverty? I spent more than four months this year teaching in Fakfak, West Papua. Before I went to Papua I knew how bad the situation in the region was from watching the news.
There is a lot of information about Papua, including information about the levels of poverty and illiteracy in the region. In Papua, the rate of education is very low and people have been known to die from starvation.
The reality of poverty and misery in Papua has drawn my attention for many years. I have devoted much time to thinking about the problems and how to overcome them. When I was in Papua, I started to form a real and complete picture of this problem. I began to ask myself how such a rich island could become so poor. The forest and sea looked like it provided abundant, which could sustain people's livelihood sufficiently.
The forest, river and sea could supply almost every need; wood for housing, various plants for medicine, unlimited land for farming, and animals and fish for consumption. With a little advanced knowledge and technology to manage these great resources, they would certainly lack nothing they would need to live a good life.
Driven by these questions, my thoughts turned to the lifestyle of the Papuan people that I saw while I was living there. I observed what they ate, what they wore, where they went when they got sick, what kind of houses they built, and finally what their definition of rich and poor was. Now apparently they eat rice instead of yam and sago palm, they wear garment clothes instead of more traditional clothing, when they get sick they go directly to a doctor rather than use their own traditional medicines, and the worst of all, they also build concrete houses instead of traditional wooden houses.
This time the measure of rich and poor was not how many pigs someone had, rather more like the Javanese, they measured wealth in terms of the size of their house, what vehicles they drove and what kind of phone they used. They have given up using their own resources and have began to use the products of others; the products of different cultures that come Java (read: modernization, globalization).
Papuans have now become absolutely dependent on other resources. And to get them they must buy them at four to six times the price. They buy clothes, rice, medicine and even building materials from Java. This is a problem, but there is something much bigger; while they must buy everything from Java, on the other hand, they sell almost nothing to Java. It is completely unfair and unjust. This is a problem, but there are bigger problems than this.
Javanese culture has become deeply imbedded in Papuan life. Today, their lifestyle is completely Javanese. They have abandoned their own culture in order to become Javanese. They eat, wear, build houses, and have become consumers just like the Javanese. They were pushed to live on something that their own island could not produce and then neglected their own resources.
Now we have to ask, how did this situation occur? In my opinion, one of the most important causes was the doctrine and theory of developed and underdeveloped regions and societies that was used by the Javanese in their approach to Papua. The Javanese came to Papua and told them that they were poor, backward, and underdeveloped, while at the same time implied how advanced, modern and civilized they were.
In this way the Javanese pushed the Papuans to be like them because they didn't want to be considered as underdeveloped and primitive. And as soon as the Papuans accepted this idea they became dependent on Java - believing they had to buy materials from Java so they too would become advanced, modern and civilized.
But the problem is that as soon as they adopted Javanese culture and became dependant on their products, the Papuans directly detached from their own culture and neglected their island's resources. And what is the result of this? Did the Papuans then became an advanced society like the Javanese? No! All that they got from this was poverty. This Javanization has just made the situation in Papua even worse than before. The Javanization was just a politic of how to sell, not how to help. They pushed Papuans to buy everything they sold, but never thought about how to create jobs for them so they could earn the money to pay for them. So, they just buy with their little saving; after which, poverty just hits harder. By Tri Harmaji, Yogyakarta The writer is a PhD student of ICRS Yogyakarta
Actress and model Manohara lifts a crocodile at an anti-corruption protest in Jakarta on Monday. (Photo: Jurnasyanto Sukarno, JG)
Corruption. I first became familiar with the concept when I was in the third grade at an international school in France. One of my classmates talked about his mom getting pulled over for speeding while driving him to school. He was worried because they took her license away because of previous traffic violations. Our teacher tried to comfort the poor kid, who looked like he thought his mom was going to be sentenced to life in prison.
As the teacher explained that his mother probably just had to fill out a few forms, I interrupted her and announced proudly to the class that in my beautiful homeland of Indonesia you can just give a policeman the equivalent of a euro or so and get away with speeding!
All the other kids thought this was cool and asked me what else people in Indonesia pay for that they couldn’t in France. I didn’t need much time to think and very casually said, “Well you can pay for your identity card, getting a drivers license, passing airport security, getting into the police force — almost everything really.” The teacher chuckled and then looked me in the eye and said, “That is called bribing, and that’s what makes your country a corrupt one.”
She explained to the class the horrible effect that corruption has on a country. One thing that was extremely close to my heart was poverty, another byproduct of corruption according to the teacher. At that moment my feelings changed. From being overly confident and bragging about my country, I developed an embarrassing, sick, disappointed feeling in my gut. I felt somewhat betrayed by my motherland.
By the time the lunch bell rang, all the kids had probably forgotten about the incident but I didn’t. It was all I could think about through my math, geography and science classes. Instead of rushing to the cafeteria, I rushed to the school’s deserted library and with the help of a computer I learned as much as I possibly could in 45 minutes about corruption. From that day forward my views on the “convenience” of corruption changed.
Is corruption convenient? Yes. Most people I ask say that corruption is a despicable act mostly performed by the government and the “elite.” I then ask them if they’ve ever bribed a cop when being stopped for a traffic violation. No one has said no.
I have come to realize that bribery has become such an ordinary part of our daily lives here that millions of people contribute to it on a daily basis without even realizing it. We bribe as easily as we breathe; we are so used to paying our way out of any little inconvenience in life that we almost make it seem OK to be corrupt.
Is this why corruption is such a big, seemingly unsolvable problem here in Indonesia? Is this why we can’t seem to find a solution to this matter? Is it because corruption is the one problem we can’t pay our way out of?
In my mind, the solution has to start with changing our mind-set toward the convenient aspects of being corrupt. We have to make changes in our mental attitudes toward corruption before just blaming the government. I see this as almost like going green; people can’t keep blaming the large polluting factories while driving a fuel-guzzling SUV.
Sadly, money is power. The one thing that disturbs me the most about corruption is the effect it has on the poor and powerless. The powerless are almost half of Indonesia’s population, and they live on less than Rp 20,000 ($2.10) a day.
So then let’s look at government officials in Indonesia. For example, ministers. Today they earn about Rp 19 million per month. When I see someone earning that amount spend far more than that in just one day, for example, without having another job on the side, I can’t help but be puzzled. I can’t help but ask whether the money they are spending on their fourth car (which most probably won’t even use) is money that is supposed be used to help the less fortunate, build new schools or help victims of natural disasters.
I was speaking with a very respectable man the other day. He works in a very high position in one of the biggest banks in Indonesia. I brought up the subject of the Padang earthquake and was telling him how I was happy that TV stations were raising a substantial amount of money for the victims. As I said that, he smiled at my naivete and he then told me that one local station raised Rp 17 billion. How much went to Padang? Rp 3 billion. What happened to the Rp 14 billion? Who knows.
The latest corruption case to blow up is, of course, the whole issue with Bank Century, top government officials, the police force and the KPK etc. etc. etc. Do you honestly think anyone involved in this mess is innocent of corruption? I don’t.
The more I dig into this issue, the more I realize that the whole system is corrupt. We can’t fix anything by just firing a bunch of people because, literally, everything is corrupt. Corruption is and will be a part of our culture unless we make real changes in ourselves.
In my opinion the only way to make any progress is by tackling the problem at the roots, starting from zero. How do we do that? We have to change our way of thinking. There should be serious lectures in schools, kids should be encouraged to have a real voice and an opinion about their nation’s future — make them develop their minds rather than just sticking to textbooks and assuming everything they read is the truth. In the public schools, we should educate children more about current affairs and corruption, make them debate the issue and broaden their minds. They basically need a view of their own rather than following the way things have always been done. Come on, right now the “grown-ups” aren’t setting what I would call a good example. They need to be challenged by young people.
I know this kind of change will take a long time and I’ll probably be an old granny before it’ll start to have any real effect but we just HAVE to change someday. I’m really tired of watching people complain but then do nothing about the problem of corruption; it makes everyone look like a hypocrite. If no one is willing to stop this culture of sleaze with genuinely good intentions and no dirty money involved, it can’t get better. I guess I would be a hypocrite too if I didn’t try to do something. It might sound a little too ambitious for a 17-year-old girl like me, but I am determined to do something about it. I am positive that we can change.
I’m going to end this with one of my favorite quotes by Margaret Mead, the American cultural anthropologist: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”
Manohara Odelia Pinot is a fashion model and television actress.
All Muslims wish to go to Mecca to perform haj as required in the Koran. And every year Indonesia sends the largest number of pilgrims to Saudi Arabia, because the Saudi Arabia government allocates 1 percent of the total Muslim population for each country, or 210,000 participants, for this year.
As the government charges about Rp 33 million (US$3,350) each, this year's the total payment from pilgrims is about Rp 2.8 trillion. A huge amount for sure.
If we use the hitungan dagang (business calculation), like many Minangkabau traders in Tanah Abang Market say, the haj travel bureaus together with the Ministry of Religious Affairs will at least get one third as profit.
The pilgrims, of course, will spend more than Rp 33 million. One to three months before their departure, there are series of practices, or training conducted by the travel bureaus or related agencies.
Before and after performing the haj, the participants should donate more money for certain ceremonial and charitable activities.
And don't forget, they should also provide their relatives, neighbors and colleagues with gifts from Tanah Suci, the Holy Land. Overall, each participant may spend about Rp 50 million.
It's a very costly spiritual journey.
One of my close friends, who often became the guide for Indonesian pilgrims, revealed that he made much money every time the season came.
His father, who ran the haj business, could afford to build a nice house and his family enjoyed an easy life. And my friend told me that he was really motivated to learn Arabic and Islam at a pesantren (Islamic boarding school) because he wanted to work for his family business.
He said in the haj business he profited in two ways: Reward from God as well as the reward (wealth) from running the business.
The officials at the Ministry of Religious Affairs, especially those who work at the Ministry's directorate general for haj affairs, may also share my friend's view.
It is a lucrative business and the office is often regarded as lahan basah (a financially profitable division). Once you are there, you will prosper, the officials there often say.
And they are not alone, surely. The fact that one corrupt bureaucracy is correlated with other corrupt ones has been known for long time in relation to the haj management. We can clearly see how all the elements from beginning to end are monopolized.
Take a look at how the ministry manages accommodation. Almost everything is fraudulent: the arrival, the catering, the hotels, transportation, guides, and communication.
The government is very lucky, because many Indonesians are used to being patient and passive. And we can trace this "luck" back to two or three centuries ago.
As retold by Marcel Willox (1997), when it was recorded before the nineteenth century, Indonesians risked their lives and wealth and everything for the haj.
They will tend to remain passive even though they have to sacrifice themselves here or there, because they deeply believe that their death is never a waste. As their intention is declared before they leave, they are already indoctrinated for the eternal life.
But will this kind of business that exploits the belief and willingness of the people carry on like this? Are not there any alternatives to make it fairer and therefore less exploitative?
First of all, since the rules of the game are typically bureaucratic, and therefore strengthen the corrupt practices, the chance for change is slim. So, there should be an initiative from the lawmakers to review or amend the 2008 law on the haj management.
The management of the haj should be required to be more transparent and accountable, especially before the public.
There should be reliable and standardized procedures and operations that the public can trust. The law should ascertain that there is no more aji mumpung (taking advantage) or yang penting jalan (just go ahead).
Second, there should be independent institution(s) filled with independent people which are legally continuously supervising, assisting and auditing the management of the haj in all its aspects.
And it is the government itself, the President at best, that should establish it since it is under the executive's scope of work. The existence of this institution will enable the checks and balances process in the handling of the haj. Khairil Azhar , Jakarta The writer is a teacher at Lazuardi GIS, Jakarta.
OBSERVERS analysing the visit of US President Barack Obama to China not unnaturally looked for signs of a shift in the world balance of power — and found them. For one thing, the American leader was noticeably respectful of his Chinese hosts and did not attempt to lecture them, at least not in public and probably not in private as well. And the Chinese side finally got what it had wanted for 30 years — to be treated as an equal by the United S t at e s. Of course, the shift in the balance of power does not mean that China is going to replace the US as a global hegemon. It does mean, however, that China will play a much bigger role in world affairs.
During the Bush administration, Beijing was told that it had to learn to be a responsible stakeholder. Now, it is learning that it has to pay a price for a bigger voice in world affairs — the assumption of additional responsibilities.
Power and responsibility go t o g e t h e r.
A joint statement issued by the two countries shows the extent to which they now share a common world view. They reviewed global issues from the Middle East to South Asia; from the global economic recovery to climate change.Each acknowledged the right, indeed the responsibility, of the other to deal with global issues.
“The two sides noted that, at a time when the international environment is undergoing complex and profound changes, the United States and China share a responsibility to cooperatively address regional and global security challenges,” they said. In the joint statement, the US “wel - comes a strong, prosperous and successful China that plays a greater role in world affairs”, addressing China’s concerns of American attempts to frustrate its rise.On its part, China declared that it “welcomes the United States as an Asia-Pacific nation that contributes to peace, stability and prosperity in the region”, thus ameliorating American fears that a rising China would attempt to squeeze it out of the reg ion.
In this emerging world order, both the US and China will have to make adjustments. Washington, known for its predilections for unilateralism, will have to pay greater heed to the interests of China and other countries.And China will have to play a global leadership role to which it is unaccustomed.
The late Deng Xiaoping warned his successors to keep a low profile and never take the lead, and China largely hewed to this course over the last two decades. But as the country has grown to become the world’s third largest economy — soon to become the second largest when overtaking Japan — it will have to come to terms with an unaccustomed new role. In this new role, it will be difficult for China to be a follower in the international community, going along with majority views. Indeed, China will have to moderate its oft-stated policy of noninterference in other countries’ internal affairs.
This is implied in the joint statement, where the two countries agree that they “share increasingly important common responsibilities of major issues concerning global stability and prosperity” and agree to “work together to tackle challenges, and promote world peace, security and prosperity”. America’s and China’s interests are now so intertwined that each acknowledges the right of the other to be involved in its economic affairs since what one country does will affect the other.
Thus, to reassure China that its investments are safe, the United States promised to “take measures to increase national saving as a share of GDP and promote sustainable noninflationary growth” and return the “federal budget deficit to a sustainable path and pursuing measures to encourage private saving”.
And China promised to “continue to implement the policies to adjust economic structure, raise household incomes, expand domestic demand to increase contribution of consumption to GDP growth and reform its social security system”. So what we have now is a framework for a bilateral relationship in which each sees the other as a partner.
What remains now is to build political trust, which is clearly still lacking. While both countries say they are committed to building a positive, cooperative and comprehensive relationship for the 21st century, old problems such as Taiwan, Tibet and human rights are as intractable as ever while new problems are bound to emerge. It will not be easy for this new partnership to work. But if it doesn’t, the outlook for the resolution of world issues in the 21st century will be bleak. By Frank Ching, New Straits Times.
ANYONE who doubts whether cashiered general Prabowo Subianto will make a serious bid for the presidency in 2014 need only watch Hungry Is The Tiger, a beautifully filmed documentary that lays out his plan to rescue the country's poor. Using a series of heartrending interviews, interspersed with wayang storytelling, the 79-minute documentary offers the promise of a 'White Revolution' that will turn deprived children into tigers - 'hungry and strong'.
The revolution is about milk and how Indonesia can emulate a successful project in western India, where women are given dairy cows as a way of supplementing the income of their husbands and keeping their children in good health at the same time.
This is not a crass exercise in political hype. Director and cinematographer Gary Hayes - whose new Julia Roberts feature, Eat, Pray, Love, was partly shot in Bali - has created an amazing canvas on which to paint a simple, compelling message. As a professional work, it mirrors the slick televised campaign advertisements that got Prabowo a lot of attention when he first declared his presidential ambitions - something that had never been seen before in Indonesia.
In this case, however, an obviously well-fed Prabowo is introduced only as a goat-breeding former general, who got all his soldiers to drink milk when he was a battalion commander in Bali years ago. He had to abandon his own presidential campaign, but acting as the running mate of Indonesian Democratic Party - Struggle presidential candidate Megawati Sukarnoputri did win him extra visibility.
A former chief of the Indonesian Special Forces and the Army Strategic Reserve, the often hot-headed Prabowo may be controversial. But as a trip this correspondent took through Java earlier this year revealed, he has a growing following. How he keeps himself in the spotlight over the next five years and how much money his businessman-brother, Hashim Djojohadikusumo, is prepared to lay out for him will go a long way towards determining his chances in what is now a wide-open field.
Recent reports suggest the brothers have had a falling out in recent weeks because of Hashim's insistence on having a bigger say in Prabowo's Great Indonesia Movement Party (Gerindra), which controls 26 seats in the new Parliament. But if that is the case, it won't last long. They have always been close, as befits brothers whose father, former finance minister Sumitro Djojohadikusumo, always saw them as a dream team: Prabowo the military and political leader, and Hashim the financier.
While it is far too early to make a serious assessment for 2014, it is still a wide-open field with only Din Syamsuddin, the head of mass Muslim organisation Muhammadiyah, as the other likely candidate at this point.
Golkar chairman Aburizal Bakrie may be tempted, but Indonesians are wary of businessmen, particularly someone whose drilling company is widely blamed for causing the ongoing Sidoarjo mudflow disaster in vote-rich East Java. What we don't know is whether President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono will use the incumbency in his final two years to promote a possible successor to carry the banner of his majority Democratic Party.
There is virtually no one on the horizon at this point, but Vice- President Boediono or Finance Minister Sri Mulyani Indrawati could be contenders - or even Paramadina University president Anies Baswedan, 40, clearly a national leader in the making.
Certainly, Hungry Is The Tiger is a strong reminder that Prabowo is in there for the long haul, as is his retention of Dallas-based Republican strategist Rob Allyn, who acted as scriptwriter and executive producer for the film. The emphasis on self-sufficiency is interesting. Prabowo is, after all, the former son-in-law of ex-president Suharto, whose obsession with growing enough rice for a populace that was once close to starvation won him a United Nations award in the late 1970s. More importantly, Prabowo sees the political advantages of focusing on the rural poor in particular and on the so-called 'people's economy' - a lesson he learnt from deposed Thai prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
Some people called Thaksin's rural programmes 'money politics', failing to recognise that it was a win-win situation - not only for Thaksin himself, but more importantly, for a huge section of voters who had previously been largely ignored.
Human rights groups will almost certainly continue to highlight the role Prabowo has admitted to playing in the 1997-98 abduction of pro-democracy activists, 12 of whom have disappeared. But many voters are either too young to remember that period or, like a lot of people I have talked to in the rural hinterland, simply choose to put it all behind them in favour of someone they seem to genuinely like.
That's the interesting thing about Prabowo, even if he is portrayed in elite circles as a dangerous man. He does seem to appeal to a wide range of younger constituents, a great many of them girls whose jilbabs indicate a devout adherence to Islam.
There is no question, however, that Prabowo's human rights record will continue to haunt him if he ever becomes president. He is currently banned from visiting the United States and openly acknowledges that he would have to send his vice-president in his place. The Straits Times (Singapore) John McBeth, Senior Writer
IN recent years, the ties between Malaysia and Indonesia have come to be defined by the issue of migrant workers.
For many in Indonesia, the face of Malaysia is of heartless employers who maim and kill poor, hapless domestic workers who left home in hope of earning money to send back to loved ones.
Malaysia is also seen as a thief who steals the arts and crafts of Indonesia and claims them as its own.
For many in Malaysia, on the other hand, Indonesia is associated with illegal migrant workers blamed for petty and violent crimes that often end in injury and death.
It is tragic that bilateral relations have deteriorated to such narrow perceptions after 52 years of diplomatic relations.
It is well worth the efforts of both governments to dispel such perceptions, as the ties between the two countries are far deeper and more meaningful than these narrow perceptions.
For a start, the Malaysian embassy in Jakarta could have a public affairs section to respond to accusations and queries from the Indonesian press and groups ranging from labour unions to human rights advocates. The embassy lacks such a section at present.
For one recent example, the perception here is that Malaysians were behind a website mocking Indonesia, leading to demonstrations outside the Malaysian embassy in Jakarta, but there was no official response from Malaysian representatives.
Nor has there been any refutation of the accusation by the fringe nationalist group, Bendera, that one Indonesian migrant worker dies in Malaysia every day through abuse and neglect.
A public affairs section would also be invaluable in engaging with Indonesia's press, civil society, non-governmental organisations and other groups to foster better relations.
The Indonesian press has grown into a large, powerful and influential force.
The combined national and local print media number an estimated 1,000 publications, according to the Indonesian Journalists Alliance.
Good ties with the press will help put a fair perspective on important issues, or whenever Malaysia needs the Indonesian press to explain and disseminate its side of the story.
Indonesia is a country of great importance to Malaysia and the rest of the region. It is Southeast Asia's largest economy and has the world's fourth-largest population with 240 million people. Malaysia's population is about 12 per cent of Indonesia's.
Indonesia is a sprawling archipelago spread across 17,000 islands and shares a long border with Malaysia.
Behind the headlines of maid abuse and criminal migrant workers, Malaysian and Indonesian investors have been cooperating to create jobs and wealth for both countries in agriculture plantations, telecommunications and mining.
It is important for that to be more widely known among Malaysians and Indonesians alike. How many realise that Malaysia is Indonesia's fourth-largest investor?
Last year, Malaysia's approved investments in Indonesia totalled US$2.35 billion (RM8 billion), according to official figures.
Bilateral trade jumped 14 per cent last year to total RM44.9 billion from RM39.1 billion in 2007.
While many Indonesian students study in Malaysia, Indonesian universities also play host to 5,900 Malaysians.
Fuelled by leisure and business travel, Malaysian tourist arrivals in Indonesia rose to 800,000 last year. Every weekend, Malaysians flock to the hillside city of Bandung for retail therapy at the dozens of factory outlets offering a wide variety of clothes, jeans and T-shirts at cheap prices.
The number of Indonesians visiting Malaysia is far greater, totalling 1.8 million.
Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono chose Malaysia as the first foreign state to visit after his re-election to a second term in July.
It was a gesture of goodwill deeply appreciated by Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, who had attended Susilo's inauguration for a second term on Oct 20.
These are positive signs for Malaysia-Indonesia ties. Indonesia's newly-appointed Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa described Susilo's visit to Malaysia as having a "great, great outcome".
"All the dynamics and chemistry were extremely positive, emphasising why bilateral relationships are so important," Marty said upon his return to Jakarta.
* The writer is NST's Jakarta correspondent
INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP - NEW BRIEFING
Kabul/Brussels, 25 November 2009: Only vigorous constitutional and electoral reforms will prevent Afghanistan from slipping further into instability after Hamid Karzai’s fraudulent re-election.
Afghanistan: Elections and the Crisis of Governance,* the latest policy briefing from the International Crisis Group, examines the situation in Afghanistan after a deeply flawed presidential electoral process delivered a critical blow to the legitimacy of both the government and the international community. The briefing argues that institutions facing a credibility crisis of such huge proportions cannot defeat the insurgency.
“Karzai’s retaining power under these circumstances has bolstered the impression that the international community is disinterested in or incapable of checking corruption”, says Candace Rondeaux, Crisis Group Senior Analyst. “It handed the Taliban a huge public relations victory”.
To stem the decline in public confidence, the international community, particularly the US and the UN, must urgently put in place and vigorously support a number of key measures, including:
• restrictions on the size of the cabinet, barring nominees with demonstrated links to armed groups or criminal activities from joining government;
• the formation of an impartial commission of inquiry to conduct a thorough public review of the 20 August 2009 elections; the National Assembly’s use of its full sanctioning powers against those suspected of abusing their offices to influence the polls; and vigorous pursuit by the attorney general and courts of criminal prosecutions of those involved in flagrant violations of the law;
• consultations among relevant Afghan and international actors to achieve consensus on immediate steps to strengthen the machinery for the 2010 elections;
• convocation of a loya jirga to undertake constitutional reform, including consultations on the role of the Supreme Court; enhancing the independence of the judiciary and legislature; and meaningfully devolving authority and resources to provincial and district levels; and
• resignation of UN Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) chief and UN Special Representative of Secretary-General Kai Eide, since he has lost the faith of many on his staff and the necessary trust of many parts of the Afghan polity, accompanied by a thorough re-evaluation of the advisory role of UNAMA’s Enhancing Legal and Electoral Capacity for Tomorrow (ELECT) program view to rebuild public support for Afghanistan’s electoral institutions and processes.
“The international community has too often acted as if the election cycle was merely a box to tick, and we’ve all seen where that has led”, says Samina Ahmed, Crisis Group’s South Asia Project Director. “Impending decisions about military strategies, troop levels and state-building concepts may mean little if we do not cauterise the damage these fraudulent elections inflicted on Afghanistan. Only thorough reform can do that”.
.jpg)
