Forgetting Afghanistan Again

By Sonali Kolhatkar, AlterNet. Posted April 2, 2005.

In the past two years the US media have drastically reduced their coverage of Afghanistan. According to the American Journalism Review only three news organizations--Newsweek, Associated Press and The Washington Post--have full-time reporters stationed in Kabul. What little is published focuses mostly on feel-good stories, superficial change and unopposed reportage of the Bush administration's claims.

Take Laura Bush's recent visit to Afghanistan. The news media immediately turned toward the still-struggling Central Asian country. But despite a slight increase in media coverage thanks to Mrs. Bush, not a single news article dared to question her empty talk of solidarity with Afghan women. For example, the Associated Press's Deb Riechmann mentioned Laura Bush's meeting with "Afghan women freed from Taliban repression." Reichmann simply ignored their new oppressor--U.S.-backed warlords. Mrs. Bush cited the progress made on girls' education--a statement made very often by the State Department and George W. Bush himself. The U.S. media failed to remind the public that the U.N. recently concluded Afghanistan's education system is the "worst in the world."

This behavior on the part of the U.S. media is not new. In the early 1990s, the worst atrocities by mujahadeen fighters (including some members of the current government) resulted in tens of thousands of civilian deaths and hundreds of thousands of refugees in a four year period in Kabul alone. During that time, media coverage dropped drastically. In the late 1990s, when the Taliban were implementing their oppressive laws, the media largely ignored it. In 2000, when tens of thousands of Afghan refugees were trapped in horrific conditions in refugee camps in the Pakistani side of the border, the same pattern of silence continued. Only when the Buddha statues of Bamiyan were blown up, or the attacks of 9/11 took place was Afghanistan worth focusing on.

Why don't the media today examine Afghanistan and Bush's claims of "freedom and democracy"? True, most Afghans have embraced wholeheartedly the promise of choosing their own leaders through an electoral system, despite having certain aspects of democracy imposed on them by a foreign country. But the power of undemocratic warlords has stifled the aspirations of Afghan people. When I visited Afghanistan a month ago, I spoke with independent pro-democracy political activists like Malalai Joya, who is forced to conduct her work underground. Fearing attacks by warlords, they use false names and travel in disguise or with bodyguards. I met journalists who are risking their lives to report the crimes of the warlords in the face of government threats.

A majority of Afghans voted for Hamid Karzai, even though he is clearly a U.S. puppet. They did so because he promised never to compromise with warlords. But after his election, Karzai appointed the former governor of Herat, Ismail Khan, a fundamentalist misogynist warlord, as Minister of Energy. Karzai recently appointed a known war criminal, Abdul Rashid Dostum, as the National Army Chief of Staff. These moves were praised by U.S. ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad as "wise," even though the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission's recent survey revealed a deep desire among Afghans across the country for justice for past war crimes committed by the likes of Khan and Dostum. The Afghans I met were eager to see the warlords disarmed, and prosecuted, not rewarded with government positions.

Urge the media to increase and improve their coverage of Afghanistan. It only takes a few minutes.

Sonali Kolhatkar is co-director of the Afghan Women's Mission, a U.S.-based non-profit that funds health, educational, and training projects for Afghan women. She is also the host and co-producer of Uprising, a daily morning radio program at KPFK, Pacifica in Los Angeles.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »