From the December 2001 issue of Ms. Magazine:

A Veil on the Truth
By Cynthia Peters

A few privileged Afghan women have been caught smiling for AP cameras,
but many Afghan women, men and children are silently dying behind the
burqa of U.S. deceit.

The facts are simple. Massive food distribution programs put in place
prior to 9-11 in response to widespread famine were derailed by the
anticipation of and then the actual U.S. bombing campaign, and have 
been even further set back by the Taliban's retreat. According to the 
New York Times (11/30/01), "In the past two weeks, the tonnage [of 
aid] delivered dropped to a pace less than half of what it had been 
in the previous two weeks." The problem is that the "towns and cities 
are so chaotic that relief agencies cannot safely operate. Many roads 
are off limits because of lawlessness and banditry."

Those of us who opposed the U.S. war in Afghanistan nevertheless saw
its apparent rapid resolution as an opportunity to at least get much
needed supplies into the country. Having routed the enemy, perhaps the
United States would stop the bombing, allowing food trucks to move in
from across the border. But, instead, the opposite is true. As of this
writing (December 5), the bombing continues, civilian populations are
left at the mercy of marauding gangs, and food aid dwindles.

There are a few simple things we could do that would immediately turn
down the torture in Afghanistan.

First, the U.S. should stop bombing. There is no real accounting yet 
of the civilian casualty rate, but reports in the last few days claim
that U.S. bombs hit four villages near Tora Bora, possibly killing
hundreds (NYT 12/3/01). This is an unethical and illegal use of U.S.
firepower. If it's Osama bin Laden who we are still after, it is never
too late to apprehend him in a manner that accords with international 
law -- present proper evidence and allow the UN to mount a prudent,
ground-based multilateral campaign to capture him. In any case, since
there is no Afghan enemy mounting any kind of defense or engaging in
battle, there is no excuse for large-scale bombings -- whether 
directed by the U.S. or the UN.

Second, the bridge to Uzbekistan, which is a key passage for aid 
trucks, should be secured. And we should meet Uzbekistan's demand 
that an international force provide security at their Afghan border. 
Instead American military officials are saying that although they
"recognize the urgency of opening the bridge from Uzbekistan, [U.S.]
troops will not be protecting the border."

There is callous disregard for human life in this casual 
acknowledgement of the urgency. American officials understand the
consequences of their inactivity, but are blithely sitting back and
saying they want Afghan forces -- not foreign troops -- to police the
roadways, when the only Afghan forces that exist in the country are
"lawless bandits," and it is American officials themselves that 
installed them. Having destabilized the country to the point where it 
is not even safe for aid trucks to travel, it seems the U.S. is 
washing its hands of the disaster. If only that were the case.

Instead, the U.S. is actually blocking efforts to bring in the very
peacekeepers that might secure the roads and borders, and facilitate 
the transport of life-saving aid. Buried in an article about how the
Northern Alliance, during negotiations in Bonn, finally relented on
allowing foreign peacekeepers into the country, the Boston Globe
(11/30/01) reported that some U.S. officials believe peacekeepers will
be a nuisance to their unilateral conduct of the war. "Citing Bush
Administration officials, the Washington Post reported that `the U.S.
Central Command, which oversees the war in Afghanistan, is opposing 
the imminent deployment of peacekeepers in areas freed from Taliban
control out of concern this could encumber U.S. military operations.'"

In a New York Times article (12/3/01) about the Bonn negotiations, a
brief aside mentions the "Pentagon's unwillingness to take part in any
peacekeeping force or to favor placing peacekeepers anywhere where 
they could get in the way of the war against Al Qaeda." Specifically,
since November 12 when the Northern Alliance took Kabul, the Pentagon 
has blocked proposals by France and Britain to send thousands of 
troops to secure Kabul, the northern half of the country, and aid 
routes. On December 4, the Pentagon said it would "not object to
peacekeepers confined to Kabul and its immediate vicinity" -- a
concession that is mostly symbolic (only 200 peacekeepers will be
admitted) and is nonetheless entirely irrelevant to ensuring open
channels for aid (NYT 12/5/01).

Third, the U.S. should reconsider food airdrops. Dropping 
"Humanitarian Daily Rations" -- bright yellow packages, decorated with
the American flag and containing 2200 calories worth of peanut butter,
shortbread, and fruit pastries -- is counterproductive. Airdrops
undermine the work of neutral aid organizations by turning 
humanitarian assistance into an attempt to win "hearts and minds." 

They ignore the special needs of malnourished children who require a
specific diet. "If you would give peanut butter to a severely
malnourished child, you are likely to do more harm than good," says 
Lucas Van den Broeck of Action Against Hunger (Boston Globe 10/25/01).
And the airdrops bypass crucial distribution methods, which ensure 
food gets to all who need it, not just to those nimble enough to 
gather the yellow packets as they drop from the skies, assuming, that 
is, that they land where people can reach them and not among land 
mines (10 million of which litter the Afghan landscape). According to 
at least one UN report (Boston Globe, 11/30/01), two children have
already been killed "when they stepped on mines running across a 
field trying to pick up food packets."

We won't see pictures of their exploded bodies in the morning 
newspaper because those images are a threat to the Pentagon's ongoing
prosecution of the "war on terrorism." Those images must stay safely
shrouded from public view. While the media showcase the newly revealed
faces of Afghan women, the innocent victims of the U.S. war are still
thickly veiled.

This is a veil that U.S. citizens have the power to lift, and the
consequences of doing so are immense. We should expose and demand an 
end to a war that has turned Afghanistan into a world stage for the
theatrical display of U.S. might and banal disregard for human life.