$1 Trillion Worth Mineral Deposits In Afghanistan



The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan. According to senior American officialdom, the mineral deposits are enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself.


An internal Pentagon memo states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium.”


In the words of one of my American friend after she read this news:

Why they (American officialdom) even bother telling this to us is a mystery. It’s not like they need our approval anymore. They’ve made that abundantly clear.


From the same purview, it could be a justification for us, American, to stay there in Afghanistan, forever to “protect” these resources.


It seems that United States will hardly be leaving Afghanistan now, not until the time deposits are completely dug and transported — maybe partially — out of Afghanistan.


On the other hand, the news is perhaps not so shocking. According to Huffington Post:


Just visit the public web site of the U.S. Geological Survey and read the press release “Significant Potential for Undiscovered Resources in Afghanistan Released: 11/13/2007 10:00:00 AM” and you will find the following: “Afghanistan has significant amounts of undiscovered non-fuel mineral resources according to the U.S. Geological Survey’s 2007 assessment . . . Estimates for copper and iron ore resources were found to have the most potential for extraction in Afghanistan. Scientists also found indications of abundant deposits of colored stones and gemstones, including emerald, ruby, sapphire, garnet, lapis, kunzite, spinel, tourmaline and peridot. Other examples of mineral resources available for extraction in Afghanistan include gold, mercury, sulfur, chromite, talc-magnesite, potash, graphite and sand and gravel.”


To be sure, Afghan Talibans will take a keen interest after the final revelation of these massive deposits. This remains unclear what will come next. Maybe the Afghan Talibans will show more resistance than ever before, and maybe they’ll tilt towards some sort of peace deal. The latter one seems highly unlikely to transpire. In any case, the deposits solely belong to the people of Afghanistan. It’s the prerogative of people of Afghanistan to benefit from the $1 trillion worth mineral deposits. It sure will help to overhaul the war-torn country’s infrastructure. US has no right to “steal” the mineral deposits. If anything, “steal” is a better word in the case of United States of America.


My personal message to POTUS Mr. Obama is:


Please spend a little more time in nipping off the poppy etc. drug crops in Afghanistan, and a little less time looking for minerals. Thank you.

A Notorious Winner For Nobel Peace Prize


Obama - Nobel Peace Prize Winner

Obama - Nobel Peace Prize Winner


Obama won the Peace Prize days back, and tomorrow he’s going to visit Norway to receive it in person. The term ‘Peace’ — for which Obama is actually getting the Prize — categorically talks about the absence or nonoccurrence of war. The so-called summa cum laude Peace Prize Obama has won during a time when he’s commanding two ugly wars — Afghanistan and Iraq. Wars are always ugly, besides, the disputed resolutions on war across the globe does substantiate the fact that these wars are supplementally ugly. Is he really worthy of receiving the Peace Prize?


I’m not against the Peace Prize itself, but I was wondering about those 5 members in the panel who unanimously approved Obama’s name for Peace Prize. Were they actually known to the definition of Peace? Or perhaps Obama has won so many hearts and minds and enjoying the warmth of so many of the fans throughout the world after the same intensively hanky panky orations — a traditional weapon of every political leader. But it’s another matter altogether that giving a ‘hope’ for reshaping the world in this 21st century by Obama — the Peace Prize winner — has reached to an ad infinitum end. It is hard to point to a single place where Obama’s ‘sincere’ efforts have actually brought about peace. Obama has done nothing pragmatic to bring peace to any where in the world by even an ane percent. Is there there any?


There’s something for sure I can say that Obama won’t be winning any such phenomenal prize within his country during his stay in office as President. It’s been nearly one year now since Obama took the office and the state of financial and commercial hardship in US is at its peak. Instead of getting better, it deteriorated more. The unemployment rate has touched 17.5% in United States.


The committee of Nobel Peace Prize has made a mockery of the award. Now I understand again, how hard it’s to distinguish the hopes from the achievements — real achievements. Same has been the case with Pakistan, but without a Peace Prize involvement.

An Internationally Unpopular War



Sometimes surprises aren’t really surprises as they’re always expected in some way, but are delivered a bit late. Obama is going to reveal his new Afghanistan strategy on coming Tuesday during speech to the cadets at West Point. The top Democrats of U.S. including the Vice President Joe Biden has made it absolutely clear to Obama that he shouldn’t expect a friendly reception if he’s going to announce in favor of the troops surge strategy regarding Afghanistan. Ergo, Obama is under bare poles. As yet, Obama hasn’t informed members of his war council about the decision he’s going to make.


Senator Russell Feingold — another top Democrat — has coneyed his extensive reservations on the direction of president’s strategy. Senator Russel Feingold said: Devoting billions more dollars and tens of thousands more troops to Afghanistan is not likely to significantly improve conditions in that country, and it will not help — and could even hurt — our efforts to dismantle al-Qaeda’s global network with safe havens in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, North Africa and elsewhere.


Another interesting thing to note is that the most hawkish Democrats like Senator Carl M. Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee — and and Senator John F. Kerry, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee — have also expressed their reservations on troops-surge strategy.


In fact Senator Kerry has raised his voice to follow the strategy of Kennedy — that instead of increasing the number of troops, it’d be better if more be done to train the Afghan Army and police and to teach them the counterinsurgency tactics and outfit them with advanced equipments.


The Republicans have endorsed every war-funding bill and strategy sine 9/11, but this time many Republicans also seem to averse the troops surge plus extra war-fundings strategy, while they raise the issue that U.S. — their own homeland — is having monetary trouble — the problematic economic crunch.


Just few days back I read a report on the number of American people opposing the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. As per the poll result — published in Washington Post some days back — 52% of Americans want their troops back home as they find the 8 years results of war futile.


Just today, the German army’s chief of staff has resigned over an air strike in northern Afghanistan in September in which civilians were believed to have been killed. If anything, two Nato countries including Canada and Holland are retreating their troops from Afghanistan soon after Obama is going to announce new war strategy on coming Tuesday. This has caused a bit panic in the Nato countries like Germany and Itlay, and the common perception is that other Nato countries are planning to decrease their number of troops or might retreat all of them. Germany and Italy are silent; simultaneously their silence speaks volume that fighting and elongating the war in Afghanistan is really not practical. Britain is playing an arch-role in swaying the Nato countries.


On the other hand, Pakistan is all wishing that U.S-led Nato forces shouldn’t vacate Afghanistan since it’ll make Pakistan surrounded by it’s arch-foe India from both sides. Indian army is said to have been located in Southern part of Afghanistan, and strategically position of Pakistan is weak, it’d be weak even then.


Some of the officialdom from U.S. say that U.S. is also having secret talks with Afghani Talibans for peace process and for that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are acting as an interlocutors. The recent visit of CIA’s chief to Pakistan and meeting with ISI’s chief, COAS and other Pakistani officialdom does substantiate the fact of U.S’s interest to handle this war in an another way. Afghani Talibans have recently put a condition that to want peace in Afghanistan U.S- led Nato forces should vacate Afghanistan; it’ll become all peaceful and Afghani Talibans would take care of their country in a well way.


As yet, the House of Representatives is echoing with anti-troops surge strategy. The war is becoming unpopular everywhere in the world while in 8 years it has served a literal no good purpose and now the war is about to get enter into its 9th year.


Obama has recently pledged that he’ll put this war to an end by the time he’ll leave the office as he said he’ll not render the Afghanistan war issue to his successor, instead he’d like his successor to deal with other core issues like economy. How could we believe on Obama’s promise now when we’ve just witnessed Obama breaching his own promise of late — when he said that Gitmo can’t be closed down by Jan 2010. Ostensibly, it was Obama’s promise to close down Gitmo and such places while he was on the road to become president — during the election campaigning — the hot campaigning debates and everything connected to it. But conspiciously, he has failed to fill the bill.


In any case, Obama should unite the people of U.S, and the rest of the world badly affected by the bloody war, while making any decision.