GOV 312L 1ST EditionLecture 2Outline of last lecture:I. National security and safetyII. Basics of the US relationships with the 9/11 hijackersIII. The concept of blowback, which some people argue 9/11 was a case ofOutline of current lecture:I. Arguments of the three readings, starting with the 9/11 commission reportII. Basics on AfghanistanIII. Soviets and Americans in AfghanistanCurrent lectureConcepts-getting the main point from a textParallels in USSR/US experience in AF: difference between defeating an army (military goal) and governing a people (political goal)-parallels in USSR/US media: technical critques vs political critiques-international law: was the US-led war a crime, as Lanine argues?-Imagining if the positions were reversedLast time-two ideas of national security: defensive concept (JQA) and an offensive one (Carter doctrine)-discussed US relations to 9/11 hijackers and al-Quaeda-examples of blowbackCurrent LectureI. Arguments of the three readings, starting with the 9/11 commission reportThough the US media is not censored like Soviet media, they support similar viewpoints. They describe the invasion of Afghanistan as well intentioned, to help the Afghan people, and to protect the homeland. They vilify external interference though they are a source of external interference themselves. They make little reference to the civilian casualties due to the invasion and discount the fact that their invasion led to greater casualties than predicted if they had done nothing. The few journalists that ask the question, “Is the invasion legally and morally right?” are accused of being unsupportive to the troops and have their patriotism questioned. The readings take FOREVER to get to the point.II. Basics on AfghanistanEthnicity and Regions-Afghanistan has several ethno-linguistic groups.-Pushtuns (45%) have had political dominance since the mid 1700s.Topography-mountains run northeast-southwest, separates the population, reduce contact with a central government.Local Loyalties come firstAfghanistan was a battle ground for fending off communism in the muslim worldSeemed puzzling that Afghanistan had adopted a communist system of governmentLocal advocates of an Islamic government became the vanguard of resistance with Pakistan, Saudi, and US supportIII.Soviets and Americans in AfghanistanSoviet Period· Carter doctrine said that if the soviets get Afghanistan they might make it to the surrounding countries and control the oil.· Though Islam is seen as anti-America today, it used to be seen as an ally to America duringthe cold war that was opposing the atheist USSR.· American strategists thought that USSR had an obsession with getting to “warm water ports” weirdly enough· “As a general rule, when a country has ‘Democratic’ in their name, they are usually not democratic”· One of the “reasons” for the US for going in now, was to improve women’s rights and education that are oppressed by the Taliban. Though the Soviets tried to do this back in the coldwar.· There is a difference between invading and conquering a country, and actually governing acountry. What the US is going through now is similar to what the Soviets went through.· Typo in Turning Point slide. Should be “US covert support”· US famously provided stinger missiles to Afghan resistance that could shoot down helicopters.· “Arab” Afghan leaders like Osama Bin Laden actually did little fighting, but still took credit for defeating the Soviets· Gorbachev contests that the Afghanistan war is what defeated the USSR. He said it was the poor economic situation.US Period· The idea of Operation Enduring Freedom was supposed to be a light footprint, only a few thousand soldiers. Criticized that it was trying to beat a country on the cheap.· Karzai is known as the mayor of kobel because of his lack of power· Lanine argues that the media never questions the premise of the war and that it only focuses on technical criticism· The UN is slanted to protect the interests of the 5 countries who can veto in the Security Council· 9/11 was not caused by Afghanistan so the US had no right under international law to start a war. If the US wanted to go after the group responsible for the terrorist acts, they should have used police and not military action. Instead they attacked a country that was hostingOsama bin