Reader comments are listed below. Comments are currently closed and new comments are no longer being accepted. NATO promised security around perimeters of investment is a critical prerequisite condition for any investment that creates Afghan jobs and fills the state exchequer.
There is nothing wrong for China to invest in Afghanistan amidst high security risks and try to make a buck or two. Indeed it's hard to have it both ways. So the logic of this article is that China opens a mine but doesn't send in any troops and so is again the bad guy? Did I miss the memo that said all foreign investments in a country have to be accompanied by military invasion? In which case the new Ikea they are building near me is cause for greater concern than I thought.
The western media is obsessed by the growing 'menace' of China, but the truth is we could learn a lot from her foreign policy. Our preening leaders are so busy handing down moralizing judgements on developing countries that they miss the economic opportunities that exist. China is fixed on doing business and making her citizens richer, while our guys just can't resist the temptation to get back in the colonial saddle and meddle with the local's affairs. Ultimately the Chinese approach will create jobs and wealth, which will do more to civilize Afghan society than any military operation.
Al-Qaeda has already opened a front with Chinese because of the treatment of Uyghurs. If Al-Qaeda's primary goal is to minimize the western influence in what it considers as the Muslim Land than it has to be aware of the rapidly growing Chinese commercial influence in the Middle-East, Asia and Africa.
Although neither Chinese nor Al-Qaeda are known for tolerance, they seem to be keeping safe distance for now while they deal with their primary adversary. Once again, Afghans find themselves as the residents of a buffer zone between much larger adversaries.
