Does America’s stance on Egypt mean it’s time to dump Karzai?

How can America take a principled stand alongside Egypt’s protestors and still support Hamid Karzai?  

The courage of ordinary Egyptian citizens as they stand up to a corrupt regime that has denied them of their most basic rights is hard for most Americans to resist. It speaks to something that is ingrained in all of us because it so resonates with our own national story. We recognize that even though what comes next is hard to predict and change carries big risks, even though Hosni Mubarak has been a dependable ally, that we have an obligation to walk the walk when it comes to our most fundamental national principles.

Mubarak’s crony state has stolen, empowered the few, imprisoned its enemies, and even while appearing to be a bulwark for our interests actually made the region much more dangerous thanks to its repeated disregard for our insistent calls for reform. They have embraced the age old hypocrisy of some of our most noted frenemies throughout history: taking American money is fine, taking American military equipment and training is fine, but taking American advice about how to treat their people? That’s American meddling and they don’t mind telling us to buzz off.

Now go read the front-page story of Sayed Mussa in the Sunday Times of London or the piece by Ray Rivera called "Afghan Rights Fall Short for Christian Converts" in the Feb. 5, New York Times. Mussa is now being imprisoned by the Afgahn government. He has been sentenced to death and reportedly regularly beaten and tortured while in prison. His crime, according to the Times, is that he converted to Christianity. While the Afghan constitution promises something like religious freedom, it also allows the enforcement of Shariah law by the courts. And according to the interpretation of Shariah law being used against Mussa, leaving Islam is an offense punishable by hanging. He was arrested as part of a systematic effort by Hamid Karzai to cut off what the president, our ally, the man we put in office, saw as a terrible threat: the spread of Christian baptisms. Mussa’s job prior to his arrest? Rehabilitating landmine victims like himself.

According to the Sunday Times of London, Western advocacy groups have sought not to raise a public outcry because they are afraid it will inflame a government that "increasingly blames foreign interference for the country’s woes." The New York Times noted that two Republican congressman have pressed the U.S. government for stronger action.

Could any assertion be more rich or infuriating? Clearly the worst thing the U.S. government ever did to the Afghan people was directly support the installation of Hamid Karzai as president.  Over twenty-two hundred coalition lives have been lost in Afghanistan. Almost 1,400 of these have been American. Over 10,000 Americans have been wounded. By the end of this fiscal year, the our military spending devoted to Afghanistan will be approaching half a trillion dollars.  

As appalling as the case of Mr. Mussa is, it is only a symptom. The women of Afghanistan are regularly being deprived of their most basic rights. Elections have been compromised. The government is stealing untold hundreds of millions (or more). Deals are regularly being cut to accommodate avowed enemies of the United States. U.S. efforts are regularly being impeded or obstructed by the Karzai government due either to incompetence, or worse, periodic competence.

While much has been made of America’s $1.5 billion a year in aid to Egypt, that is easly topped by the $3.9 billion a year we give to Afghanistan.  

If President Karzai is so concerned with foreign interference, perhaps he ought to resist cashing the checks. However, this is a president who never met a bag of money he didn’t like nor, if reports are to be believed, has he often seen one that he didn’t think he could put to good use on behalf of his friends, family or political interests.  

Furthermore, with 100,000 U.S. troops still in Afghanistan, the certainty we will have troops there for another three years and the likelihood that it will spill over into many years more than that, we actually have considerably more ability to influence what would happen once Karzai is replaced than we would once Mubarak leaves.  

It has been observed that consistency is not a virtue when it comes to foreign policy and that every circumstance requires its own pragmatic assessment of our national interests and how to apply whatever influence we may have. While that is indisputably true, there are circumstances in which inconsistency between our public positions-particularly in high-profile circumstances in the same volatile neighborhood-becomes untenable because it creates risks that can inflame and even empower our enemies. The gap between our words regarding Egypt and our action in Afghanistan is rapidly become one of those situations.