Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai Pleads for Peace in the Streets of Kabul

KWAME HOLMAN: Hundreds of Afghan troops patrolled the streets of Kabul today to prevent further unrest. Yesterday, violent anti-U.S. and anti-Western protests erupted after a U.S. military vehicle was involved in a deadly traffic crash during morning rush-hour in Kabul's northern suburbs.

The heavy cargo truck was part of a U.S. convoy traveling from Bagram Air Base, the main U.S. military facility, into the capital, when its driver lost control. The truck plowed into a dozen civilian cars at an intersection, killing at least five Afghans.

AFGHAN CITIZEN (through translator): An American convoy came, and I tried to park my car on the side, when they hit my car and turned it upside down.

KWAME HOLMAN: Coalition spokesman Tom Collins today explained what triggered the crash.

COL. TOM COLLINS, Coalition Spokesman: An initial investigation has determined that a mechanical failure of the vehicle's brakes is the cause of this tragic accident. The convoy was on a logistics mission in support of our efforts to help the Afghan people.

KWAME HOLMAN: Yesterday's riots were the worst since the fall of the Taliban regime in 2001. Within minutes of the crash, angry mobs began stoning the convoy and then headed into the center of Kabul, where some looted, ransacked and set fire to several buildings, including a compound belonging to the aid group CARE International.

From among the hundreds of protesters who took to the streets came chants of "Death to America." Afghan and U.S. troops said they fired warning shots into the air to control the crowds, but some witnesses claimed U.S. troops fired on civilians.

AFGHAN YOUNG MAN (through translator): People were killed by U.S. troops. They shot two people; they were American.

AFGHAN YOUNG MAN: They are killing. They're killing people.

KWAME HOLMAN: Eleven people were killed; nearly 140 were injured. Afghan President Hamid Karzai yesterday pleaded for calm.

HAMID KARZAI, President of Afghanistan (through translator): We will recognize as the enemy of Afghanistan these people who do these things. You should stand up against these agitators and not let them destroy our country again.

KWAME HOLMAN: The outbreak in Kabul follows an upsurge of fighting in the south over the past month between a revived Taliban and U.S. and NATO troops. Some 350 people have been killed, including more than a dozen civilians, in a coalition air strike on suspected militants in Kandahar last week.

Currently, some 22,000 U.S. troops and 8,500 other foreign soldiers make up the coalition forces in Afghanistan. And in the coming months, NATO peacekeepers are expected to take over more security duties from a shrinking number of U.S. troops, especially in the south.

JIM LEHRER: More on the anger in Afghanistan now from Ali Jalali, interior minister in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2005. He's now a professor at the National Defense University here in Washington.

And Barnett Rubin, director of studies at the Center on International Cooperation at New York University. He served as a consultant to the United Nations on Afghan issues and frequently travels there.

Mr. Jalali, "Death to America," why would Afghans be yelling such a thing now?

ALI JALALI, Former Interior Minister, Afghanistan: Well, these are some kind of a spontaneous reaction to an incident. However, this does not mean that the people of Afghanistan are against the presence of the U.S. forces or international community, because they do realize that, only with the presence of the U.S. forces and the international community, the country can be assured that stability will return to the country. Otherwise, the country can slip back into chaos.

JIM LEHRER: But those people, the hundreds of people who started throwing rocks and all of that, just because of a traffic accident?

ALI JALALI: Well, this is not only traffic. A traffic accident triggered something which is more, you know, related to the social frustration, criminality, and also manipulation of the situation by interest groups and groups hostile to the government, to turn a protest into riot, into violence, and where some criminals actually went on a looting spree.

JIM LEHRER: Mr. Rubin, how do you read what happened yesterday?

BARNETT RUBIN, Center on International Cooperation, New York University: Well, I think that it was a number of different things that came together.

First, of course, there was a reaction, a spontaneous element, both in reaction to the traffic accident, but that symbolized something more, which is the resentment that Afghans -- that's been building up in many Afghans.

In other words, what Afghans said for the last several years is, even though we've always rejected invaders, we will accept the U.S. and the coalition forces if they are here to help us, but not if they're here to use our country for their own purposes.

The fact that they have seen far fewer economic benefits than they expected, that the military vehicles are constantly going through Kabul and cause many more accidents than this -- although not fatal ones like this -- is a source of irritation, and it symbolizes for them that the U.S. is using the country at the same time that, in Kabul City, they have no more electricity than they did when the U.S. came in.

Second, there are some political groups that did take advantage of this. This accident took place in an area that is under the control of certain commanders who have recently been demobilized and who belong to a political group that has been pushed out of power. And there's some evidence that some of the demonstrators were organized by that group.

Finally, in recent weeks, the clergy has been preaching rather strongly against the government, in particular since the case of the Afghan who was reported to have converted to Christianity, who was spirited out of the country. And they claim that this showed that the government with a no longer Islamic. So there are a number of factors converging.

JIM LEHRER: Do you agree with that, that there's more here than just one thing, Mr. Jalali?

ALI JALALI: Yes, I agree with Barney. I think, you know, sometimes you talk to people and they believe that they are frustrated with the slow pace of development. They had high expectations in 2002 after the downfall of the Taliban.

However, Afghanistan received far less funds for reconstruction than many other nation-building efforts around the world, including Kosovo, including East Timor, and former Yugoslavia. On the other hand, in some parts of the area, it took the international community two years to realize that the ISAF or ISAF war should being expanded to other parts of the country.

JIM LEHRER: The what?

ALI JALALI: ISAF, the International Security Assistance Force...

JIM LEHRER: The coalition force, the security force?

ALI JALALI: Yes, the security.

The south was neglected a lot. The south is actually the hinterland of the Taliban. Until now, recently, there was only one base, U.S. forces 3,000, in Kandahar, but those other troubled provinces close to the Pakistani border did not, you know, have a deployment of international forces, and Afghan police and Army capacity is very limited.

So, therefore, during the past four years, where the expectation was very high, and people saw less change in their lives.

JIM LEHRER: Than they expected?

ALI JALALI: Yes.

JIM LEHRER: Do you agree with that, Mr. Rubin, that the reality for the people on the ground, for the Afghans, has not met the expectations that they had four years ago when the U.S. came in there and pushed the Taliban aside?

BARNETT RUBIN: Well, absolutely. I was in Afghanistan at the end of March, early April, and I definitely felt this kind of very negative atmosphere in the people that I was talking to.

And another aspect of what happened yesterday was the very inept reaction of the police and the ministry of the interior, which Mr. Jalali used to be the head of.

The interior minister was reported to be extremely indecisive. The police disappeared from many areas. And I should mention that the president himself also disappeared from the scene for several hours until he finally issued a statement at 7:00 p.m.

So it was not only the outburst of anger by demonstrators and the manipulation by some political groups; it was also the incapacity of the government to deal with this situation.

JIM LEHRER: Mr. Rubin, what about -- I also read a piece today which suggested that there's some growing resentment among the Afghans that has to do with Western workers, as well as troops, having brought a lot of drinking of alcohol, prostitution, and all of those things with them, and there's resentment growing on that. Is that a legitimate complaint?

BARNETT RUBIN: Well, without judging its legitimacy, it certainly is a complaint.

JIM LEHRER: OK.

BARNETT RUBIN: The Afghan constitution says that the government is supposed to fight against all intoxicating substances, including alcohol, but alcohol is freely available in many establishments in Kabul because the powerful Westerners there want it. The government won't do anything against it.

So that symbolizes to people that the government is not really sovereign, is not enforcing its own Islamic laws, it's not enforcing its own constitution.

There are so-called Chinese restaurants all over Kabul which are well-known to be houses of prostitution. They operate with impunity, and both rich Afghans and also some Western contractors, who are not bound by the rules of the military, frequent them.

And, again, this is a subject of very strong preaching in the mosques about foreigners having brought moral corruption to the country. And we see in some of the targets of the demonstrators yesterday, which included Western restaurants, and guest houses, and so on, that this was a part of the sentiment they were expressing.

JIM LEHRER: What's your feeling about that, Mr. Jalali?

ALI JALALI: I agree with Barney that this is a source of resentment in Afghanistan. However, I will add this: that most of the alcohol, most of the illegal activities are done by illegal power-holders, warlords, militia commanders.

During my tenure as minister of the interior, all what we confiscated, the smuggling of these materials were sponsored, were protected by warlords. So therefore it is not something that came by the Western countries or the Western presence there.

However, the kind of a -- the atmosphere in Afghanistan after the downfall of the Taliban created a sense in people that they can do everything. You know, democracy means different things to different people in Afghanistan.

JIM LEHRER: Sure.

ALI JALALI: And, however, while Afghans went and voted and supported the creation of democratic institutions. However, this process was not supported or sequenced by other forms of development that would bring positive change to the level of the people, so they voted, but they didn't see change in their lives.

And all they saw in this democracy was all these negative things, as Barney alluded to. So when they think of democracy, a liberal democracy, they see these symbols of the democracy.

JIM LEHRER: Well, the obvious question to ask you both then is: What can be done about this? Does something dramatic have to be done? Or, if not, is this thing going to get worse and worse and worse?

ALI JALALI: I usually say that the international community should realize that Afghanistan cannot be stabilized and pacified on the cheap. So far, it has been on the cheap.

And on the other hand, yes, the capacity is very limited in Afghanistan. However, a serious review of the situation is needed. And I think, unless all these concerns of the people -- unemployment, education...

JIM LEHRER: I know that 40 percent of the people in Afghanistan are unemployed; is that right?

ALI JALALI: Yes, this is true.

JIM LEHRER: Forty percent?

ALI JALALI: Most of the people who participated in these riots were unemployed young people.

JIM LEHRER: Mr. Rubin, same question. What can be done about this?

BARNETT RUBIN: Well, on the other side, I think we have to take a fresh look at the U.S. military deployment there, not whether it is necessary -- I think it is necessary -- but the U.S. and coalition forces are there under the right of self-defense, which was certainly legitimate right after September 11th, and are operating without any agreement with the Afghan government.

But now we have helped the Afghan people and the United Nations set up this government, elect a president, elect a parliament. They're now choosing a new Supreme Court, reformed their administration, reformed their police, which Mr. Jalali was part of, build their new army.

So it's time for our relationship to have a new basis. And that should be an agreement that recognizes the sovereignty of the Afghan government, an agreement about the status of the U.S. forces there, which would be debated by the parliament.

Of course, there's a risk that they might take decisions we don't like. But I think it's a risk that will be very good for us to take because, once the parliament agrees to our presence there and their agreed-upon rules, then they will have much more ownership and a sense of partnership with us.

JIM LEHRER: All right. Gentlemen, thank you both very much.