- $1 billion Empire State Building IPO: why it won't be like Facebook IPO
- In surprise move, GOP leaders admit defeat in payroll tax battle
- More than 30,000 Germans turn out against anti-piracy treaty ACTA
- Does Obama blueprint reduce budget deficit fast enough? (+video)
- Pentagon budget: Does it pit active-duty forces against retirees? (+video)
- Murdoch media crisis deepens with five new arrests
- How Pinterest combines the best parts of Facebook, Tumblr, and Etsy
- US, China face 'trust deficit' as China's heir apparent visits
A year after Taliban, little change
The US pledged more aid to Kabul, but Iraq may distract from rebuilding efforts.
(Page 3 of 3)
Analysts say that challenge - along with remaining deeply involved in reconstruction - is a goal on which Washington must and will stay focused, all the more so with so much of the Muslim world skeptically eyeing the Bush administration's plans for "regime change" in Iraq.
"There has been an American tendency to view things as a quick in and out, and then after that, leave the locals to do the rest. This time, that cannot be," says Elie Krakowski, senior fellow with the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington.
"We have to remain involved and we have to be less afraid to do things," such as getting more of the US military in Afghanistan involved in reconstruction work. "One needs to take things into perspective," he adds. "One year is not a very long time."
KABUL, AFGHANISTAN - US Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill made a day trip to Kabul yesterday, meeting with top financial officials and bearing a promise that "the US will be there for the people of Afghanistan."
Mr. O'Neill's visit comes at a time when many Afghans have been voicing disappointment with the slow inflow of promised funds from donor countries, and the sense that much of the aid earmarked for reconstruction ends up going to foreign nongovermental organizations rather than to Afghans themselves.
The US, in addition, has faced criticism that plans for war with Iraq are diverting resources and attention away from Afghanistan. O'Neill deflected such suggestions from reporters. Only the news media, one US Embassy official here mused, is completely focused on Iraq.
Far from shrinking from its pledges to help Afghanistan, says Alberto Fernandez, a counselor for press and cultural affairs at the Embassy, the US has delivered more than it promised, dedicating $835.1 million in the 2002 fiscal year. "If anything, I think America's commitment has broadened in Afghanistan."
After meeting with the central bank governor and the finance minister, O'Neill promised that more funds would flow directly through Afghanistan's government. "As time goes on, it is important that the people of the country see the connection between their government and their country's development," he said.
"We also talked about the important elements which are necessary for economic growth - developing the rule of law, enforceable contracts, and the everyday fight against corruption," he added. "Money that actually belongs to Afghans will come out of the mattresses and out of other countries and will help to fuel the development of the private sector."
One of the largest projects O'Neill discussed with officials here is a "five-star hotel in Kabul, which would be a useful addition to the economy." He was not more specific, but government sources said it would be a Hyatt Hotel - a major chain that would be a welcome addition in a city in which the only large Western-style hotel is a war-rattled ex-Intercontinental that has not been renovated for decades.
O'Neill also applauded the overhaul of the afghani, the currency which now stands at 60,000 to the US dollar, as he watched old bills shredded by workers at the Central Bank. The new afghani, which is already in circulation and which will replace the old currency by January, is about 60 to the dollar.




