No Worse Enemy: The Inside Story of the Chaotic Struggle for Afghanistanby Ben Anderson
In this powerful and shocking exposé from the front lines in Helmand province, leading journalist and documentary-maker Ben Anderson (HBO, Panorama, and Dispatches) shows just how
- LendMe LendMe™ Learn More
The war in Afghanistan is over ten years old. It has cost countless lives and hundreds of billions of pounds. Politicians talk of progress, but the violence is worse than ever.
In this powerful and shocking exposé from the front lines in Helmand province, leading journalist and documentary-maker Ben Anderson (HBO, Panorama, and Dispatches) shows just how bad it has got. Detailing battles that last for days, only to be fought again weeks later, Anderson witnesses IED explosions and sniper fire, amid disturbing incompetence and corruption among the Afghan army and police. Also revealing the daily struggle to win over the long-suffering local population, who often express open support for the Taliban, No Worse Enemy is a heartbreaking insight into the chaos at the heart of the region.
Raising urgent questions about our supposed achievements and the politicians’ desire for a hasty exit, Anderson highlights the vast gulf that exists between what we are told and what is actually happening on the ground. A product of five years’ unrivalled access to UK forces and US Marines, this is the most intimate and horrifying account of the Afghan war ever published.
Spike Jonze (Academy Award-winning director) on Ben Anderson’s film Taking on the Taliban
- Oneworld Publications
- Publication date:
- Sold by:
- Barnes & Noble
- NOOK Book
- Sales rank:
- File size:
- 1 MB
Meet the Author
Ben Anderson is an acclaimed journalist and Emmy-nominated filmmaker. In a career spanning 14 years, he has filmed and presented over 40 films for the BBC, Channel 4, HBO and the Discovery Channel. He has presented five of his own series for BBC2 and is a regular reporter for Panorama and Dispatches. He was twice a finalist for the RTS young journalist of the year award and his HBO film The Battle for Marjah was nominated for three Emmys. In addition, he has written for GQ, Esquire, The Times of London, and the London Review of Books. When not reporting from the field, he lives in London.
and post it to your social network
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
See all customer reviews >
Journalist Ben Anderson has been visiting Afghanistan since the summer of 2007. He notes, “on each visit I was told that the Taliban were on their last legs, the Afghans were almost ready to provide security for themselves and the government was almost ready to govern.” But in the real world, “the only thing I ever saw happen was an increase in troop numbers and a corresponding increase in casualties, military and civilian. This, I was told, was further evidence of the Taliban’s desperation and proof that the insurgency was in its last throes.” He notes, “What happened next, after vital resources had been diverted to Iraq, was simply a return to predatory power politics and the rule of the warlords. To a place where the corrupt and vicious thrived and the most able and honest were sidelined. The state of affairs that had allowed the Taliban to sweep to power in the first place. The 2005 elections, which might have led to truly representative government, were a sham, with some observers claiming that fraudulent votes outnumbered the genuine.” Anderson reports, “People approached marines in the bazaar, saying: ‘Please don’t leave us alone with those guys’, referring to the police. The same thing happened in every town I’d seen cleared. The fact that the people being liberated were asking for protection from those we were fighting to introduce ought to have raised obvious questions. But it was too late in the day to admit such a terminal flaw in policy.” Anderson quotes Captain Peterson, the Commanding Officer of Lima Company, who said, “You’re trying to build a country up by destroying it and it seems like a paradox but those are people who have not been to Afghanistan.” Shades of Vietnam – where another US officer famously said, “We had to destroy the village to save it.” Anderson notes, “General McChrystal’s claim that [Operation] Mushtaraq was Afghan-led, a claim repeated by President Obama, a claim widely-spread and never seriously challenged, a claim backed by a massive media campaign, was the biggest fallacy of the entire operation. The Afghans were nowhere near ready to lead any military operation, leave alone one in the Pushtun south. Certainly not one as big as Mushtaraq.” As Anderson points out, “There was such desperation to increase the Afghan National Army’s numbers … that just about anybody could get in, especially as the desertion rate was so high. ... Often, they used the weapons and uniforms they’d been given to attack real security force members of their foreign mentors. This happened more and more, suggesting both the police and the army had been, heavily, albeit easily, infiltrated. But the problem was not properly addressed, because that meant admitting that the absurdly ambitious goal of having a national army able to secure every province of Afghanistan, on its own, by 2014, was a fantasy. But that goal was the exit strategy so publicly, everyone had to say it was plausible.” He concludes, “In huge swathes of the country, the government will not stand for twenty-four hours, much less three years, without foreign support. Every Afghan I have spoken to is convinced there will be another round of civil war as soon as we leave, with no rules of engagement or courageous restraint. They also think that the Taliban may well win. Perhaps the most damning indictment of our intervention is that there are also many Afghans who will think that if there is such a victory, the good guys will have won.”