Talk:Hamid Karzai

Karzai's brother

Surprised no one has been able to pin down/reference the fact that Karzai's brother, Ahmed Wali, is one of the biggest opium lords in Afghanistan. American and ISAF officials tell you this all the time in Kabul and Afghans also refer to it often. It's the biggest open secret in the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.132.42.90 (talk) 11:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Open secret/rumor still needs have a source -- Esemono (talk) 10:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

And this one rather does pin it down. 81.105.100.178 (talk) 00:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC).

Unocal

CNN: Karzai and Unocal?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/12/12/karzai/index.html

If CNN is saying that Karzai was a Unocal lobbyist, then I'd believe it.

---

According to columnist Ted Rall, Karzai used to be on the board of Unicoal. Given Unicoal's interest in the trans-Afghanistan pipeline, this then becomes a very relevant piece of information. However, an opinion columnist ain't a primo source. Anyone have better info on the topic? -- April

---

The article mentions Karzai becoming president December 5, 2001 but the table shows him becoming president December 22, 2001. Which date is correct? Flockmeal 02:47, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)

Never mind, the date issue is resolved. Flockmeal 23:29, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)

---

Have Le Monde and Moore admitted that the Unocal claim is erroneous? If not, I don't think we can call it "erroneous" just because Unocal denies it. Gzornenplatz 21:47, Jul 11, 2004 (UTC)

No, not to my knowledge - but who seriously expects them to? Anyway, it's hard to believe Unocal is lying; these things are easy to verify if true, given the paper trail in hiring anyone. No such evidence has been presented. And, Karzai's own spokesman denied the rumor [1]. The assertion is no more credible than the rumor that Osama bin Laden owns Citibank, and may similarly be a "mix-up" (a confusion with the ambassador who had worked for Unocal). VV[[]] 22:24, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't expect Unocal or Karzai to admit it either. There doesn't have to be a public paper trail. So let's just say the claim has been made and it has been denied, without making a judgment. Gzornenplatz 22:47, Jul 11, 2004 (UTC)

Why on earth would you not expect them to admit it? It's not like there even can be a big secret about who someone's employees are. This is nothing but another cheap smear, and the wording you're using seems like it's trying to give it credibility it does not possess. VV[[]] 19:21, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I think there could easily be a secret about it, especially if the CIA was involved in all this too [2]. In any case, the wording is factual and lets everyone decide for themselves who they trust more - Le Monde and Moore, or Unocal and Karzai. Le Monde is not exactly famous as a source of "cheap smears", and if they stand by their report, we should report that without proclaiming it "erroneous". Gzornenplatz 20:50, Jul 12, 2004 (UTC)

Unocal question continued

i'm cutting/pasting the best lead i've found so far (just a quick search, but it seems relevant): http://www.worldwar3report.com/18.html#shadows1 18. Jan.. 26, 2002 By Bill Weinberg

1. WAS KARZAI A UNOCAL CONSULTANT? France's Le Monde newspaper wrote in a Dec. 5 profile of Hamid Karzai that the Afghan interim president "has a wide knowledge of the western world. After studying law in Kabul and India, he completed his training in the United States where he was for a time a consultant for the American oil company Unocal, when it was studying the construction of a pipeline in Afghanistan."

This claim was reiterated in the Jan. edition of Le Monde Diplomatique, where Pierre Abramovici http://www.christusrex.org/www1/icons/abramovici.html wrote that "during the negotiations over the Afghan oil pipeline, Karzai had been a consultant for Unocal."

The claim also surfaced in the Saudi newspaper Al-Watan, which reported Dec. 15: "Karzai found no contradiction between his ties with the Americans and his support for the Taliban movement as of 1994, when the Americans had--secretly and through the Pakistanis--supported the Taliban's assumption of power... At the time, Karzai worked as a consultant for the huge US oil group Unocal, which had supported the Taliban movement and sought to construct a pipeline to transport oil and gas from the Islamic republics of Central Asia to Pakistan via Afghanistan." (BBC Monitoring Service, Dec. 15)

The Le Monde article was jumped upon by numerous media outlets--particularly lefty e-newsletters--who cited it as truth, without raising questions about the article's un-named source, or bothering to get a quote from Unocal (e.g., Tom Turnipseed in Counterpunch, Jan. 10; Ted Rall, < www.rall.com>, Jan 15). But when WW3 REPORT reached Unocal Manager for International Communication Teresa Covington at the company's Houston headquarters on Jan. 25, and asked if Hamid Karzai had ever worked for the firm, she replied: "No he did not. Neither as an employee or a consultant. We sent Le Monde a note asking them to correct that."

This raises numerous questions. Why has Le Monde not run a correction? Was Karzai's work laundered through sub-contractors? And, if so, why is Unocal trying to hide it? Why hasn't it been more widely reported?

The most probing account appeared by Wayne Madsen http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MAD201A.html on the web page of Canada's Centre for Research on Globalisation Jan. 23. Wrote Madsen: "According to Afghan, Iranian, and Turkish government sources, Hamid Karzai, the interim Prime Minister of Afghanistan, was a top adviser to the...UNOCAL Corporation which was negotiating with the Taliban to construct a Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline from Turkmenistan through western Afghanistan to Pakistan." Madsen also claims Karzai "maintained close relations with CIA Director William Casey, Vice President George Bush, and their Pakistani Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) interlocutors" during the Mujahedeen war. "Later, Karzai and a number of his brothers moved to the United States under the auspices of the CIA. Karzai continued to serve the agency's interests, as well as those of the Bush Family and their oil friends in negotiating the CentGas deal, according to Middle East and South Asian sources."

Madsen maintains that "Karzai's ties with UNOCAL and the Bush administration are the main reason why the CIA pushed him for Afghan leader over rival Abdul Haq, the assassinated former mujaheddin leader from Jalalabad, and the leadership of the Northern Alliance, seen by Langley as being too close to the Russians and Iranians." He also sees a possible CIA conspiracy to eliminate Haq to clear the way for Karzai: "Former Reagan National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, who worked with Haq, vainly attempted to get the CIA to help rescue Haq. The agency claimed it sent a remotely-piloted armed drone to attack the Taliban but its actions were too little and too late. Some observers in Pakistan claim the CIA tipped off the ISI about Haq's journey and the Pakistanis, in turn, informed the Taliban. McFarlane, who runs a K Street oil consulting firm, did not comment on further questions about the circumstances leading to the death of Haq."

Madsen, like Le Monde, fails to share his sources. WW3 REPORT will continue to monitor this story, and urges all subscribers to report back with any leads.

i'm not sure what fails to share his sources means - if it just means that madsen didn't publish a bibliography in his article, then it's not a strong argument that he's wrong, it can simply be that he's lazy. If someone's really interested in this (chance to show that michael moore, among others, are definitely wrong on one fact, not just maybe wrong!), emailing madsen would probably help. He says According to Afghan, Iranian, and Turkish government sources, Hamid Karzai, the interim Prime Minister of Afghanistan, was a top adviser to the El Segundo, California-based UNOCAL Corporation.... He can surely explain a bit more about his access to three independent government sources - why would government sources from Iran and Turkey be embarrassed about talking about Karzai's cv? Hmm.... Anyway, nice to know that wikipedia people are collectively double-checking, triple-checking on this sort of thing. :) Boud 02:50, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well, I don't know about the CIA, but when a firm pays someone as a consultant, they are often not on the payroll. It's much different than actually hiring a salaried employee.

Unocal

The article is here, behind a pay screen. The claim is still disputed of course.--Lopakhin (talk) 01:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

there's no mention in this article of Karzai's employment at Unocal - Conoco as per the claim made by Mike Moore in his film Farenheit 9/11 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.68.165.61 (talk) 15:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Er...actually that topic is briefly covered, but you'd have to actually read the article to know that. However, it is something that needs to be fleshed out. Other sources other than LeMonde have made the same assertion. See: Christ.Sci.Mon.[3], and Asia Times[4].--CurtisSwain (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, recent changes show there's some debate about this, but we can't just go making assertions without some kind of reliable source to support them. Let's just leave the article as is until someone provides some documentation that settles the matter.--CurtisSwain (talk) 05:21, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Karakul Hat

Muhammad Ali Jinnah, founder of Pakistan in 1947

Karzai is known for his trademark Karakul hat, which is made from the skin and fur of aborted lamb fetuses.

Is the Karakul Hat's origins and making really necessary in this article on a head of state? If it is, does it really have to be at the top of the page? It makes more sense to have the Karakul hat composition of lamb fetuses on the Karakul hat page... Instead of provoking an "edit war", I thought we should talk about this here... --69.143.105.237 (talk) 17:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• Agree

• I agree. I don't see how a description of the hat making process adds to this article. Kingturtle (talk) 17:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• I agree. The hat description does not belong at the intro since the article is about Hamid Karzai. It may be added somewhere else in the relevant section that deals with his favorite style of clothes.--RahulMitrah (talk) 17:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• I agree. How the hat is made is totally irrelevant. Mentioning that he usually wears a karakul hat is fine but it's superfluous to mention how the hat is made in the introduction. It's kind of like mentioning in the introduction of [Random biography article] that he is usually seen wearing a cap..... which is made of cotton which grows on the cotton plant. Bootini (talk) 23:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

• Disagree

• The Karakul hat is a very old traditional hat worn by all Kings or Emirs in the past, not just in Afghanistan but also in other Asian countries. He wears the hat not to cover his bald head but as a symbol of a "King" figure, not King of Afghanistan but King of his Pashtun people (specifically his Popalzai group).--203.175.65.191 (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• The hat is his trademark and to erase it would be like lack of a better example, Superman and not talking about his S - crest on his chest. -- Esemono (talk) 05:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
• Super man is the only person with the S crest on his chest but Karzai is not the only person who wears the karkul hat, many leaders and ordinary people in Asia wear them. I have one myself, I purchased it in Kabul.--119.73.0.171 (talk) 04:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

• Consensus seems to be to add it back in, which I just did. -- Esemono (talk) 12:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hat and picture

Given that the intro talks about him being known for his hat, why do we have a hatless picture of him for the infobox? No question that it's a useful picture (incidentally, the first I can remember seeing of him without a hat), but perhaps if we're going to talk about the hat in the text it would be good to show him with a hat. Image:Hamid Karzai.jpg (pictured here) would be a good replacement. Nyttend (talk) 17:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

The infobox is for "most recent" pictures of people. This image of Karzai you added here is from January 25, 2002, get with the program.--119.73.0.171 (talk) 04:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Seperate pages on Karzai Administration I, II, III

My suggestion is to spin-off at least three separate pages from this page on Hamid Karzai: a page on the Karzai administration during the transition period before his first election (2004), a page on his first period as a chosen president (2004-2009) and a page on the newly started period. Information on his ministers etc. is then better on its place on those pages, as it less on the current page on Karzai himself. --JanDeFietser (talk) 08:36, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Why do all that? Karzai is just a president of a country like all the others. Do we have any other examples of Presidents to follow? I think all that information should be added to President of Afghanistan and Politics of Afghanistan.--119.73.0.171 (talk) 04:37, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

We have already also two separate pages on Barack Obama and Obama administration - and do you think that then the same problem will not rise eventually on those pages President of Afghanistan and Politics of Afghanistan? --JanDeFietser (talk) 05:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, now I see, you've done great work for creating the Karzai administration.--119.73.0.138 (talk) 11:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

characterization of election fraud

Changed from "election was characterized by the western media" as containing fraud to "was tainted by fraud". This is because the main article clearly and properly cites primary sources alleging fraud. in any case, "characterized by the media" is a weasel phrase; we should be relying on primary sources, not describing what teh general media buzz around anevent is. In this case, there is no shortage of primary sources, both journalists and erection observers, providing detailed and verifiable examples of fraud.58.152.10.51 (talk) 02:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

That is good you did that and the fraud charges are not confirmed, only western media reports were saying widespread fraud took place. Their information is based on their own study, and the Afghans didn't complain except few of the losers in the race. This whole thing was planned by westerners to try to remove Karzai but they failed because Afghans stood silent focusing on westerners (America-NATO).--119.73.0.138 (talk) 11:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Name change?

Not too long ago, an anon user changed Karzai's name to include Abdul at the beginning, but only in the lead and infobox. I don't think is correct, and I'm going to go ahead and revert it, but I wanted to bring it up here for other people's thoughts. C628 (talk) 00:33, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Semiprotect

I've semiprotected the article for a month, in response to an ongoing Fox News story that Karzai converted to Christianity. --TeaDrinker (talk) 21:06, 11 August 2010 (UTC)