Folks are getting a lot of yucks out of the news that the military is using Viagra to bribe tribal elders in Afghanistan. Obviously the effectivness of inducements for local allies is an important consideration in counterinsurgency, and both money and guns have nasty side effects when put in the hands of leaders who are, let us say, somewhat ambivalent about U.S. forces in the area. But when I first heard about the Viagra bribes, I had to say I was somewhat put-off by the idea of aiding sixty year-old tribal leaders with their marital problems in a country where women can be forcibly married off at a very young age and have few rights in general. Spencer Ackerman and Megan Carpentier had similar concerns.
One of the stated goals of the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan is improving the lot of women there, and this kind of bribery seems to undermine that goal. It's hard to say whether the benefit outweights the cost, although it seems the cost of distributing weapons would be higher. Money apparently attracts too much attention and can make the informant worthless, but it seems like steps could be taken to prevent that from happening. Ezra and Jesse jokingly ask whether this kind of bribe is hard or soft power. I'd say it's morally ambiguous power and maybe we should think harder about the consequences of its deployment.
-- Tim Fernholz
