Are Afghan women’s rights beyond the UK’s reach?

David Miliband’s speech on Afghanistan marks an important moment in the downgrading of expectations for what kind of Afghanistan NATO will leave behind it.

It acknowledges that Afghanistan works for the most part on “sub-national government” and will do for the foreseeable future. In one intriguing paragraph, which bears the hallmarks of much mandarin crafting, Mr Miliband says:

“Our role should not be to prescribe exactly how those (ancient) traditions (of sub-national governance) evolve, or how the systems which reflect them are implemented … but to provide the resources without which none of this (stability) would be possible, and which will be far less expensive than trying to suppress the insurgency by conventional military means.”

Got that? I think it means that where a Taliban-sympathiser or some other menacing chief is running an area they can get on with it as long as they are not exporting global Jihad or destabilising the entire country.

I think it means issues like women’s rights in Afghanistan, once talked about quite a bit in speeches by the leaders of combatant countries, are beyond our reach in many parts of the country.

It will probably only enhance Hilary Clinton’s high opinion of David Miliband, expressed in her “Vogue” magazine interview:

“Well, if you saw him it would be a big crush. I mean, he is so vibrant, vital, attractive, smart. He’s really a good guy. And he’s so young!”

(Thanks to Alex Barker in the FT/Westminster blog for spotting this.)