According to the way you've laid it out, like the Afghan people, you aren't the judge of this. in one situation, too, you want to be the judge of what's best for the afghan people; but it's highly unlikely you think i'm the judge of what is best for you. gotta be consistent here, i think.
kelley
ps: There's a good essay by Deborah Stone about this issue. It's on the difference between equity and equality. She points out that things can be "fair" even if they are unequal. She points out that sometimes we place an arbitrary boundary around those to whom goods are distributed. we exclude some groups that, from another perspective ought to be included.
in her example, she talks about how to divide up a chocolate cake in a classroom. what are fair (equitable) ways of doing this. voting, merit, etc. then she points out that some students who skipped class that day might feel excluded unjustly. they couldn't help it, they were ill, so they missed the cake. other students who dropped the course complain that, had they known about the cake, they would have remained in the class. they complain that they weren't given full knowledge to make a rational choice.
she then points out that, aside from her and the students, there is an entire university system that makes the class happen. why should we arbitrarily exclude the dept fac from the cake? what about the dean, the president, the rest of the uni. without them, there wouldn't be a class at all. and, of course, the classroom and the cake mess will be cleaned up by the janitors. oh, and what about the admin staff that made sure there were napkins, plates, forks?