|
Futures of Afghanistan
and Pakistan at the whim of a self-serving and unreliable
‘friend’
By Zafar
Bangash
As the
US war on Afghanistan intensifies, a motley collection
of warlords and bureaucrats is being assembled to take
over from the Taliban. The 86-year-old ex-monarch, Zahir
Shah, in exile in Italy since 1973, has been brought
out of mothballs and dusted down to lead a "moderate"
coalition of Afghans. A national council was set up
after a meeting in Rome on October 1. Four days later
general Pervez Musharraf, president of Pakistan, sent
a personal letter to Zahir Shah, inviting him to send
a representative to Islamabad for talks on the future
of Afghanistan, according to the daily Dawn (Karachi,
October 5). Zahir Shah has responded positively and
announced that his representatives will visit both Islamabad
and Tehran to discuss Afghanistan’s new government.
A vicious
propaganda campaign has been under way against the Taliban
in the western (especially American) media for several
months, yet the US’s new Afghan allies hardly inspire
confidence either. The Taliban need not be one’s favourite
group but what is being touted as a "US-friendly"
coalition is no better. It includes such people as the
Uzbek militia of general Abdul-Rashid Dostum, who was
allied to Najibullah, the last communist ruler of Afghanistan.
When Dostum changed sides and joined the late Ahmed
Shah Massoud in 1992, it brought the mujahideen to power
in Kabul. From 1992 to September 1996, when they were
driven out, Massoud and Dostum’s men wrought havoc in
Kabul. Rape, theft and pillage were widespread; in one
particularly vicious incident in October 1994, a mother
and daughter were raped by one of these ‘valiant commanders’.
It was the disgust of ordinary people with these warlords
that enabled the Taliban to sweep almost the entire
country within two years.
After
assuming control in Kabul in September 1996, the Taliban
restored law and order, much to the chagrin of those
who preferred chaos. Despite the Taliban’s interpretation
of Islam, the people welcomed their stern ways to control
lawlessness. They also disarmed the people, a herculean
task in a country where every child is born with a gun
in his hand. These achievements won the Taliban the
support of even those who disagreed with their policies
on other issues. The attempt to overthrow them is fraught
with danger and will not lead to stability in Afghanistan.
It also has serious implications for Pakistan, which
has been forced to change its policies by intense pressure
from the US.
Deep cracks
have already appeared in the new coalition. For instance
Abdullah Abdullah, foreign minister of the Northern
Alliance, which controls less than 5 percent of Afghanistan,
has said that Zahir Shah will not be acceptable as a
"compromise" leader, yet Haron Amin, a representative
of the alliance in Washington, told CNN on October 7
that the former king would be welcome. Similarly, the
Northern Alliance includes such figures as Abdul-Rasoul
Sayyaf, who is as rigid about women as the Taliban.
So what could the coalition achieve even if the Taliban
were toppled? The Taliban represent some 60 to 65 percent
of Afghanistan’s population, the Pushtuns, while the
Northern Alliance comprises various minorities who agree
with each other about little or nothing. There would
be no ‘stability’, a point which seems to have escaped
Pakistan’s government in its haste to avert the wrath
of the US.
It was
these tactics and American pressure to give detailed
intelligence that were probably the cause of Lieutenant-General
Mahmood Ahmed’s resignation as director of Inter-Services
Intelligence (ISI) in the military shake-up in Pakistan
on October 8. The ostensible reason for his resignation
was that he was superseded by two junior generals, but
in fact general Musharraf was planning to get rid of
his benefactors — generals Mahmood and Muzaffar Usmani
— who had brought him to power, because the US demanded
it. The third general, Aziz Khan, has been ‘promoted’
to the largely ceremonial post of chairman of joint
chiefs of staff, which means that effective command
of troops is now out of his hands. These generals were
seen as "too Islamic" and close to the Taliban.
Musharraf has acted to secure his own position — a day
earlier he extended his tenure as chief of army staff,
which had been due to end on October 8, indefinitely
— and to get western approval, rather than serve Pakistan’s
interests. In return Pakistan has got little but the
perils of the Afghans’ enmity.
It would
be well to bear in mind that, after Pakistan had hosted,
supported and financed the mujahideen for more than
15 years, these same mujahideen attacked and ransacked
the Pakistani embassy in Kabul in September 1995. One
embassy staffer was killed, and the ambassador and military
attache were beaten by members of the Northern Alliance,
led by Burhanuddin Rabbani, then president of Afghanistan.
Even while Pakistani diplomats were being attacked Rabbani’s
own family was living in a villa in Peshawar. Nor would
it go amiss to recall that it was during Rabbani’s presidency
that rape and pillage were widespread in such cities
as Kabul, Jalalabad and Qandahar.
Equally
important is the fact that the Taliban cannot be eliminated
completely even if their leadership is wiped out. They
are a reality that must be dealt with, albeit not through
the US. When the US flees Pakistan will be left to deal
with yet another set of problems in whose creation it
has become an accessory. Islamic Iran, by contrast,
despite its differences with the Taliban, has flatly
refused to join the "anti-terrorism" coalition
and said that it will not join in any attack on a neighbouring
Muslim country.
There
are millions in Pakistan, and indeed in most of the
Muslim world, who resent American policies. Those who
side with the US are also seen as enemies of Islam and
Muslims. Many Arab regimes have been circumspect in
their support of the US for this reason; not so Musharraf.
As the US’s war on Afghanistan continues, it is possible
that Usama’s supporters will strike at American targets
in different parts of the world. The US has already
announced that it is closing its embassy in Saudi Arabia.
The US has never been restrained by the deaths of innocents;
"collateral damage" is how it describes such
casualties itself (provided that those casualties are
not white Americans, of course). The US has gone mad
over 6,000 American deaths on American soil, but there
is no sympathy or concern for the deaths of 6,000 to
8,000 Iraqis every month as a result of the US-led economic
sanctions against Iraq, which attrition has gone on
for more than 10 years.
While
bombs are being dropped on Afghanistan, noisy propaganda
is under way to highlight food drops for Afghan refugees.
The refugee crisis has been created largely by US threats,
and now the attacks on Afghanistan. There are reports
of some 7.5 million Afghan refugees on the move. Given
the three-year drought in Afghanistan, which has affected
at least two million people, the new exodus of refugees
will create a nightmare for Pakistan because no government
in Afghanistan, however constituted, is likely to have
the ability to deal with such a catastrophe.
Given
Afghanistan’s history, the region is likely to be in
turmoil for decades. The consequences of this tragedy
will be borne mostly by the countries bordering Afghanistan,
Pakistan in particular. The US is notorious for washing
its hands of the problems it creates. Regardless of
whether or not it achieves its objectives in Afghanistan,
when it has had enough the US will simply walk away,
leaving Pakistan to deal with the mess. Pakistan’s additional
problem is that it is a nuclear state; this alarms both
zionist Israel and Hindu India. Once the Americans have
used it, Pakistan will be ditched as quickly as it was
abandoned after the Soviets were driven out of Afghanistan
(1989). In the process they eliminated general Zia ul-Haque
and most of the top military leaders with him. One cannot
help wondering whether general Musharraf has taken any
of this into account while listening to the blandishments
of Tony Blair and Colin Powell in Islamabad.
|