The Afghan cauldron

Lord Curzon, at the turn of the 20th century, aptly described Afghanistan as “a piece on the chess board on which is being played out the game for domination of the world”. At that time, the Great Game was being played between Czarist Russia and Imperialist Britain. In the last century, the contestants were the USSR and the US. The latter chose the dangerous weapon of religious fundamentalism in conjunction with Pakistan and promoted Taliban. At one time the Pashtuns under Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan were secular and non-violent, but now they have become most radical Islamists. With generous funding from the US and support from Pakistan, they forced the then Soviet Union to quit Afghanistan. The Nineties saw oppressive Taliban rule in Afghanistan. Pakistan supported it and the US turned a Nelson’s eye to Taliban misdeeds. The Bamiyan statues, a world heritage, were subjected to bombardment for days and destroyed without any reaction or intervention by the lone superpower. No cruise missiles were fired into Afghanistan, as was done later when a US embassy and a US ship were attacked. The genie had come out of the bottle. The monster struck its benefactor hard on 9/11. Pakistan was forced to join the war against terror under threat of being bombed back to the Stone Age. The US offensive of 2001 in Afghanistan, Enduring Freedom, was a success. Afghanistan was liberated from Taliban misrule. Thousands of Taliban and Pakistan Army personnel in civilian clothes were encircled in Kunduz. The US organised a massive airlift for them, evacuating them to Pakistan. Therein lay the genesis of the present trouble facing the US, accentuated by the misconceived US diversion to Iraq. Those evacuated in 2001 became the hard core now operating from havens in Pakistan against the US and its allies in Afghanistan. American aid of billions to Pakistan is being used to fund the Taliban and build Pakistan’s military strength for operations against India. This has led to an absurd situation. US funds are being utilised to kill US soldiers in Afghanistan. The Chinese presence in Gilgit-Baltistan and their interest in the rich mineral resources of Afghanistan have further complicated matters.
Pakistan has been playing a double game, attacking selective terrorist outfits that affect its security and simultaneously covertly supporting the Taliban in their havens in Pakistan. US logistics convoys enroute to Afghanistan from Karachi have been repeatedly attacked in Pakistan. Yet the US continues to give billions as aid to Pakistan.
Last year there was much talk of “good” and “bad” Taliban. The US tried to strike a deal with the “good Taliban” before quitting Afghanistan. Pakistan’s role was crucial. Several rounds of talks were held for months with Mullah Akhtar Muhammad Mansur, a senior Taliban commander. He was even brought to Kabul in Nato aircraft from Quetta and had meetings with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and top US commanders and was given sizeable sums of money. It was later discovered that he was an impostor — a shopkeeper in Quetta. Mullah Omar, the top Taliban leader sheltered in Pakistan, issued a statement denying any talks at any level with the US. After this fiasco there is now no talk of “good Taliban”.
General Sir Peter Wall, the British Army Chief, was invited by the United Services Institution to give a talk on Afghanistan. I was presiding over the function and introduced the topic, giving the background described in the earlier paragraphs. Gen. Wall gave a good military exposition of the operations being conducted in Afghanistan by the International Security Assistance Force. Military operations are achieving results but improvised explosive devices pose a major problem. The Afghan National Army has been expanded from 2,000 to 100,000 and will be 400,000 strong by 2014. It is being increasingly employed to fight the militants with the international force operating in its support. Eventually they should be capable to operate on their own, allowing the international force to pull out. Concurrently, massive economic development and improvements in quality of governance are being carried out. He projected an optimistic picture. Without mentioning the K word, he stated it was necessary to resolve regional problems in South Asia for success in Afghanistan.
The aim of building an economically developed Afghanistan, one with good governance and capable of ensuring its own security, is indeed laudable. However, there are certain aspects that have to be kept in mind. Corruption undermines both development and governance. Despite all aid from the US, Chiang Kai-shek’s forces were thrown out of mainland China due to rampant corruption. Apart from professional competence, the Afghan National Army’s loyalty and discipline must not be allowed to be subverted by the Taliban’s ideology. No doubt economic development is a battle-winning factor in counter-insurgency. However, its effectiveness gets greatly diluted by religious fundamentalism. Per capita Central aid to Kashmir has been 10 to 11 times more than other states in India. Thus, people below the poverty line in Kashmir constitute 3.7 per cent against the national average of 26 per cent, and in some states as high as 36 per cent. Yet, this has hardly had any effect on anti-India feelings among separatists in the Valley.
In view of Gen. Wall’s veiled reference to Kashmir, I was prompted to compare the situation in Afghanistan with Kashmir. The population in both at one time believed in liberal Islam — Khudai Khidmatgars in one case and deep-rooted Sufism in the other. Religious fundamentalism has now brought about a metamorphosis. They both face cross-border terrorism from Pakistan, which itself is reeling under extremist violence.
Both Afghanistan and Kashmir have multi-ethnic populations, Kashmir being also multi-religious. Violence in Kashmir has been largely contained but the same cannot be said of Afghanistan. The insurgency in both cases is confined primarily to one ethnic group — Pashtuns in Afghanistan and the Valley Muslims in Kashmir. Though they are the largest ethnic group in their respective states, they do not constitute a majority. The insurgency in Afghanistan is directed against foreign powers. In Kashmir it is against a country with which Kashmir has had cultural, civilisational and political links for thousands of years and of which it is an integral part. The victory of insurgency in Afghanistan or in Kashmir will be a shot in the arm for those who espouse international jihad. It will undermine all liberal values, including those of Islam. Islamists and Islam are different from each other. The recent assassination of governor Salman Taseer in Pakistan and what followed show the grave danger humanity faces from Islamists. The US is a prime target of Al Qaeda. Minaret and burqa controversies have erupted in Europe. Fears of “Eurabia” haunt the world. Pakistan is imploding under the weight of extremism. India is engaged in Kashmir to uphold secular values and her national integrity. In so doing, she is also serving an international cause. Countries that advocate India coming to terms with religious fundamentalism in Kashmir are harming their own long-term interests and those of the international community.

The author, a retired lieutenant-general, was Vice-Chief of Army Staff and has served as governor of Assam and Jammu and Kashmir