|

Truth
and Reconciliation Commission on Afghanistan
Laxmi
Bai
Executive
Summary
The
long and bloody Afghan conflict from 1975-2001 is regularly
cited as a glorious victory for jihadi Islamism in many
countries including
Pakistan
. Such claims are also repeatedly made by jihadi
Islamists such as Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The Afghan War was in
reality a horrific conflict which over 25 years killed 2 million
Afghans, created 8 million refugees, and caused the Afghan
nation to suffer near-total destruction from which it is only
now attempting a precarious recovery. A severe information
deficit exists about all aspects of the Afghan War among the
public, especially in Muslim countries and the deficit is
fostered by a policy of deniability exercised by the U.S, Saudi Arabia
and
Pakistan about their roles in the Afghan War.
The world community is currently facing the urgent necessity of
containing the myths of the Afghan War. First, the necessity of
quashing the global jihadi myth built up around the Afghan War,
by exposing its dirty antecedents in the War. Second, there is
the necessity of providing a stable basis of truth rather than
the uncertain basis of expedience for the reconciliation and
reconstruction of the Afghan nation. In order to achieve these
two important goals, the establishment of a Truth and
Reconciliation Commission on Afghanistan by the United States
and Russia with the participation of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,
Afghanistan, Iran and other countries is the only way.
Contents
Brief
history of the Afghan War
Scope
of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission on Afghanistan
Truth
and Reconciliation Commissions in other countries
Benefits
of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission on Afghanistan
Obstacles to the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation
Commission
References and
Footnotes
Brief history of the Afghan War
The Afghan war had its roots in a series of overthrows starting
in 1973 when Mohammad Daoud overthrew King Zahir Shah. In 1975,
resistance to the communist regime began as uprisings. The
Afghan Islamist factions of the resistance were favored by
Pakistan
,
Saudi Arabia
and the
US
over Afghan
traditionalist and royalist factions. After the Soviet 1979
invasion of Afghanistan, the US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan
selected seven Afghan Islamist groups [i],
trained thousands of their members and supplied them with
billions of dollars of weapons, aid, and support to fight the
Soviets and the communist regime in Afghanistan. The CIA and
Pakistan
’s ISI in association
with Saudi intelligence set up an arms and aid pipeline to keep
the mujaheddin supplied from
Pakistan
. They also collaborated
closely with each other in planning military and political
strategy for their mujaheddin clients.
During the period 1979-1989 the Soviets fought to quell the
Afghan resistance by repeated assaults such as aerial bombing of
villages that resulted in large numbers of civilian casualties
and displacements. The mujaheddin practiced guerilla warfare and
fought for control over various regions with Pakistan-supplied
arms and training. Beginning in 1986, the
US
supplied Stinger
missiles to the mujaheddin to further increase the Soviet cost
of involvement in
Afghanistan
. The mujaheddin did not
always fight cleanly; for instance many commanders were paid by
the ISI and CIA to launch missile attacks on
Kabul
city that resulted in large civilian casualties [ii].
Pakistani and Saudi authorities co-opted the initial Afghan
nationalist resistance to defeat the Soviet Army and topple its
proxy Communist regime in
Kabul
. This was performed by
sustained political, military and material support of the most
radical of Afghan Islamists Hikmatyar and Sayyaf.
The Afghan mujaheddin supported by the US, Pakistan and Saudi
Arabia, made repeated attempts to engineer total military
victory and political dominance for their particular Salafi
clients Hikmatyar and Sayyaf. As a result of Saudi and Pakistani
influence, multiple attempts to bring about sustainable military
or political culminations with cooperation of other Afghan
mujaheddin and exile groups failed because they did not grant
Hikmatyar such total military or political dominance [iii]
[iv]
[v].
Jihadis from
Pakistan
,
Saudi Arabia
and other Arab
countries participated in the Afghan War; notable were Bin Laden
and Al Zawahiri. Numerous organizations flourished by receiving
their share of aid and/or weapons for the jihad and subsequently
gained in power and prestige. Some of these groups later
coalesced into Al Qaeda. Under President Zia Ul Haq and his
Islamisation program, which ran in tandem with the Afghan jihad,
religious parties in
Pakistan
gained influence
through the burgeoning number of madrassas funded by Arab donors
aimed at indoctrinating young people for the jihad.
Under pressure from military conflict in
Afghanistan
and political
compulsions in
Moscow
, the Soviet Army
finally withdrew from
Afghanistan
in 1989. The US and
Soviets reached an agreement and completely disengaged from the
Afghan conflict in 1991, even though no stable settlement for
restoring peace in Afghanistan could be reached between the
superpowers or various Afghan factions. In the post-1991 period,
Pakistan and Saudi Arabia continued to pursue their previous
policies of fueling the conflict by avoiding compromise with
other mujaheddin groups and attempting to engineer a total
military victory for Hikmatyar and Sayyaf [vi]
[vii].
Many Afghan commanders and exile groups considered the Afghan
Jihad to have ended after the Soviet withdrawal in 1989.
However, the prerogative for ending the conflict was out of
their control due to Pakistani and Saudi obduracy. The Pakistani
commitment to engineering victory for the radical Islamist
Hikmatyar can also be seen in the fact that two civilian
governments of Pakistan, that of Prime Minister Junejo in 1988
and Benazir Bhutto in 1990, were dismissed, in order to enable
the Pakistani Army and the ISI to continue their Afghan policy.
In the years 1989-2001, it is estimated that approximately one
million Afghans were killed. Specifically, the period between
1989-1995 was marked by large-scale civic disorder and
destruction, lawlessness and conflict. Notable was the fighting
in
Kabul
in 1992-1994 in which 20,000 Afghans civilians are estimated to have
been killed.
In 1994, Hikmatyar was abandoned by
Pakistan
and the newly supported
Taliban militia gradually won over large tracts of war-weary
Afghanistan
. Pakistani jihadis
fought alongside the Taliban with the Pakistani Army and ISI
providing military planning and support. The Taliban's military
victories came after not only driving back its chief opponents
in the Northern Alliance and Hizb-e-Wahadat, but also after
carrying out massacres of Afghan civilians in which the
Pakistanis also participated [viii] [ix] [x] [xi].
At the time of the
US
invasion in 2001, the
Taliban were presiding over an oppressive regime not recognized
by any country except
Pakistan
and
Saudi Arabia
, and entrenched in a
civil war against the
Northern Alliance
. The Afghan economy was
in ruins with no prospects for reconstruction; Afghan women were
forced out of work and Afghan girls forced out of schools by
state decree. Under Taliban patronage, Osama Bin Laden and his
allied organizations were operating camps in
Afghanistan
to train jihadis for
guerilla warfare and terrorist attacks on a global scale.
Clearly, the power and prestige which jihadi Islamism gained in
the Afghan conflict derived from the billions of dollars of
weapons, aid, and training, and state patronage which US, Saudi
Arabia and Pakistan supplied to their clients during that
period. It is also clear that any jihadi victories were of the
pyrrhic kind which may be ascribed to jihadi Islamists and their
ISI and Saudi sponsors preferring to preside over the most
horrific destruction rather than seek compromise. Unfortunately
such a destructive conflict is now mythologized and eulogized as
a landmark victory by radical propaganda through out the Islamic
world. This is facilitated by the continued maintenance of
official denial by the
US
,
Saudi Arabia
and
Pakistan
about their roles in
the Afghan War.
Scope of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission
on
Afghanistan
Ideally, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission would be
established by the
United States
and
Russia
with the participation
of
Saudi Arabia
,
Pakistan
,
Afghanistan
,
Iran
and other countries.
Under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, each nation,
including the
US
and
Russia
, would put on public
record its cumulative role and its share of the horrors of
Afghan conflict in the period 1975-2001. The sole purpose would
be solely to put the truth on the public record for the purpose
of reconciliation and ending the cycle of violence. As the
victims number in tens of millions; it would be primarily
representative groups, organizations, member of militaries and
former and present government functionaries who would testify
before the Commission.
Primarily the governments of
Russia
,
Saudi Arabia
,
Pakistan
, and the
United States
would testify about
support to the war effort such as alliances, clients in the war,
military aid, arms pipeline, and training of combatants. Other
aspects of testimony would involve particular military
offensives, Afghan civilian causalities, destruction of
infrastructure, glorification of the jihad and religious
extremism through propaganda and indoctrination.
Truth and Reconciliation Commissions in other
countries
Truth and Reconciliation commissions have been used in a number
of other countries to document and reach reconciliation after
extended periods of political violence.
South Africa
South Africa
established a Truth and Reconciliation Commission when the rule of
apartheid ended in 1994. In order to facilitate reconciliation
among South Africans and put an end to cycles of violence, the
Commission put on record the violence and human rights abuses
committed in the period of 1960-1994.
Human rights abuses had been committed by both sides in
South Africa
, the domestic
governments in imposing the official apartheid policy, and by
South Africans fighting the government. The South African Truth
and Reconciliation Commission did not aim to award punishment to
those who committed human rights abuses on either side. Rather
it encouraged offenders to put the truth on official record; the
Commission offered amnesty to those who confessed to their
crimes. The Commission also aimed to record incidents of human
rights abuses, identify victims, and offer relief and reparation
to the deserving.
East Timor
East Timor
established a
Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation to look into
human rights violations committed in
East Timor
between April 1974 and
October 1999.
The Commission, which is currently in operation, has a mandate
to seek the truth, record victim testimonies, perpetuator
acknowledgements of human rights abuses, to facilitate community
reconciliation by dealing with minor offences such as looting,
burning and minor assault, and to make recommendations to
prevent further abuses and help past victims. The Commission
does not have the power to offer amnesties. Serious crimes such
as crime, rape and torture have to be brought to trial in the
state’s justice system outside the Commission.
A number of other countries have established Truth and
Reconciliation Commissions to look into human rights abuses in
the past, including Chile, Argentina, Peru, Sri Lanka and South
Korea [xii].
Benefits of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission on
Afghanistan
Benefits to
Afghanistan
By revealing the past actions of Afghan and foreign players in
the Afghan War, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission would help
Afghans reconcile with their past and provide a sound foundation
for the peaceful reconstruction of the Afghan nation and
society.
A Truth and Reconciliation would lay out the truths regarding
the Afghan War. The truth would grant Afghan civilians their due
position as key sufferers in the 25 years of the Afghan conflict
and as the key stakeholders in peace and progress in the future.
It would also help foster trust and reconciliation between the
numerous Afghan factions whose current relationship is
precariously based on military peace imposed by the presence of
international military forces. It would put an end to the cycle
of violence which can otherwise be triggered by revenge killings
by warlords or the assassinations of major government leaders.
A Truth and Reconciliation Commission would also provide a basis
of truth for
Afghanistan
’s reconciliation with
other countries including
Pakistan
,
Iran
and
Saudi Arabia
. The world may owe
Afghanistan
monetary or material
aid, but much more so the world owes
Afghanistan
the truth about the
Afghan War.
Benefits in the Global War on Terror
The establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission on
Afghanistan
is consistent with the
goals of the global war on terror. The realities about the
near-total destruction of Afghanistan, its causes and its
contributors, what led to it and who contributed to it, when
laid before the public record would serve to destroy jihadi
Islamist myths being propagated and reveal the true costs of
jihadi Islamism.
A number of blatant falsehoods being propagated to credulous
populations by jihadi Islamism’s proponents would also be
conclusively quashed.
Myth #1: The Afghan Jihad did not target noncombatants, women
and children.
The Afghan War was, in fact, characterized by indiscriminate
killing of civilians by all sides. Civilians were killed in all
phases including in missile attacks by mujaheddin during the
Soviet phase as well as ethnic and sectarian massacres. The
women of
Kabul
suffered atrocities
committed by former mujaheddin commanders in the early nineties.
The Taliban regime committed atrocities on women on the
frontlines of its civil war with
Northern Alliance
.
Myth #2: The Afghan Jihad was a noble struggle for Muslims’
just rights.
The Afghan Jihad was fought in defense of Afghan nationalism
against the Soviet occupation. It is also factual that the jihad
was co-opted by the Pakistani Army/ISI and
Saudi Arabia
's religio-political
agenda in association with the
US
’s strategic agenda of defeating the
Soviet Union
.
Myth #3: The armed jihad purifies Islamic societies and rids
them of corruption.
In fact, in
Afghanistan
, there were brutal
mutual betrayals by mujaheddin commanders who killed each
others’ men in the battlefield and refused all compromise on
the political front. The jihad reduced Afghan society to a
dangerous, private army-dominated, brutalized society with every
civic and social institution destroyed and cities reduced to
rubble. Afghan women were reduced to illiteracy and some forced
into prostitution, opium was freely traded by Pakistani-Afghan
drug lords, and the economy destroyed.
Myth #4: Jihadis who fought in
Afghanistan
and elsewhere are
martyrs who will gain entry to paradise for themselves and their
relatives.
When the shifting alliances, betrayals and foreign agendas in
the Afghan War are laid on public record, the question of
martyrdom in the Afghan War would be seen as a difficult one. It
will become clear that it was usually the current jihadi allies
of the Pakistani ISI/Pakistani Army who were conferred the
status of martyrs.
The establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission will
go a long way to stem the mythology surrounding the Afghan
Jihad.
Benefits beyond
Afghanistan
The aims of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission are
consistent with
Pakistan
’s official policy of
enlightened moderation, namely to quell religious extremism in
Pakistan
.
In
Pakistan
, the Afghan jihad is an
ongoing process that began in 1975. Pakistanis participated in
the Afghan jihad in large numbers [xiii].
However, all discourse on jihad including in state textbooks for
school children propagates jihad as an abstract Quranic concept,
with no mention of the human toll in neighboring
Afghanistan
. The Truth and
Reconciliation Commission would bring the facts about Afghan War
into the public discourse on jihadi Islamism in
Pakistan
and
Saudi Arabia
.
The establishment of the Commission would also have a positive
impact in other countries vulnerable to the propaganda of jihadi
Islamism such as
Bangladesh
and
Indonesia
. Additionally, for the
United States
and
Russia
the Commission would
clearly display the long term consequences of Cold War policies.
Obstacles to the establishment of a Truth and
Reconciliation Commission
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission on Afghanistan as
suggested in this article is different from previous such
Commissions because it requires extensive cooperation between
several governments. Such a Commission would be unprecedented.
In addition it requires political will on the part of the
United States
and
Russia
to voluntarily put
their Cold War choices in
Afghanistan
under public scrutiny.
In countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, not only are
participants in the Afghan Jihad policy still in positions of
power, but there is also no existing tradition of public debate
on internal conflicts much less on matters considered key to the
state’s ideology and security. It may be recalled that Hamidur
Rehman Commission reports on the secession of
East Pakistan
were not released in
Pakistan
for more than two
decades. The participation of
Pakistan
and
Saudi Arabia
in an international
body such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission on
Afghanistan
would be an
unprecedented opening up or glasnost in these societies.
A more general impediment to the establishment of a Truth and
Reconciliation Commission is the desire of world powers and
governments to continue the Great Game in
Central Asia
. Competition for access
to Central Asian energy resources might see the revival of the
use of jihadi Islamism and proxies in the region, an option
which world powers would not wish to lose by laying out their
past policies to international scrutiny. In summary,
United States
,
Russia
,
Pakistan
and
Saudi Arabia
must determine if the
commitment to reconstruction of
Afghanistan
and tackling radical
Islamist ideology is a matter of expedience or conviction.
Reprint from Afgha (www.afgha.com) and the original article
may be viewed http://www.afgha.com/?af=rc&pa=showpage&pid=213
References and Footnotes
[i]The
seven Afghan Islamist parties were (1)Nationalist Islamic Front
of Afghanistan(NIFA) led by Sayyid Ahmad Gailani, (2) Afghan
National Liberation Front(ANLF), led by Hazrat Sibghatullah
Mujaddidi,(3) Harkat-i Inquilab-i Islami (HAR) of Mawlawi
Muhammad Nabi Muhammadi (4) Hizb-i-Islami, Hikmatyar group(HIH)
of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (5) Hizb-i-Islami, Khalis group(HIK) of
Mawlawi Yunus Khalis(6) Jamiat-I Islami-yi Aghanistan(JIA) lead
by Burhanuddin Rabbani (7) Ittihad-i Islami bara-yi Azad-I
Afghanistan(ITT ) led by Professer Abd al_rabb al-Rasul Sayyaf
[ii]Page
114, [Barnett Rubin]
[iii](1)Failed
attempt to establish interim government in February-March 1988,
page 88, [Barnett Rubin] (2) During Afghan shura in February
1989 CIA and ISI estimated that compromise or negotiations with
PDPA were unnecessary as its military downfall was imminent. (3)
Manipulation by ISI and Saudi intelligence of the February 1989
Afghan shura held to decide interim government, the Interim
Islamic Government of Afghanistan (IIGA) pages 103-104, [Barnett
Rubin]
[iv]March
1990, ISI and Saudi intelligence tried unsuccessfully to
engineer a coup by Afghan Defence Minister Tanai and Hikmatyar
to depose President Najibullah. page 108, [Barnett Rubin]
[v]March
1991 The CIA and ISI engineered a mujahidin assault on Paktia in
Khost province. Though Jalaluddin Haqqani's forces succeeded in
capturing the town, Hikmatyar's forces captured the garrison and
victory was short-lived as ISI prevented Haqqani from recovering
the heavy arms seized by Hikmatyar and factional fighting broke
out page 110, [Barnett Rubin]
[vi]March
1993 Under Saudi sponsorship, Islamabad Accord was signed making
Burhanuddin Rabbani the President and Hikmatyar the Prime
Minister. Himatyar immediately dismissed the Defence Minister
Massoud and the internecine fighting continued.
[vii]January
1994 with fresh military aid from
Pakistan
, Hikmatyar and Dostum launched combined assault
on
Kabul
to displace Rabbani. Hikmatyar failed to capture
Kabul
[viii]January
1994 with fresh military aid from
Pakistan
, Hikmatyar and Dostum launched combined assault
on
Kabul
to displace Rabbani. Hikmatyar failed to capture
Kabul
[ix]25
percent or more of the Taliban forces were Pakistani in 1999.
page 118, [Larry Goodson]
[x]More
than eight thousand minority residents were reportedly killed by
the Taliban in and around Mazar-i-Sharif and Bamiyan page120,
[Larry Goodson]
[xi]
Human Rights Watch, The Massacre in Mazar-i-Sharif, November
1998 http://www.hrw.org/reports98/afghan/
[xii]
http://www.usip.org/library/truth.html
[xiii]Ahmed
Rashid estimated that eighty thousand to one hundred thousand
Pakistanis fought and trained in Afghanistan during the 1990s in
"The Taliban: Exporting Extremism." page 107, [Larry
Goodson] [Barnett Rubin] The Search for Peace in Afghanistan -
From Buffer State to Failed State, Barnett R. Rubin, Yale
University Press, 1995 [Larry Goodson] Afghanistan's Endless
War, State Failure, Regional Politics and the Rise of the
Taliban, Larry P. Goodson, University of Washington Press, 2001
Reprint from Afgha (www.afgha.com) and the original article may
be viewed http://www.afgha.com/?af=rc&pa=showpage&pid=213
|