[Reader-list] Afghanistan, Graveyard of Empires
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at mnet.fr
Wed Dec 5 01:34:47 IST 2001
Foreign Affairs
November, 2001 / December, 2001
SECTION: 9/11 AND AFTER; Pg. 17
Afghanistan, Graveyard of Empires
by Milton Bearden;
MILTON BEARDEN served as CIA station chief in Pakistan from 1986 to
1989, where he was responsible for that agency's covert action
program in support of the Afghan resistance to the Soviet-supported
government.
THE GREAT GAME
MICHNI POINT, Pakistan's last outpost at the western end of the
barren, winding Khyber Pass, stands sentinel over Torkham Gate, the
deceptively orderly border crossing into Afghanistan. Frontier Scouts
in gray shalwar kameezes (traditional tunics and loose pants) and
black berets patrol the lonely station commanded by a major of the
legendary Khyber Rifles, the militia force that has been guarding
the border with Afghanistan since the nineteenth century, first for
British India and then for Pakistan. This spot, perhaps more than
any other, has witnessed the traverse of the world's great armies on
campaigns of conquest to and from South and Central Asia. All
eventually ran into trouble in their encounters with the unruly
Afghan tribals.
Alexander the Great sent his supply trains through the Khyber, then
skirted northward with his army to the Konar Valley on his campaign
in 327 BC. There he ran into fierce resistance and, struck by an
Afghan archer's arrow, barely made it to the Indus River with his
life. Genghis Khan and the great Mughal emperors began passing
through the Khyber a millennium later and ultimately established the
greatest of empires - but only after reaching painful accommodations
with the Afghans. From Michni Point, a trained eye can still see the
ruins of the Mughal signal towers used to relay complex torch-light
messages 1,500 miles from Calcutta to Bukhara in less than an hour.
In the nineteenth century the Khyber became the fulcrum of the Great
Game, the contest between the United Kingdom and Russia for control
of Central Asia and India. The first Afghan War (1839 - 42) began
when British commanders sent a huge army of British and Indian troops
into Afghanistan to secure it against Russian incursions, replacing
the ruling emir with a British protege. Facing Afghan opposition, by
January 1842 the British were forced to withdraw from Kabul with a
column of 16,500 soldiers and civilians, heading east to the garrison
at Jalalabad, 110 miles away. Only a single survivor of that group
ever made it to Jalalabad safely, though the British forces did
recover some prisoners many months later.
According to the late Louis Dupree, the premier historian of
Afghanistan, four factors contributed to the British disaster: the
occupation of Afghan territory by foreign troops, the placing of an
unpopular emir on the throne, the harsh acts of the
British-supported Afghans against their local enemies, and the
reduction of the subsidies paid to the tribal chiefs by British
political agents. The British would repeat these mistakes in the
second Afghan War (1878 - 81), as would the Soviets a century later;
the United States would be wise to consider them today.
In the aftermath of the second British misadventure in Afghanistan,
Rudyard Kipling penned his immortal lines on the role of the local
women in tidying up the battlefields:
When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains And the women
come out to cut up what remains Jest roll to your rifle an' blow out
your brains An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.
The British fought yet a third war with Afghanistan in 1917, an
encounter that neither burnished British martial history nor subdued
the Afghan people. But by the end of World War I, that phase of the
Great Game was over. During World War II, Afghanistan flirted with
Aryanism and the Third Reich, becoming, fleetingly, "the Switzerland"
of Central Asia in a new game of intrigue as Allied and Axis
coalitions jockeyed for position in the region. But after the war the
country settled back into its natural state of ethnic and factional
squabbling. The Soviet Union joined in from the sidelines, but
Afghanistan was so remote from the consciousness of the West that
scant attention was paid to it until the last king, Zahir Shah, was
deposed in 1973. Then began the cycle of conflict that continues to
the present.
RUSSIAN ROULETTE
AFGHANISTAN FESTERED through the 1970s, but with the seizure of
power in Kabul by Nur Mohammed Taraki in 1978, the country began a
rapid spiral into anarchy. Washington's ambassador in Kabul, Adolph
Dubs, was kidnapped in February 1979 and later killed during a
failed rescue attempt; the next month, Hafizullah Amin seized the
prime ministership along with much of Taraki's power; and eight
months later, on Christmas Eve, after watching the disintegration of
order for much of a decade, the Kremlin decided to try its hand at
military adventure.
The Soviets began with a modern repetition of the fatal British
error of installing an unpopular "emir" on the Afghan "throne." The
operation was marked by a brutal efficiency: Hafizullah Amin was
killed under mysterious circumstances, Kabul was secured, and the
Soviets put their man, Babrak Karmal, at the helm of the Afghan
government. It looked initially as if the Soviets' optimistic
prediction that they would be in and out of Afghanistan almost before
anyone noticed might prove correct. Certainly, President Jimmy
Carter was too preoccupied with the hostage crisis in Iran to give
much thought to Afghanistan, or so the Kremlin believed.
To Moscow's surprise, however, Carter reacted quickly and
decisively. He cancelled a number of pending agreements with the
Soviet Union, ranging from wheat sales to consular exchanges; he set
in motion the boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics; and, much more
quietly and decisively, he signed a presidential finding that tasked
the CIA with the organization of aid, including arms and military
support, to the Afghan people in their resistance to the Soviet
occupation. In January 1980, Carter sent his national security
adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, for consultations with Pakistani
leaders who were already supporting the Afghan resistance. On a side
trip from Islamabad, Brzezinski traveled the length of the Khyber
Pass to the outpost at Michni Point, where he was photographed
squinting along the sights of a Soviet AK-47 assault rifle, its
muzzle elevated and pointing into Afghanistan. In that moment, the
president's national security adviser became the symbol of the
impending U.S. phase of involvement in Afghanistan's endless martial
history.
The CIA had to scramble to comply with the president's order. But
within weeks it had organized its first weapons delivery - a
shipment of several thousand venerable Enfield.303 rifles, the
standard weapon of the Afghan tribals - to the resistance fighters
who were already beginning to snipe at the Soviet invaders. During
the 1980s, the agency would deliver several hundred thousand tons of
weapons and ordnance to Pakistan for distribution to the Afghan
fighters known to the world as mujahideen, the soldiers of God. The
coalition of countries supporting the resistance grew to an
impressive collection that included the United States, the United
Kingdom, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and China. Lining up behind
seven separate and fractious Afghan resistance leaders based in
Peshawar, the capital of Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province, the
mujahideen field commanders were allotted their supplies and sent off
to face the Soviet forces.
For the first five years of its covert war, the CIA attempted to
maintain plausible deniability. Its officers in Pakistan kept a low
profile, and the weapons it supplied to the mujahideen, with the
exception of the British Enfields, were models manufactured in
Warsaw Pact countries. An additional advantage of using Soviet bloc
weapons was that the mujahideen could use any ammunition they could
capture from army garrisons of the puppet Democratic Republic of
Afghanistan - or buy, with American dollars, from corrupt DRA
quartermasters or even Red Army supply officers.
By 1985, the Soviet 40th Army had grown from its original, limited
expeditionary force to an occupation force of around 120,000 troops,
widely dispersed at garrisons around the country. But as the Soviet
forces grew, so did the Afghan resistance. By the mid-1980s the
mujahideen had more than 250,000 full- or part-time fighters in the
field, and though they and the civilian population had suffered
horrendous losses - a million dead and 1.5 million injured, plus 6
million more driven into internal and external exile - the Soviet
forces were also beginning to suffer.
As the CIA became more deeply involved in its covert proxy war with
the Soviet Union, it became clear to President Ronald Reagan's new
CIA director, William Casey, that the conflict had stalemated. The
United States was fighting the Soviets to the last Afghan in a
confrontation that could run on indefinitely. By 1985 Soviet air
tactics had been refined, and the mujahideen suffered increasing
casualties from the growing Soviet fleet of heavily armored MI-24D
attack helicopters. The Afghans had nothing in their arsenal
adequate to defend against this equipment and so, after a heated
debate and heavy pressure from Congress, the White House decided to
provide them with Stinger antiaircraft missiles. The Stingers entered
the war a month after Mikhail Gorbachev's seminal August 1986 speech
in Vladivostok, where he described the conflict, now in its seventh
year, as a "bleeding wound." U.S. intelligence at the time, however,
indicated that as he uttered those first words of disengagement, he
also gave his generals one year to bring the Afghans under control,
using whatever force necessary. Three months earlier the Soviets had
replaced the failing Babrak Karmal with the brutal, sadistic
secret-police chief Mohammed Najibullah, a move that only stiffened
mujahideen resistance and set the scene for the endgame of the
Soviets' Afghan adventure.
Two events in the late summer of 1986 changed the course of the war.
On August 20 a lucky shot by the mujahideen sent a 107 mm rocket
into a DRA supply dump on the outskirts of Kabul, setting off
secondary explosions that destroyed tens of thousands of tons of
ordnance, lighting up the skies of the Afghan capital by night and
smoldering during the day. A month later, on September 26, a team
led by a resistance commander with the unlikely name of Ghaffar ("the
forgiver," one of the 99 names of Allah) brought down three MI-24
helicopters in the first Stinger ambush of the war. The effect of
these events on the mujahideen was electric, and within days the
setbacks for the Soviet forces were snowballing, with one or two
aircraft per day falling from the skies at the end of the Stingers'
telltale white plumes.
When the snows melted in the high passes for the new fighting season
of 1987, diplomatic activity intensified, with the United States
represented by the exceptionally able Michael Armacost, the
under-secretary of state for political affairs. It had become clear
not only to Gorbachev and his negotiators but also to his generals in
the field that there would be no letup in Afghanistan, and that the
time to consider disengagement had come. On April 14, 1988, after
agonized negotiations over such tortured concepts as "negative
symmetry" in drawing down supplies to the combatants, the Geneva
Accords ending Soviet involvement in Afghanistan were signed. The
date for the final withdrawal of all Soviet forces was set at
February 15, 1989, a timetable that the commander of the Soviet 40th
Army in Afghanistan, General Boris Gromov, choreographed to the last
moment of the last day. February 15 also marked the end of outside
military support to both sides in the war, at least in theory.
Gromov wanted arrangements to be just right. The international press
was shuttled from nearby Termez, Uzbekistan, to a special press
center, complete with a new, covered pavilion. The body of a hapless
minesweeper had been quietly carried across the Friendship Bridge
before the press had time to reason that his blanket-wrapped form was
the last Russian soldier killed in the ten-year war. The cameras of
several dozen news services zoomed in on the center of the bridge,
where a lone Soviet tank had pulled to a halt. The diminutive Soviet
general jumped from the turret, pulled his battle-dress tunic into
place, and strode purposely over the last hundred yards toward the
Soviet side of the Amu Dar'ya. Just before he reached the end of the
bridge, his son Maksim, a slim, awkward 14-year-old, greeted his
father with a stiff embrace and presented him with a bouquet of red
carnations. Son and father marched the last 50 yards out of
Afghanistan together.
ARABIAN KNIGHTS
IN TEN YEARS OF WAR, the Soviet Union admitted to having had about
15,000 troops killed in action, several hundred thousand wounded,
and tens of thousands dead from disease. The true numbers might be
higher, but they are not worth debating. What followed Gromov's exit
grew rapidly into a cataclysm for the Soviets and a national disaster
for the Afghans.
The first signs came in May 1989, when an already emboldened
Hungarian government correctly concluded it could open its border
with Austria without fear of Soviet intervention. That signal act was
followed a month later by the stunning election of a Solidarity
majority in Poland's parliament, ending that country's nearly
half-century of communist rule. Throughout the summer of 1989, the
people of East Germany took to the streets, first in small numbers,
then gaining strength and courage in the tens and hundreds of
thousands until, on the night of November 9, 1989, in a comedy of
errors and miscues, the Berlin Wall was breached and Germans surged
from east to west. The world had hardly digested these events when
Czechoslovakia's Vaclav Havel and his band of dissidents from the
Magic Lantern theater carried out their own Velvet Revolution a
month later.
With the world's eyes focused almost exclusively on the historic
events in Eastern Europe, or on the vivid image of a young
demonstrator staring down a Chinese tank in Beijing's Tiananmen
Square, the drama unfolding in Afghanistan received scant attention.
Though there were heroic efforts by relief agencies to provide
humanitarian aid, the senior officials of President George H. W.
Bush's administration did not look back to that former war zone,
their energies instead consumed by the stunning denouement of the
Cold War.
In the turn away from Afghanistan, the United States would dismiss
even its staunch ally, Pakistan. No longer able to stave off
congressionally mandated sanctions triggered by its nuclear weapons
development program, Pakistan fell out of Washington's favor. As the
1990s began with great hope elsewhere in the world, in Afghanistan a
new post - Cold War construct started taking shape: the failed
state. And as it failed and spun into anarchy, Afghanistan became the
home of a new and little understood threat: the aggrieved Arab
extremist.
The role of the so-called Afghan Arabs in the ten-year war against
the Soviet occupation is the subject of much debate and misinformed
commentary. By early 1980, the call to jihad (holy war) had reached
all corners of the Islamic world, attracting Arabs young and old and
with a variety of motivations to travel to Pakistan to take up arms
and cross the border to fight against the Soviet invaders in
Afghanistan. There were genuine volunteers on missions of
humanitarian value, there were adventure seekers looking for paths
to glory, and there were psychopaths. As the war dragged on, a number
of Arab states discreetly emptied their prisons of homegrown
troublemakers and sent them off to the jihad with the fervent hope
that they might not return. Over the ten years of war as many as
25,000 Arabs may have passed through Pakistan and Afghanistan. At
one time the CIA considered having volunteer Arab legions take part
in the war, but the idea was scrapped as unwise and unworkable.
Despite what has often been written, the CIA never recruited,
trained, or otherwise used the Arab volunteers who arrived in
Pakistan. The idea that the Afghans somehow needed fighters from
outside their culture was deeply flawed and ignored basic historical
and cultural facts. The Arabs who did travel to Afghanistan from
Peshawar were generally considered nuisances by mujahideen
commanders, some of whom viewed them as only slightly less bothersome
than the Soviets. As fundraisers, however, the Arabs from the
Persian Gulf played a positive, often critical role in the background
of the war. During some months in 1987 and 1988, Arab fundraisers in
both Pakistan and their home countries raised as much as $ 25
million for their largely humanitarian and construction projects.
Among the more prominent of these Arab fundraisers was one Osama bin
Ladin, the son of a Saudi billionaire.
Active in Afghanistan since the early 1980s, having previously
worked in the Persian Gulf to recruit Arabs for the jihad, bin Ladin
focused his early energies on construction projects, building
orphanages and homes for widows as well as roads and bunker systems
in eastern Afghanistan. He and a few of his Saudi followers saw some
combat in 1987, while associated with the Islamic Unity Party of
Abdul Rasul Sayaf, an Egyptian-trained Afghan member of the Muslim
Brotherhood who later in the jihad embraced Saudi Wahhabism. At the
crucial battles of Jaji and Ali Khel, Sayaf and his Saudis acquitted
themselves well by stopping a Soviet and DRA advance that could have
resulted in large-scale destruction of mujahideen supply dumps and
staging areas in the province of Paktia. More than two dozen Saudis
died in those engagements, and the military legend of Osama bin
Ladin was born.
But at this point in the war, few were concerned about the role of
the Afghan Arabs, with the exception of growing criticism by Western
humanitarian organizations of the harsh fundamentalism of the Saudi
Wahhabis and Deobandis whose influence in the refugee camps in
Pakistan, now bursting with about three million Afghans, was
pervasive. It was in these squalid camps that a generation of young
Afghan males would be born into and raised in the strictest
fundamentalism of the Deobandi madrassas (Islamic schools). It was
here that the seeds of the Taliban were sown.
COME, MR. TALIBAN
THOUGH the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, it was not until April
1992 that the mujahideen finally took Kabul, killed Najibullah, and
declared what passed for victory. Their triumph would be short-lived.
Old hatreds and ethnic realities once again drove events, and
without the unifying presence of foreign armies on Afghan soil, the
state of Afghanistan simply fell apart. The civil war resumed with
horrendous brutality until the population was ready for any path to
peace, and soon one presented itself.
Rising almost mystically from the sheer chaos, the Taliban (derived
from a Persian word meaning Islamic students or seekers), began to
form under the leadership of a one-eyed cleric from Oruzgan province
in central Afghanistan, who the world would come to know as Mullah
Mohammad Omar. More as a result of timing than of military might,
they swept through the Pashtun world of eastern Afghanistan, a
welcome relief from the brigands controlling the valleys and mountain
passes. By 1996 the Taliban had seized Kabul, and the Afghan people
seemed to accept their deliverance. The West fleetingly saw the
Taliban as the source of a new order and a possible tool in yet
another replay of the Great Game - the race for the energy riches of
Central Asia. U.S. and foreign oil firms were looking for ways to
pipe the vast natural-gas reserves of Turkmenistan to energy-starved
markets in Pakistan. By 1996, most of the route of the proposed
pipeline was loosely under Taliban control, and the match of
politics, power, and energy seemed attractive. But the optimism was
short-lived. In 1997, plans for the Afghan pipeline were shelved and
the country began an even sharper downward spiral, as the Taliban
over-reached in their quest to take control of the country. Their
atrocious human rights record and treatment of women drew
international scorn, and with the exception of diplomatic
recognition from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and
Pakistan, Afghanistan was in total isolation. Its failure as a state
of any recognizable form was now complete.
Against this backdrop, the Afghan Arab troublemakers began to drift
back to Afghanistan. Many of them, including Osama bin Ladin, had
left Afghanistan after the Soviet defeat, full of determination to
bring about radical societal change in their home countries. All
failed, and many began roaming among the few remaining states in the
world that served as safe havens for their kind, mostly behind the
Iron Curtain. But with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the would-be
terrorists of the world fell on hard times. They lost their
playgrounds in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, and even the
redoubtable Carlos pitched up in Khartoum - where, coincidentally,
bin Ladin had also settled after a failed attempt to bring about
change in his Saudi homeland. Bin Ladin engaged in a number of
agricultural, construction, and business ventures, but most of his
consciousness was consumed by a brooding hatred of the United
States. This passion grew during the Gulf War, and five years later,
with U.S. troops still stationed in Saudi Arabia, bin Ladin's rage
found its final form. It would be the United States against which he
would concentrate all of his energies.
By 1995, however, bin Ladin's presence in Sudan had become an issue
both for the United States and for Saudi Arabia, which by this time
had stripped bin Ladin of his Saudi citizenship. The Sudanese were
quietly told that bin Ladin was a major obstacle to improved
relations, and that Khartoum would be wise to ask him to leave. Sudan
had already begun ridding itself of undesirables. In a dramatic
setup, Carlos, stretched out on a Khartoum hospital operating table
having a vasectomy reversed, was abruptly bundled up by French
security officers and spirited off to Paris to stand trial for
earlier crimes. According to a PBS Frontline television interview
with Sudanese President Umar Hassan al-Bashir, the Sudanese
government offered to keep bin Ladin on a tight leash, or even hand
him over to the Saudis or the Americans. The Saudis reportedly
declined the offer, for fear his presence would only cause more
trouble in the royal kingdom, and the United States reportedly
passed because it had no indictable complaints against bin Ladin at
the time. In 1996, then, on U.S. and Saudi instructions, bin Ladin
was expelled from Sudan, and he moved to the last stop on the terror
line, Afghanistan.
Still relatively unknown to the public, bin Ladin came into view
through a CNN interview in 1997, when he claimed that his disciples
had been behind the killing of 18 American soldiers in Somalia in
1993. The next year he issued a fatwa, an Islamic decree, of
questionable authenticity, calling for all-out war against all
Americans. But it was in August 1998 that he was indelibly etched
into the world's consciousness, when terrorists thought to have links
to his Al Qaeda organization struck simultaneously at American
embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 persons, including 12
Americans, and wounding 5,000. The U.S. response was quick but
futile - 75 cruise missiles were launched at bin Ladin's training
camps in Afghanistan and at a pharmaceutical factory suspected of
producing precursors for chemical weapons in Sudan. Bin Ladin
escaped unharmed, and the attack on the Sudanese pharmaceutical
factory remains a smoldering controversy to this day.
BACK TO THE FUTURE
SINCE 1998, the hunt for bin Ladin has been the driving force behind
U.S. policy toward Afghanistan. Though the Taliban have repeatedly
claimed that the Saudi has been under their control and incapable of
fomenting the various attacks with which he is charged - including
that against the U.S.S. Cole in Aden and those on the World Trade
Center and the Pentagon - the U.S. government has little doubt that
bin Ladin is the culprit. The confrontation with him and those who
shelter him is at the point of no return.
It probably could not be otherwise, but how this first engagement in
the new U.S. war on terrorism is conducted will be crucial to all
that follows. The coalition being carefully constructed will function
differently from that built for the Gulf War a decade ago. The bulk
of the military tasks in that brief war against Iraq were intended
from the outset to be carried out by the Americans, the British, and
the French. The participation of the Arab states was not crucial to
the fighting, though it was crucial to the U.S. ability to operate
from bases near Iraq. In this new conflict, the roles will, in many
ways, be reversed. The coalition partners from the Arab and Islamic
states will have specific, front-line operational roles. They will
serve as force multipliers for the usual alliance of American and
European intelligence and security services and special operations
forces. If the terror network is to be dismantled, it will be with
help from the security services of Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, Sudan,
and a few others, not from the exclusive efforts of the United
States or its European allies.
So the tale ends where it began, at Michni Point. As the Bush
administration balances its military and political goals, plans to
send U.S. troops into Afghanistan to seize bin Ladin should be
weighed carefully for their practicality and political implications.
Strident calls to add the overthrow of the Taliban regime to the list
of American objectives may be attractive in terms of human rights,
but that objective, too, must be weighed against the goal of making
certain that the events of September 11 are not repeated.
Some have called for arming and forming an alliance with
Afghanistan's now-leaderless Northern Alliance. This grouping of
commanders, meticulously pulled together in shifting alliances by the
late Ahmed Shah Masoud, now holds about ten percent of Afghan
territory. Already the recipient of military and financial support
from Russia and Iran, it seems a logical partner in the U.S. quest
to locate and neutralize the bin Ladin network and replace the
Taliban regime.
But that is not a wise course - not simply because of the cold irony
of allying ourselves with the Russians in any fight in Afghanistan,
but because it is not likely to achieve either goal. It is more than
doubtful that the Northern Alliance forces could capture bin Ladin
and his followers, and there is no reasonable guarantee that they
could dislodge the Taliban. On the contrary, the more likely
consequences of a U.S. alliance with the late Masoud's fighters would
be the coalescing of Afghanistan's majority Pashtun tribes around
their Taliban leaders and the rekindling of a brutal, general civil
war that would continue until the United States simply gave up. The
dominant tribe in Afghanistan, which also happens to be the largest,
will dominate; replacing the Pashtun Taliban with the largely Tajik
and Uzbek Northern Alliance is close to impossible. The threat of
providing covert assistance to the Northern Alliance might be a
useful short-term strategy to pressure the Taliban, if it is handled
delicately, but any real military alliance to Masoud's successors
will backfire.
The administration would do better to try to draw off segments of
the Pashtun population only loosely allied with the Taliban regime.
Those Pashtuns who signed on with the Taliban over the last five
years did so because the Taliban seemed at the time to offer a fair
chance for peace after decades of indescribably brutal war. They did
not sign on to fight the United States, whose military might many of
them will recall from the struggle against the Soviet occupation. The
administration seems to realize this, and it is now moving quietly,
gathering resources in the land of the Pashtun.
If anyone is to replace an emir in Afghanistan, it will have to be
the people of Afghanistan themselves. Any doubters should ask the
British and the Russians.
GRAPHIC: Photo, Not much left to lose: Outside Kabul, Afghanistan,
September 2, 2001, AP/WIDE WORLD PHOTOS; Map, no caption, Map by IP
Ohisson
Copyright 2001 Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. Foreign Affairs
More information about the reader-list
mailing list