Saturday, May 26, 2012


Commentary

'Afghanistan Can't Be A Suburb Of Pakistan'

Protesters hold portraits of former President Burhanuddin Rabbani during a demonstration in Kabul on September 27.
TEXT SIZE - +
By Tanya Goudsouzian
The contentious Afghan peace process finally came to a grinding halt when Afghan President Hamid Karzai announced on September 30 on local Afghan TV that there was no point in dialogue with the Taliban after its peace emissary turned out to be a suicide bomber.

By abandoning talks with the Taliban and speaking directly with Pakistan, Karzai is essentially pointing the finger at its southeastern neighbor as the primary source of Afghanistan's woes. By some accounts, this was precisely the move that the Afghan president had been itching to make since the July assassination of his half-brother, Ahmad Wali Karzai, reportedly by neo-Taliban extremists. But what clenched Karzai's resolve was the brazen assassination of former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani on September 20 -- the latest in a wave of assassinations that began about six months ago, targeting influential Afghan figures.

"At the time, most of [Karzai's] advisers, including my father, advised the president against making statements against Pakistan, or alluding publicly to Pakistan's hand in this string of assassinations," said Jalal Rabbani, son of the slain leader. "My father told him that it would be better not to antagonize Pakistan at the time, but right now it seems there simply isn't any other option."

The consensus in the power circles of Kabul is that Pakistan, fearful of losing influence in Afghanistan, has covertly agitated the security situation in order to force Afghans to the negotiating table with Islamabad.

Exposed

Prince Abdul Ali Seraj, head of the National Coalition for Dialogue with Tribes of Afghanistan, says: "Pakistan wanted this all along but it did not want to be exposed as the backer of the Taliban. Now the world hears Karzai saying, 'You are backing Taliban so we will talk to you directly for you to stop the Taliban.'"

But Seraj cautions against the pitfalls of negotiating with a meddlesome neighbor. "Karzai has to be careful. We should not succumb to Pakistan's demands to play a major role in Afghanistan's future," he says. "Afghanistan is an independent country. They can always play a role as neighbor. But Afghanistan cannot be a suburb of Pakistan."

Karzai's decision to bypass Taliban emissaries and speak instead with Pakistan may also be viewed as the result of pressure by zealous Afghan opposition figures, who were quick to capitalize on the Rabbani assassination to discredit Karzai's policy of engagement with the Taliban. Karzai's decision to make this declaration on Noor TV, owned by Rabbani's eldest son, may have fostered this impression.

After all, the late Rabbani's appointment to the helm of the High Peace Council in 2010 was in part an attempt to placate the mainly ethnic-Tajik opposition who were vehemently opposed to negotiating with the Taliban -- a process they dubbed "appeasement" -- but this move only served to fuel simmering tensions in the Jamiat-e Islami party headed by the slain leader.

Ahmad Wali Masud, head of the Massoud Foundation and former Afghan ambassador to the U.K., is skeptical of any major shift in policy on the part of Karzai. "Let's not forget that Karzai has always insisted on holding talks with the Taliban, calling them 'brothers', 'sons of Afghanistan,' and even on one occasion claiming they were better than the mujahedin. And let's not forget that he has been in contact with the Taliban for years; it's just that it has been made public recently."

Masud, an ethnic Tajik, adds: "Why has he maintained these relations with the Taliban? Because he wanted a force on his side to counter the opposition he faced from the United Front, those who fought against the Taliban in the first place. Karzai needed foot soldiers to skew the balance of power between ethnic Pashtuns and non-Pashtuns in the country. All this was to consolidate his own power base, which is south of the country, among the ethnic Pashtuns."

Members of the Jamiat-e Islami party reacted variously to the Rabbani assassination, with some pledging bloody vengeance, and others somberly reflecting upon the possibility that this was a plot that extended far beyond the Taliban.

'Shameless Opportunism'

Jalal Rabbani expressed "disgust" at the "shameless opportunism" displayed by some former members of Jamiat-e Islami, who he believes have used his father's assassination to further their own agendas. "The nature and intentions of these individuals were known, even while my father was alive," he says without naming names. "It is no surprise that they have now jumped at the chance to further their own stagnant political careers, using my father's martyrdom as a springboard."

For the Jamiat-e Islami, a party that has long been plagued by internal division and rivalry, the task at hand is to select a successor to the late Rabbani, whose legacy -- however controversial and hotly debated -- spans half a century, notably his key role in the Afghan war against Soviet occupation.

"Fortunately, my father had already put in place a mechanism for succession, by appointing a hundred or so representatives to hold a kangara [party congress] and select the most suitable candidate," Jalal says, adding that this congress would take place when "things have settled."

There are a few contenders vying for the party's top job, including Rabbani's son-in-law Ahmad Zia Masud and a number of former jihadi lieutenants, notably General Atta Mohammad, governor of Mazar-e Sharif. Although there are doubts over the ability of these contenders to fill the shoes of the late Rabbani -- widely regarded as a savvy politician and an "elder" -- the likely successor is by all accounts Rabbani's eldest son, Salahuddin, who is currently Afghanistan's ambassador to Turkey, and holds a degree from Columbia University in New York.

"After every situation like this, there will always be a power struggle," says Seraj, who does not forecast an ugly contest over the leadership of Jamiat-e Islami. "The final draw is likely to be between the son and the son-in-law because the general is too controversial a figure."

Jalal goes on to deny rumors of tensions in the family as a result of his brother-in-law's reported bid for succession. Ahmad Zia Masud, brother of the slain mujahedin commander Ahmad Shah Masud also known as "The Lion of Panjshir," served as vice president for a term, and previously as Afghan ambassador to Russia. Some feel that Masud's ascension to the helm of Jamiat-e Islami might allay reported tensions between the Panjshiri contingent and those at the party's core.

"There is no basis to these rumors," Jalal says. "Ahmad Zia loved my father and he is very much a key member of Jamiat. He has no aspirations to succeed my father, and there would never be a family rift over such an issue."

Mastermind

For now, Jalal's primary concern lies in finding the masterminds behind the assassination of his father, which he believes is fundamental to the peace and security of Afghanistan. "The probe into my father's martyrdom has been concluded on the Afghan side, and we are satisfied with the findings," he says. "But there are still a lot of unanswered questions on the Pakistan side. We hope that the Pakistani authorities will be cooperative."

Jalal, who met Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani a few days ago at the Presidential Palace in Kabul, adds: "It is time Pakistan stopped playing the game with two faces in Afghanistan. They are playing a dangerous game in my country, by looking after their own interests vis-a-vis India in a way that is devastating to Afghanistan. This must come to an end now."

Whatever the outcome of the Pakistani investigations into the Rabbani assassination, Afghan public opinion has already -- for the most part -- been made up. In a land where hearsay carries more weight than official statements, Pakistan's all-pervading Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency is widely believed to have masterminded the audacious suicide attack on the former president, who was tasked with brokering a truce with the neo-Taliban.

By offering a sample of what would ensue as a result of Pakistan's marginalization from Afghan affairs, Islamabad has muscled Kabul to the negotiating table. As such, it remains to be seen whether a terrorized Afghanistan can further any of its own national interests faced with an emboldened Pakistani goliath.

Never before have Karzai, scrutinized at home and abroad, and the fragile Afghan state, been in greater need of Washington's support. If the United States and the international community do not throw their weight behind Afghanistan, the eventual "peace settlement" will no doubt skew in favor of Islamabad, and Afghanistan will once again become Pakistan's suburb, as it was during the rule of the Taliban.

Tanya Goudsouzian is a journalist who has covered Afghanistan since 2001. The views expressed in this commentary are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of RFE/RL
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments
     
by: Sanjay from: NY
October 04, 2011 13:29
When Pakistan says it "has a right to a say in Afghan affairs", what they're politely saying is that they want Afghanistan to be their colony or satellite state. In other words, Afghans don't get to vote for Pakistani leaders, but Pakistani leaders get to decide the fate of Afghans. So why don't we stop mincing words and using "polite" language, and call a spade a spade?

Like Stalin sending tanks into Hungary or Czechoslovakia, the Pakistanis would send fanatics with RPGs and AK-47s into a neighboring country, if said country doesn't pursue the policies it wants. But whereas the morally lecturing "West" speaks boldly of the inalienable rights of Hungarians, Czechs or Slovaks, it minces words for the Afghans. Their women don't really want to go to school, we're told. They don't really like sovereignty or self-rule, we hear. Councils, Kangaras, Jirgas and other forms of representation are Jeffersonian imports which aren't really compatible with their culture, spin-doctors tell us. They've always been happy living in huts and beating their wives. Better to defer to Pakistan, we're told.

It's very obvious that Pakistan has erected a force of barbarians to brutalize and terrorize its neighbors into submission. The sooner Pakistan and its worldview are recognized as the problem, the better.

by: Arun from: MD
October 04, 2011 22:29
So what about india having a say in Pakistan or Afghanistan having a say in pakistans govt for that matter.

by: Faisal from: Boston
October 05, 2011 07:13
Why is finger always pointed at pakistan whenever any thing goes wrong in Afghanistan? Has anyone cared to highlight that the persons who are pointing these fingers are themselves stooges of the allied forces and also were once warlords and thugs, terrorizing the poor afghans in the first place. How come these same people have now become representatives of the Afghans?

Pakistan has sacrificed a lot for Afghanistan and even today a large Afghan population lives in Pakistan even using local ID cards to do business here and prefer not to go back. When this is the case than why should there not be more say for Pakistan when deciding the future of Afghanistan? Why is it that countries with no geopolitical or historical link with the country are deciding the fate of the country? While we donot consider Afghanistan as a provide of Pakistan, we do need to have a safe and stable neghibour not acting as a frontman for our enemies.

by: Topak_khan from: Pekhawar
October 05, 2011 12:47
Afghanistan does not want to be a suburb of Pakistan but it is happy to be host of India. If it is taking sides in India Pakistan relations it should be ready to face the consequences.
In Response

by: BAK from: Hyder
October 28, 2011 18:45
Why does anybody have a right to say anything about afghans, they will decide and form their own policy..And paksitan is a rogue state.. always has been.It wants afghanistan as it's slave so that it can encroach it's lands.. Anybody gave a thought about the changing borders of paksitan with afghan lans.. I'm not afghani but know this.. these lands were never conquered through war.. for sure....

by: SAROJ KAPOOR from: INDIA
October 05, 2011 13:34
NO DOUBT PAKISTAN'S SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE FORCES WANT TO OCCUPY AFGHANISTAN. ONLY CRAZY PEOPLE CAN THINK .

MY SUGGESTION IS THAT INTERNATIONAL POWERS MAY GIVE FEW NUCLEAR WEAPONS TO AFGHANISTAN WHICH COULD BE MOUNTED ON TRUCKS. AFGHANS COULD USE THEM IF UNDER THREAT. THIS WAY PAKISTAN WILL FORGET THAT THEY CAN HARRASS INTERNATION COMMUNITY. CHINA WILL ALSO REALIZE FOLLY OF ARMING A TERRORIST COUNTRY LIKE PAKISTAN WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

by: Welingkar from: India, Hyderabad
October 05, 2011 15:15
The sad part is that Pakistan justifies its meddling in Afghanistan since it needs to "take care of the sentiments of the Pashtuns" in its territory. However, Pakistan's Punjab dominated Army has never been and will never be "friends" of the Pashtuns. By dividing them through religious and terror ideologies, Pakistan is playing the game of setting one group of people against the other in Afghanistan, so that it can dominate at the expense of the people of Afghanistan- like in the story of the monkey and the two cats. Religion has been used as a cover to preach hate and extremism, so that the Pakistanis dominate. The day the Afghans across all tribes and sections discover and understand Pakistan's true intentions, it will have hell to pay.

by: Arjun from: Chennai
October 07, 2011 02:48
@Faisal by that logic, Pakistan must stop interfering in Kashmir as there are a lot more Kashmiris inside India than Afghans in Pakistan. In fact, by that logic, India must have a say in Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Srilanka and even China, as the Tibetan leadership is entirely inside India.
@Topak Khan I can only laugh at your follies. All I can say is, your covert operation in Afghanistan has nothing to do with India. While you might think you are countering India, ethnic Afghans have never wanted you out of their country more.

Latest Commentary

No records found for this widget:963

More Commentary

Most Popular

               
 
 
 
 
Being Discussed Now

Chechen Leader Names New Premier

Latest Comment (2 total)

Gushing gush: Your Kadirov and his new minister look like Mongols, but blonde Mongols. Are ... More

Protests Haunt Baku Eurovision Final

Latest Comment (1 total)

super-sonic-Arab-rocket: may be these idiots will arrest all of Azerbaijan until Eurovision ends ! ... More

Last 10 Eurovision Finalists Picked

Latest Comment (5 total)

Camel Anaturk: Meine Liebling EuGenio,we heard and read all about that on radio the Voice ... More