The Price

From the National Review (Rich Lowry Editorial)

The Smear

It was Pakistan, not the Northern Alliance, that wrecked Kabul the first time around.

November 20, 2001 12:45 p.m.





I consider myself a moderate Northern Alliance skeptic. Meaning that I thought we should arm the Alliance and aid its push in the north, but doubted it could rout the Taliban soon and didn`t expect much from it in the political arena.

Well, the Northern Alliance has, of course, defied all expectations on the battlefield. And if I`m still a doubter about how productive a role they — or anyone else for that matter — will play in post-Taliban Afghanistan, the Alliance does deserve to be defended from the rankest and most hypocritical charge levied against it by Pakistani-inspired critics: that it destroyed the capital city of Kabul when it took it over in 1992.

We hear this over and over again in the media. It`s one of the reasons Colin Powell wanted the Northern Alliance to ``invest`` Kabul, instead of actually capturing it (one of the most hilariously unworkable ideas in recent diplomatic history). And it is supposedly the reason why Pakistan — suddenly a great defender of reasonable, pluralistic government in Afghanistan — quakes at the idea of the Northern Alliance back in the saddle again.

This is all very rich, since it`s Pakistan that, through one of its proxies, bears most of the responsibility for wrecking Kabul in the early 1990s.

That proxy was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. His name has a Beelzebub-like ring to it, which is appropriate since he pretty much exemplifies the fanaticism, ruthlessness, and evil that has characterized recent Afghan history.

He was Pakistan`s favorite mujahedeen leader during the war against the Soviets, because he was a Pashtun and an Islamic extremist — sort of a Taliban before the Taliban existed. Hekmatyar`s faction in the 1970s became famous for throwing acid on women who dressed in Western clothes. The Pakistanis made a point of funneling U.S. aid to him even though — or, more like it, because — he was virulently anti-American.

When the Communist government fell in 1992, Hekmatyar decided that he would wage a campaign to oust the other mujahedeen factions from Kabul. This he proceed to attempt with artillery barrages that reduced Kabul to rubble and killed thousands of civilians.

And the Pakistanis backed him throughout, even when the civil war harmed their economic interests by making trade routes in Afghanistan impassable.

Ahmed Rashid explains in his book, Taliban:

Pakistan`s policymakers were thus faced with a strategic dilemma. Either Pakistan could carry on backing Hekmatyar in a bid to bring a Pashtun group to power in Kabul which would be Pakistan-friendly, or it could change direction and urge for a power-sharing agreement between all the Afghan factions at whatever the price for the Pashtuns, so that a stable government could open roads to Central Asia. The Pakistani military was convinced that other ethnic groups would not do their bidding and continued to back Hekmatyar.

So, maybe if the State Department is serious about avoiding another Kabul circa 1992, it should ban Pakistan from all meddling in a post-Taliban government. ( I once floated the idea of handing Pakistan the responsibility of a post-Taliban Afghanistan, as a way of making it someone else`s problem, but am now convinced the Pakistanis need to be controlled like any other Afghan faction.)

The Pakistanis eventually dropped Hekmatyar, not because he was killing people, but because he was killing them ineffectually. He was losing the war. The Pakistanis picked up the Taliban instead, who could kill and degrade women and actually take over the Afghan government.

Now, we get news that Hekmatyar is petitioning Pakistan to let him into Peshawar as a way station to reentering Afghanistan.

Talk of a country ``exorcising its demons`` is usually metaphorical, but Hekmatyar is an actual, living demon. The U.S. should demand that Pakistan keep him out of Peshawar, and do all it can to keep him out of Afghanistan, since he is the one who did so much to wreck Kabul the first time around.

http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry112001.shtml

National Review, Rich Lowry

The Smear

It was Pakistan, not the Northern Alliance, that wrecked Kabul the first time around.

November 20, 2001 12:45 p.m.





consider myself a moderate Northern Alliance skeptic. Meaning that I thought we should arm the Alliance and aid its push in the north, but doubted it could rout the Taliban soon and didn`t expect much from it in the political arena.

Well, the Northern Alliance has, of course, defied all expectations on the battlefield. And if I`m still a doubter about how productive a role they — or anyone else for that matter — will play in post-Taliban Afghanistan, the Alliance does deserve to be defended from the rankest and most hypocritical charge levied against it by Pakistani-inspired critics: that it destroyed the capital city of Kabul when it took it over in 1992.

We hear this over and over again in the media. It`s one of the reasons Colin Powell wanted the Northern Alliance to ``invest`` Kabul, instead of actually capturing it (one of the most hilariously unworkable ideas in recent diplomatic history). And it is supposedly the reason why Pakistan — suddenly a great defender of reasonable, pluralistic government in Afghanistan — quakes at the idea of the Northern Alliance back in the saddle again.

This is all very rich, since it`s Pakistan that, through one of its proxies, bears most of the responsibility for wrecking Kabul in the early 1990s.

That proxy was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. His name has a Beelzebub-like ring to it, which is appropriate since he pretty much exemplifies the fanaticism, ruthlessness, and evil that has characterized recent Afghan history.

He was Pakistan`s favorite mujahedeen leader during the war against the Soviets, because he was a Pashtun and an Islamic extremist — sort of a Taliban before the Taliban existed. Hekmatyar`s faction in the 1970s became famous for throwing acid on women who dressed in Western clothes. The Pakistanis made a point of funneling U.S. aid to him even though — or, more like it, because — he was virulently anti-American.

When the Communist government fell in 1992, Hekmatyar decided that he would wage a campaign to oust the other mujahedeen factions from Kabul. This he proceed to attempt with artillery barrages that reduced Kabul to rubble and killed thousands of civilians.

And the Pakistanis backed him throughout, even when the civil war harmed their economic interests by making trade routes in Afghanistan impassable.

Ahmed Rashid explains in his book, Taliban:

Pakistan`s policymakers were thus faced with a strategic dilemma. Either Pakistan could carry on backing Hekmatyar in a bid to bring a Pashtun group to power in Kabul which would be Pakistan-friendly, or it could change direction and urge for a power-sharing agreement between all the Afghan factions at whatever the price for the Pashtuns, so that a stable government could open roads to Central Asia. The Pakistani military was convinced that other ethnic groups would not do their bidding and continued to back Hekmatyar.

So, maybe if the State Department is serious about avoiding another Kabul circa 1992, it should ban Pakistan from all meddling in a post-Taliban government. ( I once floated the idea of handing Pakistan the responsibility of a post-Taliban Afghanistan, as a way of making it someone else`s problem, but am now convinced the Pakistanis need to be controlled like any other Afghan faction.)

The Pakistanis eventually dropped Hekmatyar, not because he was killing people, but because he was killing them ineffectually. He was losing the war. The Pakistanis picked up the Taliban instead, who could kill and degrade women and actually take over the Afghan government.

Now, we get news that Hekmatyar is petitioning Pakistan to let him into Peshawar as a way station to reentering Afghanistan.

Talk of a country ``exorcising its demons`` is usually metaphorical, but Hekmatyar is an actual, living demon. The U.S. should demand that Pakistan keep him out of Peshawar, and do all it can to keep him out of Afghanistan, since he is the one who did so much to wreck Kabul the first time around.

http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry112001.shtml

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20011120-99975287.htm

Foreign fighters used Kabul as terrorist base

By John Jennings

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

KABUL, Afghanistan — The Taliban`s Arab ``guests`` were using Kabul as a planning base for terrorist attacks, according to new evidence that came to light after the regime was ousted from this capital city by troops of the Northern Alliance.

``There were 22 nationalities [of foreign fighters] present in Kabul,`` said Dr. Gino Strada, head of a local Italian-funded charity. ``There seemed to be more Arabs than Afghans in Kabul.``

Northern Alliance forces took reporters on a tour of one former foreign ``base`` — a five-story house in an affluent part of the city — that still held many signs of its previous residents. A clear picture emerged from the accounts of neighbors as well as from documents, weapons and munitions that the foreign fighters left behind when they abandoned the house as the Taliban evacuated the city last week.

Followers of Saudi-born financier Osama bin Laden formed a well-organized, professional political and military organization, operating openly and with great independence from the government. In fact, most of their neighbors appeared convinced that the foreigners, not Afghan Taliban leaders, really held control in Kabul.

Many of the ``qarargah,`` or headquarters for foreigners, amounted to self-contained garrisons that slept dozens, sometimes even hundreds, of fighters, side by side on the floor or outside in good weather. The foreign commanders — known generically in Afghanistan as ``Arabs`` — often parked military vehicles in and around their compounds, on their way to and from the front lines.

At one palatial compound, neighbors said they had complained to the local Taliban security forces about the dust, noise and congestion on their street from the foreigners` tanks, but that the foreigners simply laughed at the Taliban troops.

The Taliban troops ``were outgunned, so [the foreigners] got their way by brute force,`` remarked Ghulam Ahmadi, headmaster of a small grade school just across the street.

Some buildings were fitted with administrative offices, classrooms and medical aid stations, as well as cells the foreigners used to imprison Afghans who got on their bad side.

On the first floor, a sunny room with bay windows opened on the walled bungalow compound`s front yard. Above the door was a circular seal that read, ``Islamic Emirate Afghanistan Defense Ministry — [Volunteer] Units.``

Just inside was a large mural map of the Arabian Peninsula and the surrounding countries. It was dotted with tiny American and other Western flags labeled ``Christian installations in the Holy Land.``

As Western journalists fanned out across newly liberated Kabul last week, similar troves turned up all over town. One Arab compound was littered with anti-tank and anti-personnel mines, as well as neatly written lecture notes in Arabic on how to blow up bridges.

The foreign fighters preferred modern-style bungalows in the relatively posh, centrally located Karte Parwan, Shahr-e-Nau and Wazeer Akbar Khan neighborhoods. As soon as the foreigners were out of the way, local residents plundered the furniture and any small arms left about. The heavier arms and ammunition, of little use to civilians, remained.

The real treasure for Western intelligence officials probably will turn out to be what the tenants have left as garbage: the heaps of Arabic documents, notes, letters and pamphlets littering the floor of the abandoned headquarters.

Elsewhere, a meticulously maintained military service record for one Arab fighter recorded the man`s training, participation in specific military operations, the outcome of those operations and a space for the fighter`s own comments. The man wrote that he had enough training and wished to volunteer for a ``martyrdom`` mission either inside or outside Afghanistan.

Some of the foreigners were indeed ``martyred`` right in Kabul, though perhaps not as they had hoped. Local people nurtured an intense hatred for the heavily armed Arabs, Pakistanis and others who virtually took over their capital.

After the Taliban left town, residents who had managed to conceal their firearms through the regime`s rule conducted house-to-house searches and found several foreigners who were gunned down in the main park in the Shahr-e-Nau neighborhood.

``We`re going to fix these foreigners,`` said Abdul Razzaq, 36, a brigade commander from north of Kabul. A tall, stocky man with a neatly trimmed beard and ready smile, he stood beside a dirt road 20 miles west of the capital.

The business of flushing out and hunting down Arab and Pakistani Taliban, Mr. Razzaq continued, had united Afghans across ethnic and sectarian lines.

The commander began showing off Pakistani identity cards taken off men whom his troops had killed north of Kabul as Northern Alliance forces advanced last week. Most Afghans these days talk, sincerely, of how tired they are of war — but still harbor a desire for revenge against Kabul`s former foreign residents.

``Yes, my boys killed them all,`` Mr. Razzaq said of the Taliban allies from this neighborhood. ``We`re going to kill all the Arabs. If I came to your country, beat your wife and drove you from your home, wouldn`t you kill me?``

Rsaxena,

This stuff is all the same. Almost one year ago this chap hijacked my handle.. and he appears periodically to show his ugly face.

Thanks for being concerned.

-YLH

Editorials:

The case against Pakistan`s dictator - The Wall Street Journal

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/tvaradarajan/?id=95001492

It was Pakistan, not the Northern Alliance, that wrecked Kabul the first time around

http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry112001.shtml

From the Cato Insitute

Terrorist Sponsors: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, China

http://www.cato.org/dailys/11-16-01.html

Thomas Friedman`s article in today`s NYT will be posted at least 50 times by the McLingums on chowk.com today. Bets anyone?

For the McBanias and McLingums who haven`t heard about it yet.... there is a great article on India by Thomas Friedman. Hurry, Ms. Atharakhasmi Tripathi has offered 30 cents to every Indian who reads and reposts that article. The offers ends today, so hurry.

Of all places Peru?

`Peru Arrests Pakistani on Terror Charges`

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011120/wl/attack_peru_pakistani_dc_1.html

Monday November 19, 7:15 PM

Pakistan wants captured fighters treated fairly



ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Islamabad urged the United Nations on Monday to ensure that Pakistanis captured in current fighting in Afghanistan were treated according to the law even though it did not approve of them fighting there.

Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar told a news conference that if any Pakistanis had gone to Afghanistan ``it was their own choice`` but Islamabad would fulfil its responsibilities to its citizens.

He made the statement when asked about news reports that many Pakistanis were among thousands of Taliban fighters surrounded by Northern Alliance forces in the northern Afghan town of Kunduz.

``It will be important that all Afghans observe the principles of humanitarian law and refrain from reprisals or violence against those people who surrender,`` Sattar said.

``We have of course no role in this matter,`` he said, but added that Islamabad hoped the United Nations and the U.S-led coalition against terrorism would act together to prevent ``excesses``.

``The government of Pakistan has constantly maintained that Pakistani citizens have no business to go to a foreign country and fight on the side of one or the other group or faction,`` he said.

But he added: ``Pakistan has a responsibility to its citizens. Even citizens who commit a violation of the law still receive protection of their government.``

Pakistani, Arab and Chechen fighters supporting the Taliban and linked to Osama bin Laden`s al Qaeda network are deeply unpopular among many Afghans. Following the opposition`s military gains over the past 10 days many foreign fighters have been captured or killed.

``We too will fulfil our responsibility toward our nationals and make representation to the concerned authorities that these people should be dealt with in accordance with law and not subjected to any inhuman act on the part of their captors,`` Sattar said.

Kissa YLH ke handle kaaa ...

We had an Urmila Matodkar in Mumbai who claimed to have got Anthrex letters... Perhaps all for some free publicity.

Now we have YLH, claiming that his handle has been hacked. (Hai mummy, yeh to joke baan gaya, kissi ne YLH ke handle ko hack kar diya ..)

YLH, goot attempt.

Reply # 31 slink

[ali, its possible to think the taliban are horrible and also think the present campaign is against basic human values.]

Thank you for asking. Dunno if my views amount to much but......

As a human being my heart goes out to the Afghans who have suffered because of the war. I also think that they have a better chance now of making it through this winter then they had under the Binladin/Mullah Omar leadership. The world too realizes the dangers that a failed state, specially a failed muslim state, poses to world peace and will hopefully do everything possible to ensure that Afghanistan does not revert to its blackhole status of the past 10+ years. That alone gives me hope for the future of Afghan people.

As a Pakistani (and American) nationalist, I feel that this is a just campaign. Remember the mullah on CNN, ``pehle um pakistan ko tabah karega, phir amreeka ko tabah karega``. Self preservation is a very basic human ``value`` and Pakistan, America and all other nation states have every right to defend themselves from the Islamists who do not believe in nation states at all. Even if we go by the Taliban figures of 2000 civilians killed in US bombing, it shows to me that the US has done a fair job of avoiding civilian casualties.

As a muslim, I believe that Bin Laden and Omar threatened the stability of all muslim states, specially Pakistan. They were a bigger threat to muslim causes than Sharon and Advani and if it takes this campaign to get rid of them then be it.

Muslims today can choose b/w the path of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and that of the retrogessive muulanas gangohi and thanvi, and I choose Sir Syed. I hope that muslims will make as good a choice as they did in 1857.

re Layman # 22

I personally abhor the war thats going on in afghanistan so yes i would have supported Musharraf. And by now we can all see that the war, an endeavor to please the american public, was a bad idea............ after one month ....osama is still at large while innocent lives are being lost each day.

United States is an extremely resourceful country. If it could buy arms from the soviets for afghans DURING the soviet afghan war it could have just as easily bought the loyalties of the taliban and captured osama without this bloody battle.

I have no sympathy for the taliban but if the US was ready to talk to illegitimate regimes of pakistan and saudia then she should have also considered negotiating with the taliban.

At this point one can only hope that future has some good in store for the people of Afghanistan.

re scout # 16

you mean you don`t do that ???????????

an image of a shortish fairish woman with a very no nonsense expression on her face appears in my mind when i read your nick .......

ali1,

nobody here likes the war. and very few people here like the taliban. on the indus news network the other day (the network for which the company i work for is currently producing documentaries and reports about the afghan crisis from the pakistani perspective) journalist mujahid barailvi was interviewing the second in command of the jui, among the things he asked him was whether the jui thought the interests of the pakistani people were subservient to the interests of the taliban, he had no answer. he also asked him whether the jui would like to see the same version of `islam` the taliban created in afghanistan to be imposed on pakistan. he had no answer to that either.
my heart goes out to the afghan people too, the thing is if my heart keeps going out to people there wont be anything left in my chest cavity for daily use :) among the themes that kept popping up in the footage manduck has gathered from refugee camps is that the common afghan (who is neither a solider or a guide) makes no distinction between the russians and the taliban or the northern alliance, in the words of one particularly articulate refugee `they have all helped hammer nails into our coffins.`
so yeah, they have all contributed to the state of things, and so have we, and so has india, and so has the us, and so have a lot of other parties. and hence my problem with certain segments of the media painting the northern alliance in the color of saviors. there is an excellent article on the unhcr webiste about the current humanitarian crisis and how its been building up for a couple of years now.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55681-2001Nov19.html

ALI1:

In all seriousness, do you think the mutineers of 1857 made a good choice? They put back on the throne a aged Mughal king who was essentially powerless. The nobles, both Hindu and Muslim, who revolted under the banner of the mutiny were essentially backward looking people who were looking at a continuation of the old system. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan`s vision, IMO, was diametrically opposite. How do you reconcile the two?

P.S: Regardless of previous interacts, I am looking for serious input. If u can provide it, great, otherwise, we can revert back to the norm.