Forum of publication not known
INDIA MUST APOLOGISE TO THE MUJAHIDEEN
By
M.L. Sondhi
The Firmest Bond
India's Afghanistan policy under the Congress regime
throughout the decade of the 1980's has been exposed as a
futile exercise in duplicity, paranoia and timidity.
Afghanistan is embroiled in a terrible civil war, and India
is not only marginalised as a player in the Central Asian
arena but has proven herself incompetent to take care of the
interests of the Hindu and Sikh citizens of Afghanistan, who
are now fleeing that country.
Till the end of the 1970s India and Afghanistan enjoyed the
most friendly and cordial of relationships, stretching back
to the days of King Amanullah's support to the Indian
national movement. But Indian support to Soviet
interventionism in Afghanistan turned the affection of the
Afghan population into hatred for India, and this calculated
risk on the part of our decision makers could only have been
the result of a colossal mistake in judgement, that
superpowers can invincibly grind local nationalisms into
dust.
One can only presume that the Indian foreign intelligence
branch went to town, having developed by this time a
self-justifying institutional rationality coupled with all
the irresponsibility that goes with unaccountable power.
The assault on the Hindu and Sikh Afghans under the
Mujahideen regime is directly the result of another
avoidable mistake of the part of the then Indian ambassador
in Kabul, who began, for the first time in history, to use
the Hindus and Sikhs in the Indian fight for the Puppet
regime. Not a military, but a political fight. These poor
misled non-Muslim Afghan citizens are now paying the price
for a policy on which adequate warning was given to the
Indian powers-that-be by Afghan refugee well-wishers in New
Delhi.
Except for a few notable exceptions in the foreign policy
and external intelligence communities, most decision-makers
continue to brandish the spectre of fundamentalism to impede
a thorough investigation into the weaknesses and distortions
of India's Afghan fixations.
Any discussion of India's links with the new Afghanistan
must take into account our close relations with the Pashtuns
who have always been opinion leaders in Afghanistan. If we
had not allowed the Soviets to dictate their agenda to us,
the Pashtuns on both sides of the Durand Line would have
continued to maintain a symbiotic relationship with New
Delhi. An open and unqualified apology to the people of
Afghanistan even at this stage will produce a shift towards
more mature views about India among the Pashtuns. A sensible
way for promoting peace in Afghanistan would require that
India favour a more stable equilibrium between the various
factions seeking to control Kabul. We should stop the
behind-the-scenes jockeying with the Tajik-Uzbek combine
Massoud and Dostum against Hekmatyar's Hezb-e-Islami. As of
today there are no signs that the Pashtuns will forgive
India for its pro-Soviet initiatives, but there are
ambiguous tendencies following Islamabad's 'betrayal' of the
Pashtuns dominated Hezb-e-Islami and India should focus on
policies which can accommodate ongoing developments towards
a new order of Pashtun unity which may surface as the
political landscape changes.
India policy-makers would do well to bear in mind three
aspects of the situation in Afghanistan for a constructive
role by which its credibility as a reliable actor can be
restored. The first is that it is absurd to consider the
solution to the aggressive forms of ethnic violence in terms
of the exclusion of the Pashto speaking people and in the
name of moderation, unity and stability to entrench in power
minorities like Tajiks and Uzbeks. In the eyes of his
countrymen, Hekmatyar is not only a fundamentalist; he is
above all a Pashtun.
The second aspect is that the transition of the Presidency
from Sibghtullah Mujaddidi to Burhanuddin Rabbani has not
facilitated the progress towards national reconciliation.
Specifically some of the most important actors like Pir
Sayed Ahmed Shah Gallani and Younus Khalis have not backed
the new Government. India needs to engender a feeling of
partnership among all groups Pashtun and non-Pashtun and
among both Shia and Sunni. Their representatives are located
in New Delhi among the Afghan-community-in-exile who have
considerably more influence than is recognized by South
Block.
The third aspect is that Afghanistan is more important in
terms of the changes underway in Asia from India's point of
view…. that the former soviet Central Asian Republics of
Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and
Turkmenistan where New Delhi is applying its maximum
diplomatic energy. There are persons who are espousing the
notion of the partition of Afghanistan between Pashtuns,
Tajiks, Uzbeks and pro-Iranian Shias. Such a development
would be wrong and unjust and against India's security
interests.
A major component of India's new strategy should be to work
in a dedicated manner for a Loya Jirga under the auspices of
the U.N. Prime Minister Rao should initiate a process of
compromise and conciliation with all the major Afghan
groups. The new policy cannot however be developed without a
frank acknowledgement that the old strategy was a Himalayan
blunder. |