Afghanistan Opinion: It's Victory Day But Afghans Are Still Voiceless Decades Later (Mull)

Josh Mull, the Afghanistan Blogging Fellow for The Seminal and Brave New Foundation. also writes for Rethink Afghanistan:

Happy Mujahideen Victory Day! This is the national holiday when Afghans celebrate their victory over the communists in the 1980's. We remember the Mujahideen of course, they're the folks to whom we gave all that CIA training and Stinger missiles so they could kill Soviets. We all at least saw the film version of Charlie Wilson's War, right?

Afghanistan: How Many Soldiers Does it Take to Screw in a Light Bulb? (Mull)

The basic historical narrative is that the Soviet superpower bad guys  (who incidentally invaded in the name of democracy and development) are defeated by the heroic good-guyAmericans, who saved the hapless, incoherent hillbillies, the Afghans, by giving them lots of weapons. Yay for freedom fighters!


The danger, our story warns, is that we abandoned Afghanistan after Mujahideen Victory Day, causing America to become the victims. Blowback! Poor, foolish America should have interfered more with Afghanistan I suppose. But we're ignoring the Afghan version of history and completely missing the point of Mujahideen Victory Day.


Let's take a look at their celebration, via Pajhwok Afghan News [subscription]:

[Deputy President Qasim Fahim] urged Afghan citizens to join together to find a solution to the problems faced by the country.

He said there were some people, both inside and outside the country, who were trying to destabilise Afghanistan.

A strong army, a vigilant fight against corruption and smuggling and respect for good government and the rule of law were some ways in which Afghanistan could retain its strength. Corruption, he said, was the fifth pillar of terrorism.

Fahim delivered a warning to unnamed countries who he said were meddling in Afghanistan's affairs, saying they would find themselves mired in similar problems if they did not leave.

Oh yeah, he's got our number all right. We are definitely "meddling," which is a nice way of saying occupation. And boy are we ever having similar problems! Indeed our meddling mires us in corruption, what with the billions lost to waste, fraud, and abuse by war profiteers. And rule of law is sure out the window since the President can now lock you up forever because he calls you a terrorist or just assassinate you. But notice that the Afghans don't think of the holiday as a time to pine for American intervention: Mujahideen Victory Day is about throwing off any foreign occupation, be it Soviet or American.

And the dirty secret here is that nobody abandoned Afghanistan. We like to take Afghanistan's decades of war and blame it on the Afghans being xenophobic, or "tribal," or some other backhanded way of saying they're all backwards idiots. If only they would just let us manipulate them, they'd have peace. But the history of Afghanistan's "war-torn" decades is a history of nothing but foreign meddling. Take a look at these snippets from the Washington Post:

Already, efforts to jockey for future control of Afghanistan have been seen among Pakistan, India, Iran and even Russia. [...]

Karzai and most Afghans fear that if Washington waits too long to decide about talking to the Taliban, control will fall to the ISI as happened in the 1980s and 1990s -- when Washington abandoned Afghanistan to Russia and Pakistan but the ISI played favorites and was unable to end the civil war among Afghan factions.[...]

Pakistan's maneuvers have prompted India to try reactivating its 1990s alliance with Iran, Russia and Central Asia, which supported the former Northern Alliance in a civil war against the Pakistan-backed Taliban regime.

See all the meddling? Iran, India, Pakistan, Russia, all of "Central Asia" apparently, plus all of our meddling. Everybody had a hand in it. And check out that bias: "ISI played favorites and was unable to end the civil war". Gee whiz, I wonder why they were "unable" to end it when, a few sentences later, we see that a lot of other folks seemed to have been around as well.

Afghans don't need more of us, they need more of themselves. Everyone but Afghans has a say in their affairs. Remember the outrage over President Hamid Karzai appointing Afghans (scandalous!) instead of foreigners to the election commission? Guess how many foreigners regulate the elections in Montana? Zero.

Now, don't misconstrue this as a defense of Karzai's fraud, it's simply illustrative of our rejection of Afghans at every step of the process. We whine about abandoning the women of Afghanistan, instead of letting them do it themselves. We complain that Afghan electricity isn't sufficiently dependent on our puppet in Kabul, instead of helping them develop their own energy capacity. And rather than allow Afghans to develop their own security, we support child molesters and drug addicts who ravage the population.

Just take a look at this movie showing in Afghanistan, keeping in mind that this is only one anecdote, from an American no less:

Last weekend, at the university where I teach, the new documentary film Addicted in Afghanistan by director Jawed Taiman, a British-Afghan, was shown. At point, one of the young boys in the family of opium and heroin addicts the film follows shouts to the camera that his addiction was produced by the U.S.-led occupation. The overwhelmingly student audience erupted into applause. I later heard that some shocked faculty members walked out in disgust with students. One, an American, reportedly said the incident has her reconsidering whether she will return after this semester.

I was stunned that my colleagues were surprised. Our students are not going to speak up in a well-lit classroom in an “American university” and tell their instructor what they honestly think about the United States. Some of the older students lived under Taliban rule. All of the students were directly impacted by the chaos of civil war and the latest bloody foreign occupation. Every Afghan understands that what you say in public can earn your execution.

But in the anonymity of a darkened gymnasium, with abundant peer support, they can exercise their frustration, disappointment, anger or disgust in a collective manner that affords both plausible deniability and little likelihood of reprisals. Popular resistance always finds, or creates, opportunities to express itself.

That's how battered and beat down by foreign interference they are. They can only express themselves anonymously in the dark. They're completely voiceless in the fate of their own country. Then there's that Pajhwok article I noted. They have to hide their exclusively Afghan voices behind loads of ads and a paywall just to keep the lights on.

But there's good news here. You are not behind a paywall, your voice is not confined to the darkness. Listen to what Representative James McGovern said on a recent conference call about Afghanistan:

I have to tell you as a former staffer and as a member of Congress-- pressure works, grassroots pressure works. It really makes a difference here," he said. "And when many people do it it's a movement. And what we need to create here in a very short period of time is a movement to try to change course on Afghanistan.

I was on that call, and I can tell you he very strongly emphasized that point over and over again. Pressure works. Calling your member of congress works. Writing your member of Congress works. Hell, even shutting down their office works. They have to listen to you, they desperately need you to tell them what to do. Unlike the Afghans, your voice still counts for a lot, and you can demand that the US stop interfering in Afghanistan, primarily by ending our bloody and expensive military occupation. Tell them the Afghans need to solve their own problems, they don't need us there manipulating them.

It's super easy, too. Take Peace Action West, for example. They've got a form all ready for you to tell congress to end the war, you just have to fill out your personal details. Click "send" and, poof, it goes straight to your specific members of congress. There are dozens more organizations out there just like that one, too. And of course it's always effective to just straight up call them at their office and speak your mind. And you won't be alone in doing this. Contact your representative, then join us on Rethink Afghanistan’s Facebook page and collaborate with the tens of thousands of others around the country working to bring this war to an end.

Middle East Analysis: Cairo's Nuclear Move, Syria's Reaction

At last week's Obama-led summit on nuclear security, amidst speculation that many Arab and Muslim states would launch an ambush upon Israel's nuclear weapons, the deputy prime minister Dan Meridor summed up the conference: "Thus far, there has been no ambush."

On the same day, President Obama called on Israel to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty as he called on other states, such as India, North Korea, and Pakistan, to join:

Israel Document: Strategic Affairs Minister on “Existential Struggle” and No Concessions

Whether we're talking about Israel or any other country, we think that becoming part of the NPT is important. And that, by the way, is not a new position. That's been a consistent position of the United States government, even prior to my administration.

Haaretz subsequently quoted Western envoys reporting that Israel may come under new pressure next month at a UN meeting on atomic weapons, with the US, Britain and France considering support for Egypt's call for a zone in the Middle East free of nuclear arms. In a working paper that reportedly Egypt submitted to fellow treaty members, Cairo said the conference should formally express regret that "no progress has taken place on the implementation of the (1995) resolution" that backed the idea of "a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons as well as other weapons of mass destruction" and should call for an international treaty conference by 2011.

Although Israel's UN mission had no official comment on the Egyptian proposal, an Israeli diplomat told Reuters the Jewish state will be ready to discuss issues such as a nuclear-weapon-free zone once there is peace in the Middle East. One Western official said:

They [the Israelis] have an interest here. If the Arabs get something they want on Israel, they'll be more supportive on Iran's nuclear program and further sanctions. Israel would benefit from that.

So for Egypt, the nuclear move is a "win-win" situation. It can increase its stock through giving the image of "driving Israel to the corner" and by leading an international gathering through which new and stronger pressure can be put on Tehran.

However, to establish this leading role in the Arab world, Cairo needs the support of a very significant country:  Syria, which is the "closest" ally of Iran and the greatest conventionally-armed "threat" to Israel. With Saudi Arabia breaking the ice with Damascus, Syrian President Bashar Assad was due Tuesday night to land in Egypt.

What is Syria seeking from this "alliance"? Damascus would gain from Egyptian support to counter Israel's allegations that Syria transferred Scud missiles to Lebanon's Hezbollah. Secondly, Cairo, in its "big brother" role mediating Palestinian affairs, could increase Syria's influence in the Gaza Strip.

The New US Nuclear Policy in 3 Bullet Points

Your easy-to-read version of the 49-page Nuclear Posture Review, released yesterday by the Obama Administration:

1. If you're not in the Nuclear Club --- Tehran, Pyongyang, we're looking at you --- don't even think about it. Shove off. Don't make us angry.

Still thinking about it? Don't.

2. If you're in the Nuclear Club --- Moscow, Beijing, how ya doin'? --- great to work with you to keep others out. Cold War? What Cold War?

3. Israel? Who is this Israel? (Repeat for Pakistan and India.)

Obama Document: The New US Stance on Nuclear Weapons

The Latest from Iran (2 April): Slipping By

1420 GMT: Obama Talks the Tough Talk. Continuing the public approach of a push for international sanctions, President Obama has told a US television network, "I have said before that we don't take any options off the table, and we're going to continue to ratchet up the pressure and examine how they respond. But we're going to do so with a unified international community -- that puts us in a much stronger position."

NEW Iran: The Clerical Challenge Continues (Shahryar)
NEW The Great Nuclear Race: Google v. Iran (Arrington)
The Latest from Iran (1 April): Out Like a Lamb?

At the same time, note how Obama carefully distinguishes himself from the line of other Washington talking heads demanding action because Iran is on the verge of military nuclear capability:

All the evidence indicates that the Iranians are trying to develop the capacity to develop nuclear weapons (emphasis added). They might decide that, once they have that capacity that they'd hold off right at the edge -- in order not to incur -- more sanctions.

But, if they've got nuclear weapons-building capacity -- and they are flouting international resolutions, that creates huge destabilizing effects in the region and will trigger an arms race in the Middle East that is bad for US national security but is also bad for the entire world.

1400 GMT: Your Friday Prayer Summary. Ayatollah Mohammad Emami Kashani giving it his best, even though a lot of folks on 13 Bedar are more concerned with a day out with the family. He's going with "Iran has a special place in the Islamic family of nations" and "we are not seeking nuclear weapons but the malicious propaganda of Iran's enemies will occur all the way through this process".

1115 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Rah-e-Sabz claims that families of human rights activists in detention are being constantly harassed by security forces.

The website also reports that film director Jafar Panahi is enduring "dire conditions" in Evin Prison and his lawyer is being denied access to his file.

1105 GMT: Now Let's See What China Says (and Does). Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, has struck his pose after discussions with the Chinese, saying that Iran and China "agreed that tools such as sanctions have lost their effectiveness".

Jalili wasn't so certain, however, that Beijing would put out that same line --- "It's up to China to answer that" --- and the Chinese response so far is limited to a call for "flexibility" in dealing with Iran.

1100 GMT: We've posted a new analysis from Josh Shahryar, "The Clerical Challenge Continues".

1015 GMT: Economy Watch. RAHANA claims, "Workers at the Ahvaz Pipe Factory have not received their wages for over a year. Additionally, upon returning to work after the Nowrooz holidays, close to 300 of them were handed their pink slips."

1000 GMT: India, Iran, and Economy Watch. Conflicting news on India's approach to Tehran: Green Voice of Freedom is claiming confirmation of earlier reports that India's Reliance Industries will not renew a contract to import crude oil from Iran.

Juan Cole, however, writes:

New Delhi just yesterday broached reviving a plan to bring natural gas from Iran through Pakistan and thence to India. The $8 billion plan has been in limbo for two or three years. First, the US pressured the Asian Development Bank not to underwrite the project, raising the question of where the $8 bn. will come from. Then, there were ethnic disturbances by Baluch tribesmen in the area through which the pipeline would run, raising questions about how secure it would be (a question you would want answered before sinking $8 bn. into it) Finally, Iran asked for an unrealistically high price for the natural gas.

But [now] Pakistan is pledging to ensure security for the pipeline.

0830 GMT: Controlling the Students. The Committee of Human Rights Reporters passes on the news that five members of the Council to Defend the Right to Education, formed by "starred" (monitored) and banned university students in 2007, remain in prison, some of them facing long sentences.

The Council's latest statement asserts, “We testify before the Iranian people that our friends have done nothing but demand for their rights; all the allegations against them are baseless. The accusations are revenge the enemies of freedom are taking against starred students."

The five are Zia Nabavi, detained on 15 June and sentenced to 15 years and 74 lashes; Majid Dorri, arrested on 9 July and sentenced to 11 years; Mahdieh Golroo and Shiva Nazar Ahari, imprisoned in December; and Payman Aref, detained in June and sent back to prison in March, serving one year and taking 74 lashes.

0745 GMT: The Iran-China Talks. More indications that Beijing is maintaining a cautious position on Iran's nuclear programme (see 0520 GMT). Khabar Online notes the discussions with Iran's top nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili but also considers Chinese moves towards the US-led "5+1" position on sanctions.

0540 GMT: Slipping By? An EA reader has noted that the Facebook page supporting Mir Hossein Mousavi has linked the anniversary of the Republic to a call for a public voice today, via a video and Ayatollah Khomeini's statement on 1 February 1979:

Everyone is entitled to choose his or her destiny. How can our ancestors be the deciders for us? How can those who were around 80 to 100 years ago determine the destiny of a nation that would be born in future? This is a nation that its destiny should be determined by itself and at this time is saying that we do not want this king.

0520 GMT: Yesterday was the 31st anniversary of the establishment of the Islamic Republic, confirmed by a public vote in which 98.2 percent supported the Republic and a new Constitution. The day slipped by, however, with little fanfare: no prominent Government statements, no opposition demonstrations, indeed little of note on the domestic front.

Indeed, much of the chatter looked forward to today, Sizdah Bedar, the 13th day of the New Year and the last day of Nowruz celebrations. It literally translates as "get out [outside] of the 13th", referring to the invocation to be outside with family enjoying nature. Pedestrian has a humourous look, with mixed memories, at the occasion.

The only tribute we picked up to the Republic's formation was an indirect one: 31 years after the public issued its verdict on its system of rule, Ayatollah Mousavi Tabrizi asserted that Ayatollah Khomeini, were he still alive, would support another referendum on the Islamic leadership, including velayat-e-faqih (ultimate clerical authority).

Away from the lack of ceremony yesterday, Baha'i and women's rights activist Dorsa Sobhani has been released from solitary confinement. Sobhani was arrested on 7 March after the family home was raided five days earlier.

On the international front, Barack Obama has tried to counter the trip of Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, to Beijing with a call to Chinese leader Hu Jintao. Obama said, according to the White House, that Hu's attendance at a summit on nuclear security Washington later this month would be an "important opportunity for them to address their shared interest in stopping nuclear proliferation and protecting against nuclear terrorism".

We're still looking for any sign of an outcome from the Jalili trip. It is the lead story for the Islamic Republic News Agency, but the lengthy article has little more than the superficial public statements: Jalili with "Iran's approach is that people benefit from peaceful nuclear energy" and the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs declaring that the relationship between the two countries is very important.