LINK BETWEEN KASHMIR & AFGHANISTAN
BY ASAD SUFI
When the Soviet forces entered Afghanistan in 1979 on the
invitation of the ‘Communist Government’ of Afghanistan, could any one even
remotely imagine that that the Soviet intervention would end in its defeat and
the dismemberment of the Soviet Empire? I remember the time and the terror it
struck in the military rulers of Pakistan, which had lived with the situation
of being the meat in the sandwich between India and Afghanistan – both
strategic partners of USSR. Afghanistan had been considered to be country in
the Soviet area of influence; entry into which did not attract NATO
intervention. Pakistan had a few friends inside Afghanistan who were opposed to
Communist rule but they were outnumbered by Soviet friends by a large margin.
Much to the astonishment of the world, resistance to Soviet intervention
started almost immediately. Pakistan was ruled by a military dictator General
Zia ul Haq who was unpopular having executed popular Prime Minister Zulfikar
Ali Bhutto. The decision by Pakistan to support the resistance came fast and
was sure footed. The Americans, who wanted the Soviet Union having its
own Viet Nam, could not believe that the largest and one of the best equipped
armed forces of a super power could be hurt seriously let alone defeated. But
the unthinkable happened; the super power was defeated in
Afghanistan.
The combination that delivered victory to the Mujahedeen
entailed the USA providing some money, some weapons, and unequivocal diplomatic
support; Saudi Arabia and several other Arab countries providing most of the
money and weapons. But there were two other factors which were crucial to
victory. The first was the revival of Jihad. According to almost every view of
‘Sharia’, Jihad is ‘war declared by the ruler of an Islamic State’. Since even
the Ottoman Caliphate was not universally recognised as a proper Islamic State,
the institution of Jihad had effectively withered away. It was a Palestinian
scholar, Sheikh Abdullah Azzam, who revived the institution of Jihad by
articulating a post imperial view of Jihad. He said that Jihad does not draw its
legitimacy from the “person” who declares it but from the “purpose” for which
it is declared. If the objective and methods are in accord with the Quran
and Sunnah, it is legitimate; if not, it is illegitimate. Fighting foreign
troops occupying the land of Muslims is a legitimate objective for which Jihad
is legitimate. It is the duty of every Muslim to do his bit to promote or
participate in it. A country that is Darussalam (where Muslims
enjoy political as well as cultural sovereignty) has a duty to help as a state;
the Muslim citizens of state that is Dar-al Aman (where
Muslims do not enjoy political sovereignty but are free to practise their
faith) can become volunteers or contributors; Muslim citizens of Dar-al-
Harb are to act in accordance with laws of their state, participating
and contributing to the extent it is lawful. The fatwa of
Sheikh Abdullah Azzam drew fighters from all over the world to Afghanistan.
The second unique feature of the resistance in Afghanistan was
the role of Pakistan. As a country the polity (principle of national
solidarity) of which is Islam, it is definitely a Darussalam. Its
government, which was led by a General Zia al Haq, and its people were in
agreement and considered the resistance in Afghanistan as ‘jihad’. Many were
ecstatic at the prospect of participating in jihad after almost three centuries
of hibernation. Pakistan also has large professional armed forces a very big
segment of which is trained in ‘special operations’. Astride the Pak-Afghan
frontier the language spoken is Pashtu and it was easy for Pakistan not only to
impart training but also to innovate in order to fight in harsh environment
devoid of modern logistic support. Over time, Pakistan developed its own
tactics for ‘asymmetrical war’, which have since been further developed by the
Taliban during resistance to American occupation.
The link between Kashmir and Afghanistan developed in the minds
of the fighters in Afghanistan most of who are more anguished by the suffering
of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. They thought if they could defeat the
Soviet Union, why could they not defeat India? But things turned sour very
quickly. When the Soviet Union withdrew its troops, Sheikh Abdullah Azzam
declared that Jihad in Afghanistan had come to an end. He ordered all foreign
fighters to go back to their countries. Most of them returned but some stayed
on to participate in Jihad in Kashmir which started in 1989 and is still
continuing. Some Arab fighters had been engaged in efforts to overthrow
governments in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Algeria etc before they came to
Afghanistan. They could not go back to their countries which had marked them as
rebels. This group has its roots in “Al takfir val Hijra” of Egypt whose
members are referred to as “takfiri”. They declare a ruler, a people, and
public servants that serve them, as kaafir (infidels) if they
do not conform to their (Takfiri) view of sharia. The
fatwa to declare the end of Jihad in Afghanistan incensed the Takfiri so much
that they murdered Sheikh Abdullah Azzam on the footsteps of a mosque in
Peshawar.
The members of the main takfiri group, generally known as
Al-Qaeda have either been killed or have left Afghanistan to go to the Middle
East or Africa. But like in Egypt where the Takfiri morphed into Ikhwan
al Muslimeen Movement, the takfiri have morphed and regrouped into
several different Islamist-Jihadist groups. Some like the Tehrik i Taliban
Pakistan (TTP) are anti-state in the classical Takfiri tradition, most others
accept the discipline of the state. The Takfiri succeeded in establishing their
control over Waziristan and Swat and other parts of the tribal belt known as
FATA. The Pakistan Army continues to engage in battle with them in order to establish
the writ of the government. The TTP dream to establish a safe haven inside
Pakistan has been frustrated. But as NATO prepares to withdraw from
Afghanistan, they are in the process of revising their objectives and strategy.
At the moment, their objective appears to be restricted to ensuring that
NATO forces exit without a comprehensive international agreement. That would
surely lead to a civil war after NATO troops leave. Ironically, the US
objective to maintain a military presence in Afghanistan after 2014 deadline
for complete withdrawal would also perpetuate a civil war. The Afghan
mainstream has learnt little from their own experience or from the three
centuries when Jihad remained suspended.
History of Afghanistan
The territory of Afghanistan has been a part of every Muslim
Empire in South Asia with capital in Delhi. Afghanistan as well as Kashmir were
an integral part of the Moghul Empire as well as the Sultanate it replaced. The
British gradually took over much of the Moghul Empire as it disintegrated and
Russia took over the Khanates of Central Asia as the Khwarizmi Empire
disintegrated. Britain and Russia were the rising super powers of the era and
the area and conflict between them was inevitable. After a prolonged conflict
often referred to as the ‘great game’ Imperial Russia and the British in India
decided to leave Afghanistan alone as a weak buffer state. However, the
Afghans, who had inherited the mantle of the Mughal Empire performed their role
with alacrity and wisdom under the leadership of Ahmad Shah Abdali.
Ahmad Shāh
Durrānī (1722 – 1772) also known as Ahmad Khān Abdālī founded the Durrani
Empire in 1747. Pakistan,
Kashmir and Afghanistan of today were a part of Durrani Empire. Ahmad Shah started his military career as a soldier in the
military of the Afsharid Kingdom of Iran and quickly rose to become a commander
of four thousand Abdali Pashtun soldiers. After the Nader Shah Afshar, who was
assassinated by his own guards in 1747, Ahmad Shah Abdali became the Emir of
Khorasan. Rallying his Pashtun tribes and allies, he pushed east towards the
Mughal and the Maratha Empire of India, west towards the disintegrating
Afsharid Empire of Persia, and north toward the Khanate of Bukhara. Within a
few years, he extended Afghan control from Khorasan in the west to Kashmir and
North India in the east, and from the Amu Darya in the north to the Arabian Sea
in the south. (His mausoleum is located at Kandahar adjacent to the Shrine of
the Cloak of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in the center of the city. The Afghans
often refer to him as Ahmad Shāh Bābā.)
The Mughal
power in northern India had been declining since the reign of Aurangzeb, who
died in 1707. In 1751–52, a treaty was signed between the Marathas and Mughals.
By this treaty the Marathas controlled virtually the whole of India from their
capital at Pune and Mughal rule was restricted only to Delhi. Marathas wanted
to expand their area of control towards the Northwest of India. Ahmad Shah had
entered Delhi but withdrew as it was still the capital of the Mughal Empire he
aspired to restore. To counter the Afghans, Maratha Peshwa Balaji
Bajirao sent his General Raghunathrao who succeeded
in defeating Timur Shah, the son Ahmad Shah, who was the Governor,
and brought Lahore, Multan, Kashmir and other provinces on the Indian side of
Attock under Maratha rule. Thus, upon his return to Kandahar in 1757, amidst
appeals from Muslim leaders like Shah Waliullah, Ahmad Shah chose to return to
India and confront the Maratha Confederacy.
He declared
a jihad against the Marathas, and warriors from various Pashtun tribes, as well
as other tribes such as the Baloch, Tajiks, and Muslims from South Asia
answered his call. Early skirmishes ended in the victory for the Afghans
against the smaller Maratha garrisons in northwest India. By 1759, Durrani and
his army had reached Lahore and were poised to confront the Marathas. By 1760,
the Maratha groups had coalesced into a big enough army under the command of
Sadashivrao Bhau. Once again, Panipat was the scene of a battle for control of
northern India. The Third battle of Panipat (January 1761), fought between
Muslim armies of Abdali and local Nawabs and largely Hindu Maratha army was
waged along a twelve-kilometer front, and resulted in a decisive victory for
Ahmad Shah Abdali. The Mughal Empire survived until 1857 as the British East
India Company – being a trading company - found it convenient to be seen as
supporting Emperor Bahadar Shah Zafar rather than being the overlord of many
princely states directly. The Mughal Emperor was formally deposed after the
‘Indian mutiny’ and Mughal Empire in India became a part of the British Empire
in 1857.
The Muslim population in the sub-continent suffered for 54 years
from 1707 when Emperor Aurangzeb died and the Third Battle of Panipat in 1761.
The main reason was Sikh militancy. The Sikhs eventually succeeded
in building an empire in the Punjab but it lasted only ten years after the
reign of its founder – Ranjit Singh (1799-1839). The Sikhs were a small
minority even in the Punjab; Muslims were in overwhelming majority. Even though
the Sikh faith was inspired by Islam and is a monotheistic faith, its early
history was dominated by war with Muslim (Mughal) rulers. The Sikhs remained a
power as long as they were a guerilla force; they did not possess the elements
to set up a state let alone an empire.
It appears that the Taliban power is similar to that of
erstwhile Sikh power. The Afghans have defeated every occupation force but have
failed to set up a proper state after the disintegration of Durrani Empire.
They needed the state of Pakistan to build a great and glorious state. The
successors of Ahmed Shah Abdali knew that but they expressed their ‘need’ in
imperial terms. An eminent Pashtun journalist, Abidullah Jan wrote: “The Union of Pakistan
and Afghanistan is the policy of neither but the destiny of both.” But all Afghan
governments had been refusing to recognize the Durand Line and claimed Pashtun
and Baluch populated areas of Pakistan. That was until the rise of the Taliban
under the leadership of Mullah Omar, who sought the union of Pakistan and
Afghanistan. The highly vocal liberal-secular minority in Pakistan opposes the
‘union’ and underlines that ‘Talibanisation’ is the principal threat to
Pakistan. The Taliban have failed because instead of emphasizing their
objective of ‘union’ they have put more emphasis on their view of ‘Sharia’
which is unacceptable to the majority in Afghanistan as well as Pakistan. If a
case for a ‘union’ was built on the common faith, shared pride in the same
history, and geographic in-separatebility, it would popular credible and
acceptable.
However, what the monarchs were unable to appreciate was
understood by rustic Taliban (children of martyrs ho had attended madrassas -
religious schools- in Pakistan). They understood that the people of Pakistan,
Kashmir and Afghanistan are ONE nation and wanted it to become one country. It
was the Government of Pakistan which hesitated as it thought their religious
zeal to be excessive. But that religious zeal made them attractive to the
takfiri cultists. With the advantage of hindsight it can be said that Pakistan
could and should have prevented Afghanistan falling into the takfiri. After
fighting for three decades and defeating two super powers, the Afghans are no
closer to setting a viable state. They must realize that one can do a lot of
things with bayonets but one cannot sit on them. The victors in Afghanistan
could either set up a state that depends on foreign charity in perpetuity or
set up a union (starting with customs union) with Pakistan.
The union of Pakistan and Afghanistan, and the liberation of
Jammu and Kashmir is their common objective. Ahmed Shah Abdali could not have
built his empire, respond to the call from Shah Waliullah, and defeat the
Marathas at Panipat without a secure base in the Punjab. Kashmir was a part of
Durrani Empire and Afghans have as much responsibility for liberating it as the
people of Pakistan. The Durand Line is no more than a administrative boundary;
it has ceased to be an international border. Successful resistance to
occupation by the Soviet Union and later the USA would not have been possible
without the two nations acting as one. It would probably be a long while before
they become one country. But the time table can be speeded up by the two
nations acting in unison without waiting for the countries becoming a
union.++
No comments:
Post a Comment