Omaid Weekly - Back Issues
[ Home ]
[ English Section ] [ Feedback ]
[
Subscribe ] [ Books
on Sale ] [ Directory ]
[
Current Issue ] [ Back Issues ]
[ In
the Press ]
Published in issues #511 on 4 February 2002, #512 on 11
February 2002, and #513 on 18 February 2002*
Would David Ben-Gurion
have embraced Hitler?
Based on the Editorial column published in the Dari-Persian
section of issue #512.
Editorial (Issue #513)
Such a question would probably insult the very core of a Jew or
an Israeli, whether asked today or fifty years ago. Then why should
we -- or dare we -- ask an analogous question from an Afghan?
Afghans are no less human, no less worthy of dignity and pride as
Jews or any other people or nations. This is precisely the reason
why Chairman Hamid Karzai's recent visit to Pakistan -- Nazi Germany
to an Afghan -- and his seemingly warm embrace of dictator Pervez
Musharraf -- Hitler to an Afghan -- is utterly unnerving, unwise,
and simply outrageous.
Some Jews -- or at least those not familiar with Afghanistan's
recent history -- reading the paragraph above may disapprove of what
is written. They may find it unacceptable to compare Nazi Germany to
Pakistan and Hitler to Musharraf. They may even find the analogy
offensive.
However, Pakistan's ten-year all-out assault on Afghanistan was
no less than genocide. It was a systematic and planned extermination
of a national group. To put it bluntly, Pakistan wanted to wipe out
Afghanistan and incorporate its remnants into a fifth province. The
innumerous instances of ethnic cleansing and scorched earth policy
-- to name only a few atrocities -- have all been documented. And
Pakistan's war on Afghanistan's rich and glorious culture,
traditions, and historic treasures -- the destruction of the
magnificent Buddha colossi by Pakistan and its Taliban henchmen
being a prime example -- was, indeed, cultural genocide. In fact,
Pakistan aimed to destroy the very character of Afghanistan -- from
its long-held mainstream and spiritual-oriented Muslim ideology to
its world-famous orchards, forests, and farmlands. The list goes on
and on.
But, just because there is not enough space to detail the list,
it does not mean that Afghanistan or its people are forgetful or so
forgiving. Let Israel forgive Nazi Germany, let Bosnia forgive
Serbia, and let the United States forgive Iran, Iraq, Libya, Cuba,
North Korea, and the "stateless" forces -- e.g. Al-Qaida
-- that currently hound its national integrity and security -- let
them and other nations forgive their own bitter enemies before you
expect the Afghans to forgive Pakistan for the bloodbath and
destruction it wrought in the plains, valleys, hills, and mountains
of Afghanistan.
The least, the very least, to be expected from Musharraf is an
apology for Pakistan's past transgressions against Afghanistan. Yet,
as in the past, where Musharraf -- and his predecessors -- have
sought to tear asunder Afghanistan's national unity and pit its
ethnic groups against each other, recruit and arm Arab terrorists to
loot and demolish Afghan cities and villages, rape its women, and
dehumanize its men, and at every turn verbally degrade and abuse the
pride and prestige of Afghanistan, Musharraf continues to harbor
former Taliban and their Arab terrorist allies. And Pakistan
continues to undermine and sabotage whatever attempt Afghanistan
makes to rise from the ashes. While outwardly complying with the
international anti-terrorist campaign and the rehabilitation of
Afghanistan, Pakistan continues to stir-up instability and strife in
Qandahar and Gardez.
Chairman Karzai should not have visited Pakistan at the call of
Musharraf. The extreme delicacy of this action -- which has severely
damaged the dignity and prestige of the heroic nation of Afghanistan
-- should have been evident or made clear to UN special
representative Lakhdar Brahimi. This point should have been
emphasized to Afghanistan's "well wishers" who may have
promoted this visit -- this critical point which is relevant to our
nation, to its particular nuances. They should have been advised to
keep their "helpful" recommendations to themselves. During
the past twenty years, Afghanistan's pride has suffered enough harm
from invasion and occupation, and by recently sacrificing its
greatest son, Ahmad Shah Masood (rahmatullah alaih -- God's
blessings upon him), the nation wants to regain the mercy and
affection of the Almighty -- not to suffer further degradation from
such foolish "advice."
If it was the international coalition against terrorism -- and at
its forefront, the United States or the United Kingdom -- or Lakhdar
Brahimi, or any other official or unofficial organ or person who
gave this "advice" -- perhaps utilizing a carrot-and-stick
approach toward aid and assistance -- they have wronged Afghanistan,
they have dishonored Afghanistan, they have done the work of an
enemy in the guise of a friend.
These friends, with their goodwill and good intentions in
rebuilding Afghanistan, should know, and know well, that this nation
-- like or, for that matter, unlike any other nation -- does not
forget any injustice against its land or its people. And any worry
or concern this trip may have posed for the Interim Administration,
it is and will remain a deep wound.
If the United States, the United Kingdom, or any other nation
were in the same position as Afghanistan -- to have suffered a near
fatal assault on its very existence -- then it can be said with all
certainty that they would be neither forgiving nor conciliatory
toward their aggressor. Were it not so, today we would see a Israel
accommodating a Palestinian state with a capital in Jerusalem, or
President George W. Bush giving a joint press conference with Saddam
Hussein in Baghdad. Nay. Instead, they would rather have their enemy
plead for forgiveness, repent for their devilry -- not salute them.
Throughout its history, Afghanistan has begotten mighty and noble
heroes that have never bowed to the enemy. And the foremost among
them was martyred just five months ago: Ahmad Shah Masood (ra), a
paragon of strength and dignity who struggled, and ultimately
succeeded, so that his nation would prostrate only to God, not to
its enemy -- whether it was the Soviet Union or Pakistan. Such was
Ahmad Shah Masood (ra) -- and such is his nation.
It is for us to preserve the legacy of Afghanistan's history of
fierce independence and triumph over enemies. We must do so even
against the "advice" of friends, whose unwise
recommendations should be rebuffed with courage and vigor. These
friends have come for the sake of their own interests -- as is
custom in world affairs -- and as such, they have no alternative but
to accept our pride, our terms. ><
David Ben-Gurion was Israel's first prime minister. This
editorial is not intended to express views on the Arab-Israeli
conflict, but rather it uses related issues as a point of analogy.
Top
Afghans question flawed
elections
Editorial (Issue #512)
In addition to publishing numerous articles and commentaries
from prominent Afghan analysts and intelligentsia on the matter,
Omaid Weekly has been inundated with reader's correspondences
highly disapproving of the recent so-called elections held in
various parts of the United States, especially in northern
Virginia. Most analysts, readers and the general Afghan community
are questioning and criticizing the purpose, method, and
organizers of these so-called elections. And there is also one
nagging question, where did it all start?
First, the organizers. Who are they? Who chose or authorized
them? Like all aspects of these so-called elections, the answer to
these questions are numerous and dissimilar.
Second, how was the method for the so-called elections decided?
What was the rush? Haste is never a good sign. Why were the
candidates not given adequate time to campaign?
In northern Virginia, for example, of the 50-plus candidates,
only a handful were known personalities in the community. And only
handful, if that, were given time to speak on a local, one-hour
Afghan television program on cable. Not surprisingly, the two
hosts of the television program -- which has a limited audience by
virtue of it being on cable and during a time when most Afghans
are having a family dinner -- were also candidates in the
so-called election. One of the hosts claimed to be an organizer,
as well.
The only other venue provided for the candidates to explain
their platform -- if they had one -- was during the actual
election, which in northern Virginia was held last Sunday. Each
candidate was given approximately 5 minutes to speak. On
instructions from what seemed to be the organizers, some voters
cast their ballots before the candidates began to speak. Florida's
presidential ballots would have been preferable to the ones given
to the voters since it at least had all of the candidate's names.
While voters were casting their ballot, the aforementioned
organizers were reading out names of those candidates who did not
appear on the ballot.
But, it seemed the voters were not a concern for the
organizers. While all major Afghan events in the Washington region
are held in northern Virginia locations easily accessible to the
vast majority of area Afghans, many voters stood for at least more
than an hour outside the World Bank building in Washington, DC in
the freezing cold. Perhaps they were the lucky ones, since they
were at least able to find parking, let alone find the World Bank
building. Some were under the false impression that the so-called
election was being sponsored by the World Bank. So, perhaps giving
the so-called elections a façade of legitimacy and an aura of
importance was higher on the list for organizers, rather than easy
access and transparency, which is usually a major priority in a
democratic process.
Then again, democracy may not have been the purpose of the
so-called elections. The purpose of the elections was never really
understood. When news items were published a few days later in
regional US media -- by, as usual, clueless reporters looking for
spin in place of fact -- it was revealed that the
"elected" were to lobby the US Congress and represent
area Afghans in Afghanistan's forthcoming Grand National Assembly
(or Loya Jirga).
Before the elections, it was said the so-called representatives
would serve only as stewards of Afghan interests in the United
States. As far as how long they would serve after being elected,
how dare such a question be asked? It has been said the so-called
representatives would themselves decide how long they would serve.
US Senators and Congressman who are ridiculed for giving
themselves regular pay raises -- during good and bad economic
times -- would probably be jealous of these so-called
representatives.
As to where the racket originated, that, too, is a mystery.
Even the Taliban's origins were clear. But, they are gone and no
longer relevant. The same fate awaited their supporters inside and
outside of Afghanistan.
Suffice it to say, these so-called elections -- in northern
Virginia and elsewhere -- do not seem to meet the approval of the
Afghan community in each of their respective locations. Afghans
here in the United States, and of course all Afghans -- whether
inside the country or abroad -- have been victims of one scheme or
another. They no longer have an appetite for victimization. And
they will not let anyone waste this chance for Afghanistan to
start anew. There are many opportunities and lots of money. Wait,
money isn't where this all started...is it? ><
Top
Purposeless elections
detriment to valuable international attention on Afghanistan and
legitimate efforts
Summarized translation from the original Dari-Persian text.
By Dr. Mohammad Haidar* (Issue #512)
In recent months, as Omaid Weekly readers are aware, there have
been various new and pointless undertakings in Afghan population
centers in the United States -- "elections" are being
held. Oddly, the slogan used to justify the elections is that
representatives must be chosen in order for them to legally
represent Afghan immigrants.
As far as the United State's Afghan community is concerned, I
will use this column to shed light on how best we can direct our
efforts so that it genuinely benefits Afghanistan and that real
needs are addressed. Neither Afghanistan nor Afghans inside and
outside of the country can afford wasted efforts on purposeless and
poorly reasoned actions, such as these elections that, in the end,
serve only to deter and diminish the current, valuable international
attention on Afghanistan and discourages legitimate endeavors by
Afghans and non-Afghans.
Ostensibly, the "candidates" -- once chosen in the
"election" -- will lobby the US Congress for Afghan
interests, help protect the rights of Afghans, and advise US
officials. As far as concerns these issues, we should be rest
assured since during recent months Afghanistan's fortunes have, God
willing, turned brighter. And thus far, the Interim Authority is
comprised of talented and active individuals who -- either in the
United States or elsewhere -- are already fulfilling these functions
-- capably, legitimately, and officially. We are all witnessing how
these members of the Interim Authority sincerely and superbly
perform their duties in manner unprecedented in Afghanistan's
diplomatic history.
In a word, Afghanistan has a skillful and active Foreign
Ministry. And, day by day, it grows stronger and more effective as
old and new diplomats are joining the corps. As such, it is
extremely inadvisable and cruelly unwise to conjure a parallel
representative body to create disorder and disunion, thereby
confusing and confounding international officials and organizations.
Consequently, at present, there is no beneficial purpose or
legitimate reason for these elections.
It is the personal right of anyone to lobby for their interests,
however, they need not be elected officials.
Aside from this self-styled election's innate illegitimacy and
uselessness, there are many other unresolved matters that only
further compound its imperspicuity. For example, there is no fixed
term for the elected candidates. It is common knowledge -- indeed,
it is common sense -- that representatives chosen in a legitimate
election, anywhere in the world and at any time, have a fixed term
in which they serve in their elected capacity. All that is common in
these elections is ambiguity and equivocalness.
Indeed, many voices are heard and answers given to even the
simplest question, such as regards the representative's duties. Some
of the candidates claim they have nominated themselves in order to
represent Afghan immigrants in the upcoming Loya Jirga [eds: Grand
National Assembly] in Kabul. Since the time when the Loya Jirga was
formed as a political entity by the late-Shah Amanullah,
participants were not an elected, rather they were appointed. And
the other two major Loya Jirgas -- the first during the premiership
of Sardar Mohammad Hashim, and the second during the premiership of
the Dr. Mohammad Yusuf -- during the monarchy of Mohammad Zaher, the
former King of Afghanistan, were also appointed bodies, not entirely
elected. It is very likely and highly probable that the upcoming
Loya Jirga will also be an appointed body, therefore we need not
confuse and mislead Afghans in the United States.
Let us suppose that these "elected representatives"
have lobbied the US Congress, and have also participated in the Loya
Jirga. Are we to assume that these "elected
representatives" would serve as our delegates in Afghanistan's
National Assembly? Moreover, the elusive organizers of these
"elections" have ordained that there will be 40 such
"elected representatives" from the four major Afghan
population centers in the United States. However, no one knows how
they arrived at this number. And if the relatively small Afghan
immigrant population here is allotted 40 representatives, then the
significantly larger Afghan immigrant populations in other countries
would require many hundreds of representatives. Anyhow, the logic
and logistics of such a scheme is, at best, unrealistic.
No matter, it is too early and inappropriate for anyone to
promote themselves as representatives or delegates. The more
judicious route is to wait for guidance from the Loya Jirga
organizing committee and any decisions by the central government on,
say, how many delegates should legally represent immigrant
populations or how they should be elected.
It is a critical time for Afghanistan. We failed to successfully
and effectively support the Islamic State government in the 1990s,
which even with its own shortcomings and constant sabotage and
extreme interference from the outside, would have been able to
redirect Afghanistan to a new beginning. Ethnic chauvinism and
outside aggression kindled the flames of war and allowed
Afghanistan's foreign enemies to plot its disintegration.
We cannot fail again. We must not repeat our past mistakes.
Afghanistan's very existence depends on the success of the current
process, which must be built on a legitimate rather than a
fraudulent foundation.
*Dr. Haidar, who earned his Ph.D. in political science in
France, was once president of Kabul University. A long-time
contributor to Omaid Weekly, Dr. Haidar is a leading political
authority and commentator on Afghanistan.
Top
Bigotry still a threat in the
new Afghanistan
Interim government must initiate UN-sponsored census
Editorial (Issue #511)
Given the sacrifices of Afghanistan against Pakistan and the
Taliban and its logical victory -- logical because a nation that has
a strong will for freedom and independence, with proper leadership,
is bound to succeed against foreign oppression -- it is even more
painful to hear bigoted criticisms and innuendos, such as: "why
are there 'three ministers from one district' in the interim
government?"
Back when the vast majority of Afghanistan was occupied by
Pakistan, the Taliban, and Osama bin Laden, and bloodshed had
reached even the mouth of the Panjsher valley -- the fortress where
the Soviets met their downfall -- all of yesterday's and today's
self-proclaimed powerful ran away with their tails in between their
legs, leaving the ordinary people to face the brunt of Taliban
atrocities. It was a touchstone, a test that discerned between the
courageous and the cowardly.
Now they have returned. Others are also returning; some who fled
the country long ago, thinking Afghanistan to be eaten up by the
Soviet bear; some who sat on the sideline during the Afghan's
triumphant yet costly jihad against the Red Army; some who saw the
Soviet invasion as an opportunity to leave the country; and others
who not only condoned but actively supported the Taliban, and thus,
the Pakistani takeover of the country. Under the guise of
"service" to Afghanistan, they have all now come back to
stake their claim -- not settling for a mere ministry here and a
governorship there.
These very knaves are now, without the slightest shame or fear of
God, protesting that one "district," referring to the
consecrated valley of Panjsher, unfairly occupies three ministries.
These leaders, commanders, and malefactors failed the test, they
shattered when struck against the touchstone of valiance and
resistance. But the gallant sons of that "district" stood
strong; with an unshakeable belief in God, with leadership from
Masood the Great, they routed the enemy. They proved that
Afghanistan was still a land where true heroes are bred. Short of
weapons and resources, they gathered around Masood the Great, and
they revived Afghanistan from near death. With the same principles
and furor with which they relegated the Soviet Union to the
"ash heap of history," they went on to crush the mightiest
of satanic, fanatic, and terrorist armies.
Nevertheless, the divisive charge is in an of itself invalid. The
interim minister for foreign affairs is, in fact, a Qandahari, not
Panjsheri. And like other patriotic Qandaharis, he was a part of the
national resistance force, led by Ahmad Shah Masood (rahmatullah
alaih - God's blessings upon him). As it stands, only two ministers
targeted by the aforementioned slur -- interior and defense -- are
from that one "district."
If one were to say that for fifty years one family -- let alone
one district -- ruled over all of Afghanistan, and during peace time
at that, accusations of dissension would be abound. Now, however,
when the nation is an utter disaster, valiant men from this very
country -- from a district that has proven itself time and again as
the fortress of Afghanistan's sovereignty -- are serving as the
interim ministers of defense and the interior, serving their nation
and their people, confronting danger, and withstanding false
accusations, fie upon those who continue to espouse and spew
chauvinism and bigotry. Truly, fie upon those who are blinded by
ethnic or regional prejudice to such an extent as to endanger the
future of Afghanistan and continue to call themselves Afghan.
Thus, it is warranted and advisable that the interim government
begin disarming those regions that are still a hotbed of sabotage
and conspiracy. It must begin in Qandahar, Mazar-e Sharif, and
Paktia, with Kabul being last on the list. Last because Kabul, as
the capital, is also the heart of Afghanistan. It is the primary
target of the nation's enemies. Have we so soon forgotten that it
was Gulbudin Hekmatyar -- the Butcher of Kabul -- and the Taliban
who were sent by Islamabad to fulfill Pakistan's objective that
"Kabul must burn"?
It is ever more urgent that the first priority of the interim
government be the eradication of this new virus of divisiveness. The
interim government must do all it can to encourage and establish
unity and concordance among the brotherly and equal ethnic and
regional groups in Afghanistan. No progress will be made in the
rebuilding and rehabilitation of Afghanistan unless the phrase
"anyone from Afghanistan is an Afghan" is etched into the
hearts and minds of all Afghans.
In the same regard, another tool used by Afghan traitors -- from
Taraki to Hafizullah Amin, from Gulbudin to Mulla Omar, from Afghan
Millat adherents to other fascists -- and their foreign backers --
mainly Pakistan -- is the division of Afghanistan into
"majority" and "minority" groups. This tool has
wounded Afghanistan's solidarity and unity, and it must be stopped.
An objective solution to this problem that has plagued
Afghanistan for many decades is a census. The interim government,
which has proclaimed itself a servant of the Afghan people, must ask
the United Nations to conduct an impartial and scientific census
that would provide the country with a valid demography. Doing so
would help solve many of the country's problems, removing many
obstacles toward the rebuilding and reconstruction of Afghanistan.
><
Top
*From this week's English-language page
of the hard-copy edition of
Omaid Weekly. Visit the Subscription page for details on how to
subscribe to the hard-copy edition Omaid Weekly.
Please contact us at copyright@omaid.com
if you wish to reproduce, distribute, transmit, display, publish or
broadcast any portion of the copyright
protected materials in this page. Barring unforeseen circumstances, you
will receive a prompt and favorable response.
[
Current Issue ] [ Back Issues ]
[ In
the Press ]
[
Subscribe ] [ Books
on Sale ] [ Directory ]
[ Home ] [ English
Section ] [ Feedback ]
|
