The Pakistani Spectator

Last year in June, the New America Foundation (NAF) sponsored a Brown-Bag Lunch featuring Afghan ambassador Said Tayeb Jawad.  The ambassador gave a presentation on the ‘New Approach in Afghanistan Fighting Terrorism as a Phenomenon and Terrorists as Individuals.’ Mr. Peter Bergen, Senior Fellow at NAF and terrorism analyst, moderated this seminar.

While addressing the unfolding events and U.S. policy toward Afghanistan, Ambassador Jawad reported that suicide attacks have gone up 600%, from 27 in 2005 to 139 in 2006. Four thousand Afghans died in the violent attacks. In 2007, at least 8,000 people were killed in insurgency-related attacks, the most since the 2001 invasion. This year 1,700 people have lost their lives.

A year after Ambassador Jawad’s seminar at NAF, according to June 30, 2008 Washington Post, “The number of civilians killed in fighting between insurgents and security forces has soared by two-thirds in the first half of this year, to almost 700 people, compares to 430 in the first six months of 2007, senior U.N. official said Sunday.”   In addition, according to Washington Post, “the number of roadside bombs increased from 1,931 in 2006 to 2,615 in 2007. Attacks peaked during the months of the warm weather fighting season, with more than 400 in the peak month of 2005, more than 800 in 2006, and about 1,000 in 2007.”

In the Seminar at NAF, Ambassador Jawad said the U.S. has spent $126 and $448 billion in Afghanistan and Iraq respectively.  He also stated that compared to $679 in Bosnia and $206 in Iraq only $57 per person is being invested in Afghanistan.  The Ambassador knows well that in Iraq the international community is spending $206 per capita, instead of $57, because there are more business opportunities there than in Afghanistan.  Another reason we Americans have invested over $500 billion dollars in Iraq, most of it in building 60 military bases there, is because of our long-term plan of regime change in Syria and Iran. If Iraq becomes a good democratic model, it will be easier to bring the change to Syria and Iran.

Among Afghanistan’s surrounding countries, India is perceived as a stable, civilized and pluralistic society which is helping Afghanistan developing its economic infrastructure, whereas, for some, Pakistan is known as a troublemaker and a violent and ghetto country which trains and channels Muslim terrorists all over the world, especially to Afghanistan. Contrary to Iraq’s neighbors, Iran and Syria, Pakistan can fairly easily be controlled by a pro-American puppet, like President Musharraf. This is another reason for America to devote fewer resources in Afghanistan.

By mentioning a relatively low number of dollars per capita being spent in Afghanistan, Ambassador Jawad unintentionally gave credence to some Muslims who believe that the U.S. is interested in staying in Afghanistan for the strategic reasons such as containment of countries like China, Russia and Iran.  The development of Afghanistan does not seem to be a priority for the world community.

At the end of Ambassador’s presentation, for the purpose of giving Muslim and Pakistani paranoia a voice, I was the first one to shoot statements and questions. I told Ambassador Jawad that some segments of Pakistani establishment believe that the real reason the Afghan issue lingers is the lack of concern of the international community of settling it, and Pakistan has just become a scapegoat for its problems.  By restating the numerical analysis presented by the ambassador, that clearly demonstrated a deficit in the international community’s serious attention to Afghanistan, I asked if Pakistan was falsely blamed for Afghan civil war.

I also gave the background of my question about the Taliban by telling the Ambassador that, “I am a Punjabi and not a Pashtun, but people could call Taliban terrorists or xenophobic but these people by nature happened to very nationalist.” I elaborated by saying that “according to my experience with the Pashtun people — if they are in a formal and informal gathering among some non-Pashtun speaking – speak Pashto without giving any regards that other people around them don’t understand their language.” I explained.

I asked him, “How can we change these people so quickly from being very nationalist to very inclusive or making them accept — us Americans who for some Taliban could be considered invaders – serious change in their life style?”  I continued by saying, “We don’t want to acknowledge our mistakes but this is realty that [currently] we have made Taliban look like illegitimate child.  It was the Pakistani ISI with the blessing of CIA, who brainwashed Taliban when they were small kids living in the Tents in North West Frontier Province (NWFP) of Pakistan, next to Afghanistan. We taught them to hate Russians. We taught them to fight, and we didn’t teach them anything else. Then they were just children growing up in Pakistan. And we are the ones who made them very religious and we are the ones who made them terrorists. We are the ones to teach them kill people and we did not teach them anything else.”

At the end, I asked the ambassador: “Is there anyway we could give Taliban some incentive to become productive citizens rather than wasting their lives fighting sometimes with Russians, sometimes with Americans and sometimes with Pakistan?”

“All right,” the Ambassador said after he heard my non-stop sermon. He spoke a sentence in Pashto and said he himself is originally from Kandahar, Mullaha Umar’ town. He stated, “There is no reason to make Pakistan or anybody a scapegoat…this is a serious war, and we are going to win together or lose together. The danger of Talibanization is not limited to Afghanistan, it’s a serious threat to the Pakistani society and to regional stability. We all, international community, the United States, Pakistan and Afghanistan have to be sincere about this issue,” the Ambassador warned.

The Ambassador seems to be right about what he said in June 2007. According to the June 28 New York Times, “a sympathizer of the Taliban, Maulana Fazlur Rehman, shocked the National Assembly when he said that the entire North-West Frontier Province, including Peshawar, was on the brink of being engulfed by extremism.” Rehman, is on the record saying a few years ago that in America, women could have a new husband on every night of the weekend; he disapproves of injecting this kind of freedom into Muslim societies like Pakistan.

Ambassador Jawad continued, “The Taliban don’t have a clear vision of forming any government. But they do enjoy foreign financial aid and funding and it comes not only from Pakistan but also from Middle East, and that each suicide person’s family is given $8 to $10K for killing himself and other innocent people. Their major purpose is to force people into their version of Islam. They also capitalize on the frustration of Afghan people.”

I believe in his heart Ambassador Jawad knows well that it’s impossible to change the Taliban’s attitude which ISI helped form in their childhood. It would take years to give them some kind of vocational training and employment to turn them away from terrorism.  These Taliban were brainwashed into becoming radical and xenophobic by the Pakistani ISI with the help of billion of American dollars doled out to Pakistan by President Regan who shared his hatred of communists with then Pakistani dictator Zia-Ul-Haq. Of course, Ambassador Jawad does not want to give any politically incorrect statement a mile away from the White House, even though culturally speaking he has more in common with his Taliban brothers than I do.

Ironically, what I told Ambassador Jawad last year in June is supported in the June 17, 2008 New York Times, which stated that currently, Maulavi Jalaluddin Haqqani, a Taliban commander, presents one of the most serious threats to NATO and United States forces.

However, according to this piece, “A quarter-century ago, Maulavi Haqqani was a favorite of American and Pakistani intelligence agencies and of wealthy Arab benefactors because of his effectiveness in organizing mujaheddin fighters from Afghanistan, Arab nations and other Muslim regions to attack the Soviet forces that had occupied Afghanistan in the 1980s.”

The New York Times continues, “Jalaluddin Haqqani has turned his expertise against American and NATO forces. From his base in northwestern Pakistan, the aging Maulavi Haqqani has maintained a decades-old association with Osama bin Laden and other Arabs. Together with his son, Sirajuddin Haqqani, these allies now share a common mission to again drive foreign forces from Afghanistan.”
On a DVD, Jalaluddin Haqqani, for example, said, “We will fight them (NATO) with patience, this is not a battle of haste; this is a battle of patience. If a strong animal fights with a small and weak animal, the big animal uses all its power, not against the enemy, but against itself.”

In the seminar at NAF, I alluded to Ambassador Jawad without mentioning the name of people like Sirajuddin Haqqani, who were taught by ISI that the Russians deserved to be killed because they are godless people. In the present situation the people like Sirajuddin Haqqani, who perceive us Americans as occupants of Afghanistan, consider us as godless people as well. For them, we would try to change their culture, loyalty, orientation and eventually their religion if they were to allow us to settle in their land peacefully.

It’s unfortunate that Jalaluddin Haqqani does not comprehend the U.S. foreign policy which is generally designed by the people occupying the White House. The occupants try to time the policies to re-win the elections each four years. Like Saddam Hussian, Jalaluddin Haqqani  does not want to understand that his terrorist gang can not produce a high enough number of body bags like the Vietnam War did to made American people force their government to stop the war.

Someone like Ambassador Jawad needs to convey a message, in Pashto language perhaps, to Jalaluddin Haqqani that he must understand that it is not VP Cheney’s daughters’ Beth and Mary or President Bush’s daughters’ Barbara and Jenna who are fighting in Afghan mountains with  these mindless Mullahs and his cultural and Muslim brothers called the Taliban.

The brave young American sacrificing their lives are not the ones who are interested in  making million of dollars on Wall Street, nor are they earning 3.9 cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA) in the schools.   Jalaluddin Haqqani should know that Musharraf could score some brownie points by boasting to President Bush for getting over one thousand Pakistani soldiers killed fighting with Taliban and President Bush could afford 1.2 trillion dollar as the cost of Iraq war, and America could afford throwing billion of dollars to stay in Afghanistan for next 20 to 30 years, given we are successful in finding a couple of more power hungry and psychopath Pakistani Generals like Musharraf in next couple of decades.

It’s sad that it’s not only the Taliban who are stubborn; we Americans are not eager to negotiate with them either. We are unsuccessful at letting the Taliban know that we just want them to live in the current progressive world with a truer form of Islam. We need to explain to them honestly that our mission is to help them to come out of dark ages. To achieve this goal, we need to confess to the Taliban that for political expediency we were the ones to give them un-Islamic teachings a few decades ago, and that their religion is one of the most progressive religions on earth.

One of our problems is the impatience of our own American Mullahs, called evangelical Christians who have sent millions of Bibles to Iraq for the purpose of converting people. Like Muslim Mullahs, who want to have seventy white virgin women in heaven after they kill some innocent people, our evangelical Christians want to earn quickly the good grace of Jesus by converting Muslims and Jews into Christianity.  Most extremist Arabs and some Taliban leaders know our longing of ‘saving’ and leading Muslims to the Christian version of eternal salvation. Nonetheless, the Taliban don’t seem to be interested in our version of religious and social freedom.

It’s understood that Ambassador Jawad is not paid to have straight talk in Washington.  Neither is he interested in educating Americans about his angry Pashtun Taliban brothers in Afghanistan, NWFP and FATA. The Taliban are scared of getting dragged into the gay marriage, sexual freedom and abortion rights culture we have pretty much adopted as a way of life in the West.

Maybe Ambassador Jawad should tell Taliban in his own language that some of the conservative Christians like President Bush believe in the sanctity of life and abstinence before marriage. For example, last year when his daughter Jenna and her then boyfriend and current husband Henry Hager were heading for camping, President Bush suggested they take two tents with them because he didn’t want them to sleep in one tent. According to Jenna, her dad is an old fashion man. Ambassador Jawad knows that the Taliban would feel comfortable learning that President Bush discourages his daughter from sleeping with her boyfriend before marriage.

Implying the covert Pakistani role in Afghan civil war, the Ambassador said, “People should not support extremism by thinking that it would hurt others but serve their interests. It’s wrong to support extremism for any purpose, especially for the policy purpose,” he said.  “What we are asking to Pakistan is simply sincerity in their cooperation.”

I hope Ambassador Jawad has given his words of wisdom to his boss, President Karzai, who used to be very instrumental in the ‘Jihad’ against Russians with the Taliban’s older generation. According to some observers, while exploiting these Islamic fighters against Russians, Karzai used to be on the CIA payroll.  Like President Musharraf, President Karzai also has a materially  comfortable life, he has conveniently forgotten as a part of the process that brought the Taliban into existence on first place.

About this reporter’s last question of  how to turn the Taliban away from terrorism the Ambassador said, “We have a reconciliation policy and we are telling Taliban that it does not matter whatever you have done in the past, come and join us to build new Afghanistan.”

In responding to a question about the potential hide out of Usama Ben Laden, the ambassador said, “He is living in a big city and not hiding out in any kind of cave, as is the popular believe among some people.”

The Ambassador stated, “The Taliban are not from a monolithic group.  Some of them are hard core and some are opportunistic.  Some of them have turned their back from terrorism and now they are part of the current Afghan government.  If they accept the principal of freedom and pluralism, they become part of Afghan mainstream.”
At the end of the seminar, an Afghan female reporter named Nazira Karimi approached me and said that she was very happy with my statements and questions to the Ambassador. I responded by saying I did not say anything new, and most people sitting in the room already knew what I said, but somehow it’s unwise to say in Washington in public what I said.

For example, about supporting the Taliban, according to Washington Post in 1997 in its op-ed, our current U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Afghan-born Zalmay Khalilzad, wrote, “the Taliban do not practice the anti-U.S. style of fundamentalism practiced by Iran” and that “we should be willing to offer recognition and humanitarian assistance and development aid.”

By the way, there is a possibility of Zalmay Khalilzad becoming the next Afghan President. According to Washington Post, he could be a unifying leader in the war torn country. He is a Pashtun, a majority in Afghanistan. The article described him as a “unifying” candidate because he is from southeastern part of the country. However, having been raised in Mazar-e Sharif, which is in northern part of Afghanistan, he has been able to cultivate good relationships with the Northern Alliance who are supported by Iran, contrary to the Taliban who are assisted by Arab countries.

A couple of weeks ago in an interview with the National Public Radio Khalilzad said, “ I am proud of [being the U.S. representative at the United Nations], and “ I will help Afghanistan when I leave this job.” According to June 25, 2008 Washington Post, “if Khalilzad concluded Afghanistan were a truly a broken country, then he would be compelled to run, despite earlier statements that he was not going to.”

In summary, whatever Ambassador Jawad thinks of his homeland and its leadership and Taliban, most South Asian observers in Washington believe that it is time for the beleaguered President Hamid Karzai to leave the scene. According to the June 07 New York Times, one European diplomat said, “We’ve got the standard [Bush] administration problem of fascination with a flawed figure.” Obviously the diplomat was suggesting that its time for both President Musharraf and President Karzai to pack their bags. It’s just a matter of time before these two men leave their people alone.

The seminar about Ambassador Jawad’s talk could be watched by clicking on the following link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oieLB5SR3-Q