| November 15, 2001 | Thursday | Shaba’an 28, 1422 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
After the fall
Projecting stereotypes
WORLD diplomacy is moving fast to ensure a neutral and broad-based government in Afghanistan in the wake of Kabul’s fall. The Northern Alliance ignored the world community’s wishes that it stay out of Kabul pending a final settlement. However, the United Nations and world capitals have made it abundantly clear that they consider the Alliance’s occupation of the Afghan capital a transitory phenomenon. In Istanbul, after talks with Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit, President Pervez Musharraf outlined his plan for a broad-based government: all forces should be withdrawn from Kabul, which should be declared a demilitarized city; there should be a UN force — drawn preferably from Muslim countries — and this should be followed by a consensus on a formula for giving the country a multi-ethnic government acceptable to all sections of Afghanistan’s population. Similar calls for a consensual approach to government-making have come from Washington, London and other European Union capitals.
Mercifully, the Northern Alliance, too, has shown an awareness of the need for a consensus. As Abdullah Abdullah, its foreign minister, told a news conference, the Alliance forces were there to ensure security, and there would be no unilateral attempt to run the country. He invited other Afghan factions to come to Kabul for talks and remarked that an Afghan government could not be formed by “foreign forces.” More welcome, however, was his remark that a UN presence was necessary. This means the Northern leadership would be willing to go by the five-point plan presented to the Security Council by Lakhdar Brahimi on Tuesday.
The essence of the UN plan lies in inviting the various Afghan factions to talks with a view to forming a provisional council, which will rule for at least two years at the end of which it would call a Loya Jirga to give the country a permanent government. Kofi Annan seemed to be aware of the need for moving fast when he urged the Security Council to take “urgent action” to prevent a political and security vacuum. At the same time, while Colin Powell was calling for a UN force consisting of soldiers from Muslim countries, America’s special envoy in Afghanistan, James Dobbins, was in Rome to meet the former Afghan monarch, Zahir Shah. This was in keeping with President Bush’s remarks after his meeting with President Musharraf (when Kabul had not fallen yet) that the US wanted “a peaceful and stable” neighbour along Pakistan’s western border, and this was possible only when “power arrangement is shared with the different tribes within Afghanistan.” This means the entire world now stands for a government that would symbolize the plurality of Afghanistan’s demographic reality.
One issue is where the representatives of different Afghan factions would meet. Qatar is said to be willing to play host to a meeting of the various Afghan factions and help facilitate a consensus among them on a broad-based, representative government for Afghanistan. However, other venues, too, can be considered. Where the meeting takes place is less important; what is more important is that all Afghans realize that in their hands lies the future of their country. Their country has suffered so much over the last two decades that only a heartless warlord would quibble over petty matters. The country needs peace and reconstruction — besides the rehabilitation of millions of Afghan refugees who would like to return home when fighting ceases. One hopes all Afghan leaders and the outside powers helping them would move with speed to install a peacekeeping force in Kabul as a prelude to a lasting arrangement.
BOTH the print and electronic media are replete with stories and images of Kabul since the victorious Northern Alliance soldiers recaptured the city early Tuesday morning. Most Taliban had vacated the city and retreated into the hills the night before. Those few remaining behind were captured and roughed up by the Alliance soldiers; indeed some were summarily executed in a mad fit of fury and vengeance. The Northern Alliance annulled the Taliban’s public morality code: burqas were thrown off and women told to step back into their professional lives; men were seen queuing up at the barber shops to get their beards shaved, which are no more mandatory.
Yet, in spite of these very emotive ‘liberating’ images, Kabul remains largely a ghost town. Fear grips the hearts of many as memories of brutal infighting among the Mujahideen factions — 50,000 Kabulis were killed between 1992-96 — haunts them. Not that anyone is mourning the departure of the Taliban, but a sense of relief is certainly conspicuous by its absence. The long road of uncertainty, with its many bends and potholes, is indeed a familiar and treacherous ground to traverse by Kabul’s residents; and sadly, the road seems to go in circles. It is imperative that the US-led coalition do all it can to bring some glimmer of hope into this dismal picture of fear and uncertainty — signs that will lead the people to what they were promised when the allied action began, and what has been a long time in coming.
HUNGRY for stories related to the anti-terrorism campaign, the British media has made quite a meal of a promising subject: British jihadis fighting the US and its allies in Afghanistan. Compelling though such stories must be for UK readers and viewers, on closer inspection there is more to them than meets the eye. The stories were fuelled by unconfirmed reports that at least four British-born men of Pakistani origin had died in Afghanistan during a US bombing raid. The media soon became obsessed with stories about how nice, normal boys from Luton had suddenly turned into hardened jihadis. Not surprisingly, the families of the men were reluctant to speak to the media, fearing for their safety, given the hostile mood against Muslims following the September 11 events.
It soon emerged that there was very little evidence to back up the stories. It was suggested that a tiny organization that signs up volunteers for jihad might have made exaggerated claims about its activities to bolster its image. A handful of men may have been sent to Pakistan but it was likely that they had proceeded no further. It was also suggested that the one Briton killed actually died in a car accident in Pakistan and not on the battlefield. The British Foreign Office also denied receiving any reports of British deaths in Afghanistan. Whatever the truth of the matter, the damage had been done. The interviews of some radical British Muslims stating that they owe no allegiance to their adopted country or to the Queen inflamed passions amongst the majority population and led to calls to try the men for treason.
The moderate majority among Britain’s two million Muslim population was also alarmed. They insisted that while a tiny number of young men may have gone to Afghanistan, the impression that thousands of Muslim Britons were lining up to set off for jihad was false. There is also dismay that Muslims will now be increasingly viewed as fifth columnists because of the activities of a handful of people. Race relations in Britain, already reeling from the recent riots in several towns, is likely to be the biggest casualty following such sensationalist media coverage. Community leaders on both sides of the racial divide must now move swiftly to dispel the false impression that all British Muslims are potential gun-toting fanatics.