We are at a critical juncture in Afghanistan. Recent events have cast very serious doubts about the viability of the current policy of training an Afghan army to take over from the US Military. The tragic deaths, murders really, of six Americans at the hands of their Afghan “colleagues” have damaged the hopeful intellectual basis of this policy.
Virtually all discussion in the American media has focused on the inadvertent burning of the Korans and whether the Afghan reaction was valid, appropriate or civilized. We are not surprised. To our knowledge, no one in the American media or in the American establishment has any idea of the relevant history. And nothing is as important as history when it comes to the Indo-Afghan continuum.
Apart from the political debate about the apology by President Obama, the rest of the public discussion has focused on whether we should get out of Afghanistan. The best clip we saw on the topic was by Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters on Bill O’Reilly’s Factor:
- And I’m very troubled by the fact that we’ve have reached a point where we had the U.S. Commander General Allen doing his best, telling our troops respect Afghan culture, respect Afghan culture, when Afghans are shooting our officers in the back of the head in the interior ministry.
- But we have been there for over 10 years, have spent countless billions. Given a lot of blood. And General Allen, our commander in Afghanistan, could not walk down the street of a single Afghan city today unarmed and survive.
Colonel Peters is a knowledgeable patriot. But even he does not look back to a very similar but far greater conflagration that consumed the entire region back in 1857. The lessons of that revolt can be helpful in addressing today’s crisis in Afghanistan.
What is the real issue in Afghanistan? The Koran Burnings or Something Deeper?
Remember the worldwide protests about the Danish cartoons about Prophet Mohammed. We don’t see that today. There have been no protests in Saudi Arabia, the seat of Islam or in any other country in the Middle East. There have been no protests in Indonesia, home to the largest Muslim population in the world, or in Malaysia, probably one of the most rabid Muslim regimes in the world.
There have been no protests in next door Pakistan. And the biggest surprise of all, no protests have broken out in the Pashtun homelands across the Durand line of control. In other words, the Pashtuns who live in Afghanistan have erupted in utter fury over the Koran burnings but their brothers across the line of control haven’t cared!
So how can this fire in Afghanistan be really about Koran burnings? So what is it about? What is the main difference in the lives of the Pashtuns who live in Afghanistan and their brothers who live in Pakistani-controlled Pashtun areas?
Clues to today’s conflagration were provided a few weeks ago in an excellent New York Times article. This article described the buildup of mutual contempt between the Afghan National Army and the American Military in Afghanistan. The contempt arises from cultural, religious differences and the deep difference between the way the two armies perceive the war. The Americans want to finish the job and go home, while the Afghans, knowing they have to live there post-America, do not want to burn any bridges. And above all, no soldier, no army wants to keep taking orders from a foreign army in their own homeland.
This situation was so combustible that only a match was needed. And no match lights a fire better and faster than a religious spark. The Koran burnings provided the spark. The fact that elements of the Afghan army killed their American “colleagues” speaks volumes to us about the different nature of this situation. It did so to General Allen as well, who pulled all Americans from their duties in the Afghan ministries.
Today’s situation in Afghanistan reminds us of a much greater conflagration in 1857, about 4 years before the American Civil War. We think a study of this 1857 event is as relevant to today’s Afghanistan as study of the Civil War remains to today’s America.
The Revolt & War of Independence of 1857
The East India Company had seized control of all of India by the first decade of the 19th century. The army of the Company was mainly comprised of Indian soldiers and junior officers led by British senior officers. As we said, no army likes to take orders from a foreign army on its own soil. And after 50 years of control, the British had become arrogant and their behavior towards the soldiers and junior officers of the Company’s Indian army had become demeaning.
The spark for a revolt was lit by a religious trigger. The British had decided to introduce new cartridges for the rifles used by the Company’s Indian army. The soldiers had to bite off the ends of these cartridges before loading them in the rifles. Word spread in the Company’s Indian army that these cartridges were coated with fat of cows and pigs. The British goal, according to the rumotory, was to make Indian soldiers Na-Pak or Non-Pak (impure) to facilitate their conversion to Christianity – Hindu soldiers by chewing on Cow fat and Muslim soldiers by chewing on pork fat. The British denied it strenuously at that time and still do, to our knowledge. It didn’t matter.
Deep outrage spread across all the units of the Company’s Indian army. Certain units chose an opportune time to attack kill their British officers and attack British units. This spread across North India and a battles raged between the Indian army units trained by the Company and the British units. Some of the defeated Indian rulers joined the revolt and a full fledged war of independence began. The only reason the British survived the first phase of this war was the support of the Sikh, Gurkha units and the units from coastal India. Britain came to the rescue of the Company by sending British army divisions into India.
What happened after this war is even more relevant to today’s Afghanistan than the religious spark that ignited it. Britain realized that it could not go back to conditions that existed before the war. So Victoria, then Queen of England, issued a proclamation in 1858. In that proclamation, Britain removed the East India Company and assumed Sovereign control of Indian territories. The proclamation also reassured the people of India that Britain intended to respect and preserve the culture of India, particularly the right of Indians to practice their traditional religions.
Britain integrated the Company’s Indian Army units into the traditional structure of the British Army. The British established local administration across India led mainly by Indian Administrators. This resulted in the creation of the Indian Civil Service (ICS) which provided a career path for bright young Indians to enter the British led administration. This service, renamed in 1947 as the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), continues to manage local administration in today’s India.
With this new structure, the British were able to run India for another 90 years until India became independent in 1947. Britain was able to leave India in relative peace and remain friendly with the free Indian Republic.
What the British did post-1857 in India can provide valuable lessons for America’s policy in Afghanistan. But that is assum
ing America wants to remain in Afghanistan until it can leave behind a sustainable Afghan structure.
Why Stay in Afghanistan? Why Not Just Leave?
The short answer is simple. To protect New York City, to protect American cities from bomb attacks like the failed Times Square attempt in May 2010. This attempt and others before it were hatched in the remote areas along the Af-Pak line of control. A terror infrastructure seems to be in place today, hidden in the sanctuaries inside Pakistan-occupied Pashtun areas. Once America leaves Afghanistan, there will nothing to prevent this infrastructure from expanding and migrating back to Afghanistan.
We agree with the consensus that if America leaves Afghanistan in its current condition, the Taleban will take over in a short period of time. As Colonel David Hunt explained to Bill O’Reilly,
- The people at the Pentagon talking about the areas they have covered. Just talk about what happens at night. For example, 60% of the cell-phone coverage in Afghanistan gets turned off at night because the people are afraid the Taliban is going to kill them or people that run the towers. It is not a safe country yet.
And this is with the presence of the US Military. Leaving Afghanistan in anything like its current condition is to a guarantee America’s return under far worse circumstances. The other reason to stay is the unparalleled strategic location of Afghanistan as the meeting ground of Iran, Pakistan, China and Central Asia with India and Russia just a bit away.
But staying in Afghanistan without making progress, without addressing the enmity in the Afghan army, in the Afghan ‘administration’ would be simply postponing the inevitable. This is why we think, the lessons of post-1857 British led Indian Administration warrant a study.
Send your feedback to [email protected] OR @Macroviewpoints on Twitter
