'India has every right to interfere
in government formation in Afghanistan'
(ALSO INDIANS HAVE A CLAIM NOW..)
Rinku Pegu speaks to experts about Indian interests, and India's possible role,
in government formation after the takeover of Kabul by the Northern Alliance
New Delhi, November 17
With Taliban forces fleeing the Afghan capital, Kabul, and the Northern Alliance emerging victorious with surprising ease, the question uppermost in the mind of the international community is: is this an end to two decades of civil war in Afghanistan?
If it is, what shape and form should governance in the violently reborn nation reborn take? Sreedhar Rao, Afghan expert at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Analysis (IDSA) says, "Any semblance of government formation in present-day Kabul will have to include all segments of Afghan polity. Not just the various ethnic groups, but elements representing a cross-section of opinions.
"Government formation in Afghanistan could also use the precedent set by India on two previous occasions. Both in the case of Sri Lanka in the early 1970s, and the Maldives in the late 1980s, India intervened during the political crises, reinstating the legitimately elected governments that had been displaced. If one were to go by this example, the government headed by Burhanuddin Rabbani, leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami faction of the Northern Alliance, should be reinstated."
The problem is Rabbani's love of the seat of power. In clear violation of Geneva Peace Accord of 1993, he had refused to release his rotational presidency even after his term came to an end. As of now, however, it is Rabbani's government that is considered legal by the United Nations, which had refused to recognise the Taliban takeover of 1996.
Also critical to government formation in Afghanistan is the nature of the role envisaged for the Pashtuns, who constitute about 40 per cent of the nation's populace and dominate the Taliban. It needs to be recalled, Pakistan, more notably its ruling dictator, General Pervez Musharraf has been maintaining since the beginning of US led bombardment "that any future dispensation in the Afghanistan will have to include the Taliban".
According to Savita Pandey, an expert on Pakistan in the School of International Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), "There should be no role for Taliban in any government formation in Afghanistan." Pandey argues that the compulsions of realpolitik show that politics is the art of possible, and not of idealism. In the present context, given that Taliban has been defeated and the Northern Alliance has filled in the power vacuum, it is only but natural that the former is excluded from a new power arrangement.
But is the involvement, or otherwise, of the Taliban such a straightforward issue? What are India's special interests in keeping the Taliban out? From an Indian point of view, the exclusion of Taliban is important because of the automatic strategic advantage its inclusion would give Pakistan, argues Savita Pandey. According to her, the whole concept of "strategic depth", which the Pakistanis have been working on, was to do little else but establish a friendly government on its western boundaries (Afghanistan) so that it could run and hide while carrying out aggressive hostilities on its northeastern boundary with India. The Taliban, after all, had been propped up by Pakistan.
However, J N Dixit, former foreign secretary of India, has other views. He feels that the belief that the loosely cobbled Northern Alliance will give up its factional fight in favour of a stable government is way too optimistic. Another bout of civil war is looming large over Kabul, he says.
However, assuming that the Northern Alliance has learnt from its bitter experience of 1996 (when it was overpowered by the Taliban due to infighting), and decides to stick together, what role can India play in solving the Afghan crisis?
There are two reasons why there should be active role for India in Afghanistan. One, past historical ties in the realm of culture, civilisation and trade. Two, India has a political stake in the consolidation of the Afghan polity.
Spelling out the agenda of Indian intervention in Afghanistan, Rao explains that it has to be three-tiered. First, it should bring about reconciliation among the various NA factions. Then, it should work to establish peace and stability in the region. And, third, it should assist in the development task of rebuilding Afghanistan from scratch.
Echoing these views, Savita Pandey argues that India has every right to intervene in Afghan politics because it has been the victim of terrorism ever since the Soviets left Afghanistan. Indeed, one of the major fallouts of the civil war in Afghanistan is the export of jehadi fighters from there to ferment trouble in Kashmir.
Asking for Indian participation in a solution to the current mess is not unprecedented. Even politically, there are several instances where India wielded a major influence in Afghanistan. To quote one, in the late 1970s, when the Communist party, called People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) was on the verge of splitting, soon after the overthrow of Zahir Shah regime, Indrajit Gupta, leader of the Communist Party of India (CPI) intervened and got the two warring factions to patch up.
The point here is that India has always played a positive role in Afghanistan, and will continue to do so. Right from building major hospitals, setting up the cottage and smallscale industry, and medium-sized irrigation, India has had a substantial presence as technological administrators in Afghanistan. Prior to 1978, India was the second-largest aid donor to Afghanistan after the Soviet Union.
It is significant to note in the context of unfolding events that prominent Northern Alliance leaders like Rabbani are calling for women to be given the right to vote, in case elections are held. A sign that partners of Northern Alliance are willing to learn from their past mistakes, as they make their latest bid for power. |
