What's new

How US subverted minds in Afghanistan-Pakistan

EjazR

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
5,148
Reaction score
1
How US subverted minds in Afghanistan-Pakistan
By Imtiaz Gul
Clinton’s candid “admission of guilt” largely went unnoticed in the flood of information revolving around America’s current involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. This also merits a look-back in to how the US empire has kept expanding its influence, imposing its will on nations and countries it considers crucial to its own interests.
Soon after the Soviet forces entered Afghanistan in December 1979, the United States responded with money and military hardware for several Afghan opposition leaders – who were to become the blued-eyed boys of Washington. Pakistan, through its Inter-Services’ Intelligence (ISI) played as the local facilitator for what became universally known as jihad.

The CIA-ISI led “jihad” ran through to February 1989, when the then Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, saw the last of his troops walk out of Afghanistan after a decade of humiliation. From then onwards, the United States disengaged from Pakistan, and in October President George Bush (senior) slapped sanctions on Islamabad for possessing nuclear devices.

The United States turned to Pakistan again for help and lifted the sanctions when terrorists brought down the symbol of American might – the twin towers of the World Trade Center, New York on 9/11, 2001.
But what happened in-between to the socio-political fabric of Afghanistan and Pakistan, is a story of shame and pain; the response to the Soviet Union in the 1980s was not confined to the tactical guerilla warfare field only; a massive anti-Russia propaganda campaign was accompanied by efforts to instill the “spirit of jihad” into the hearts and minds of Afghan children and teenagers alike. Millions of dollars and riyals (Saudi Arabian currency) were spent on the “jihadisation” of the Afghan primary and middle school curricula.

Then, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) commissioned the Center for Afghanistan Studies (CAS), University of Nebraska, Omaha, to review the Afghan curricula and mould it in line with the anti-Russian policy objectives of the US-led jihad. Under a $43 million USAID-financed project, around 4-dozen University of Nebraska faculty and staff members worked overtime to produce more than 15 million textbooks in Pashto and Dari (two primary languages in Afghanistan) for distribution among children, largely living in the refugee camps set up in Pakistan – and partially in Iran.

Along with a chain of jihadi madrasahs in the Pak-Afghan border regions, the CIA contrived – with the active support from the ISI- to harvest a militarized civil society that would furnish physical sustenance in addition to providing ideological support to jihadis raised at madrasahs


Before listing some of the changes in the Afghan curricula let us fast-forward to the post 9/11 US reaction and the policy resulting from it.

Immediately after the Bonn conference in December 2001, members of the Coalition against terrorism agreed on a transitional Afghan government, led by Hamid Karzai. With this a new massive socio-economic effort also got underway to help Afghanistan. Reviewing the curricula also constituted the broad list of initiatives meant for “fixing” the Afghan problem.

Once again, the USAID sprung into action and commissioned the University of Nebraska, Omaha to undertake a review of the primary textbooks on a war-footing. The review began in January with the stated objective of “removing objectionable content that “promoted violence, hatred and war” from the Afghan curriculum in February 2002.”

“In February 2002 we removed all references to violence, and changed the alphabet chart which had references to weaponry, for example: T is for Tank, R is for Rocket, K for Kalashnikov, M for Mujahid, J for jihad, ” a USAID official told me in November 2009, seven years after his involvement in the revision process which had taken him to Peshawar to oversee the entire exercise.

“We also removed any messaging that promoted bad feelings towards minorities, etc. However, a complete curriculum overhaul was not done at that time,” the official explained, saying the work was done on an emergency basis since the deadline for delivering 10.5 million textbooks all over Afghanistan was middle of March, 2002, to coincide with Afghanistan’s New Year and the beginning of the new academic year in the third week of that month.

USAID funded this project with $6.5 million, practically cleansing the books of materials it had funded in the early 1980s to be included in the textbooks. This “intellectual subversion “found its way into the Pakistani text books as well.

A Pakistani journalist recalled his meeting with an elderly Afghan teacher at the Kacha Garhi refugee camp on the outskirts of Peshawar. The old man, Ayaz Khan told me, was one of the dozens of academics tasked with revising the Afghan primary school curricula in the early 2002.

Pashto and dari textbooks surrounded the old man, squatting in a corner of the USAID hang-out inside the camp, and he was scribbling on a big register.

“We are now removing what we had inserted into these books 20 years ago,” the old man responded when asked about his mission. His response, reminisces Khan, still echoes in my ears as a reflection of how systematically the US intervention in the Afghan curricula led to the “jihadisation” of the society in Afghanistan and Pakistan. It is a hitherto the least explored dimension of the US-led Jihad’s degeneration into militant Islam and terrorism.

It is a sad story of Pakistan’s decline from a front-line citadel of Islamist US-led Jihad against “infidels” to an embattled state, facing the consequences of that jihad.

Strangely, over three decades of failures of Pakistan’s military and political elite notwithstanding, the United States stands out as the single source of a) putting Pakistan on the way to jihad for its own narrow-ended foreign policy objectives in the early 1980s, and b) using Pakistan again in the post 9/11 response to fight the forces that had grown from the womb of the CIA-ISI sponsored anti-Soviet Russian jihad.

And this instrumentalisation of proxies – countries, groups or individuals – for foreign policy objectives is nothing new.

“The United state spent decades cultivating Islamists, manipulating and double crossing them, cynically using and misusing them as Cold War allies, only to find that it spawned a force that turned against its sponsor, and with a vengeance. Like monsters imbued with artificial life, radical imams, mullahs, and ayatollahs stalk the landscape, thundering not only against the United States but against freedom of thought, against secular science, against nationalism and the left, against women’s rights. Some are terrorists, but far more are medieval-minded religious fanatics who want to turn the calendar back to seventh century,” Robert Dreyfuss writes in the introduction of his book “Devil’s Game,” that illustrates what he calls “over six decades of America’s empire-building project in the Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan”.

This disastrous approach had other witnesses too; on December 6, 2009, I stumbled into a senior European diplomat in Islamabad. I would not name him since he requested so but the ambassador narrated a fascinating tale of a meeting that he attended as a junior officer with state department officials in Washington in October 1988 – over 20 years ago.

Afghanistan was one of the subjects under discussion between the two delegations. Once they touched on the issue of the Afghan resistance – the seven mujahideen commanders – the head of delegation from this small but important European country asked curiously about the possible impact of the western support for religious fundamentalist groups.

“Don’t worry, they are Sunnis and not Shia fundamentalists, they are our allies,” was the response the European delegation got from the State Department counterparts who were then dealing with south and southwest Asia.


I was stunned by the expedience inherent in this answer, wondering what shape these parties – instilled with the spirit of jihad - might take a few years down the lane, reminisced the special envoy while discussing the fall-out of the short-sighted US political expedience that also resulted in mistrust vis-à-vis Washington. The mistrust that ensued since the US sanctions on Pakistan is all pervasive even today, something that Hilary Clinton also discerned during her late October 2009 Pakistan visit.

(The author heads the independent Centre for Research and Security Studies, Islamabad. And the author of a recent Penguin publication “The Al-Qaeda Connection – Taliban and Terror in Tribal Areas.” )
 
.
America is an amazing country.

Here the world is embroiled in battle against the Soviet communist social-imperialists and it's christian-dominated America that comes up with the bright idea that Islam can be a rally point for the anti-Soviet effort.

Not Zia's Pakistani strategic theorists? Not the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia?

America.

And what, btw, explains the promotion of such within the tribal regions long after we had left? The continuation of the madrassahs in their vast numbers? Or Pakistan throwing its weight behind the taliban LONG after we'd left?

Another stunning display of delusion by a Pakistani.

Thanks.:usflag:
 
.
America is an amazing country.

Here the world is embroiled in battle against the Soviet communist social-imperialists and it's christian-dominated America that comes up with the bright idea that Islam can be a rally point for the anti-Soviet effort.

Not Zia's Pakistani strategic theorists? Not the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia?

America.

And what, btw, explains the promotion of such within the tribal regions long after we had left? The continuation of the madrassahs in their vast numbers? Or Pakistan throwing its weight behind the taliban LONG after we'd left?

Another stunning display of delusion by a Pakistani.

Thanks.:usflag:
It is ever the Americans, the Jews, the CIA, the Mossad, the Rothschilds, the Illuminati...Next will be the Vulcans, the Romulans and Marvin the Martian...But NEVER the muslims themselves.
 
.
It is ever the Americans, the Jews, the CIA, the Mossad, the Rothschilds, the Illuminati...Next will be the Vulcans, the Romulans and Marvin the Martian...But NEVER the muslims themselves.

Even if one were to agree with what you say, you cannot deny the culpability of American foreign policy in the militarization of Afghanistan and the tribal societies of Pakistan.
 
.
Only one conclusion can be drawn by judging history. There'll never be a sincere relation between Pakistan and the US. It's a relationship based on interests. The key lies in the hands of Pakistan. It's high time for Pakistan to decide about the continuation of such a deceitful and untrustworthy relation. Instead of indulging in blame games Pakistan should take the first step and thank the US for all its efforts. The US and her allies should be left to fight their WoT in Afghanistan. Pakistan needs to tackle instability in its territory, guard its borders and wave bye bye to the WoT. Any incentive should be kindly rejected with a thanks, but no thanks.
 
Last edited:
.
Only one conclusion can be drawn by judging history. There'll never be a sincere relation between Pakistan and the US. It's a relationship based on interests. The key lies in the hands of Pakistan. It's high time for Pakistan to decide about the continuation of such a deceitful and untrustworthy relation. Instead of indulging in blame games Pakistan should take the first step and thank the US for all its efforts. The US and her allies should be left to fight their WoT in Afghanistan. Pakistan needs to tackle instability in its territory, guard its borders and wave bye bye to the WoT. Any incentive should be kindly rejected with a thanks, but no thanks.

US is in grip of AIPAC and Pro Israeli lobbies just wanted to full their agenda and dreams of promised land. WOT is now moving towards historical end , one by one US allies are withdrawing their forces from Afghanistan and in the end US will face similar defeat as Russia faced .

ISI is strongest organisation having support of Arabs oil rich states , US tried many times to weaken ISI through corrupt political leadership but failed .

How US formulate their future policies for middle east and south asia will be difficult task after failure of their recent game plan.
 
.
US is in grip of AIPAC and Pro Israeli lobbies just wanted to full their agenda and dreams of promised land. WOT is now moving towards historical end , one by one US allies are withdrawing their forces from Afghanistan and in the end US will face similar defeat as Russia faced .

ISI is strongest organisation having support of Arabs oil rich states , US tried many times to weaken ISI through corrupt political leadership but failed .

How US formulate their future policies for middle east and south asia will be difficult task after failure of their recent game plan.

Did you post in the wrong thread?

Yes ISI will save you, your lives, your minds, your future and relationships with all your neighbors... and yes with holy Arab (respect) money too. Infact ISI is currently working on winning a science nobel for one of the madrassahs - one supported by Arabs (respect) of oil rich states.
 
. .
Operation Cyclone was the code name for the United States Central Intelligence Agency program to arm the Afghan mujahideen during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, 1979 to 1989. Operation Cyclone was one of the longest and most expensive covert CIA operations ever undertaken;funding began with $20–30 million per year in 1980 and rose to $630 million per year in 1987.
Operation Cyclone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
U.S Covert Operations in the Afghanistan War

With the 1979 invasion of Soviet troops into Afghanistan, the war between anti-communist rebel forces and the Soviet-backed Afghan government was well underway. The number of Soviet troops in Afghanistan reached 100,000 by early 1980. Anti-communist guerrilla forces, jointly called the mujahidin (Islamic warriors), actively fought both the Soviet troops and the pro-Soviet Afghan government led by President Babrak Karmal.

From the Soviet invasion onward, the United States sought ways to back the anti-Soviet forces. By 1983, the CIA was purchasing assault rifles, grenade launchers, mines, and SA-7 light antiaircraft weapons, totaling 10,000 tons, mainly from China. The Reagan administration had them shipped to Pakistan, a country that at the time was working closely with Washington.

Then, in a move that marked a turning point in the relentless war, in 1985, President Ronald Reagan made a secret decision to escalate covert support to the mujahidin. Soon after, the CIA began to supply an extensive array of intelligence, military expertise and advanced weapons to the Muslim rebel forces. They included satellite reconnaissance data of Soviet targets in Afghanistan; Soviet plans for military operations based on satellite intelligence and intercepts of Soviet communications; covert communication technology for the rebels; detonating devices for tons of C-4 explosives for urban targets; long-range sniper rifles; a targeting system linked to a U.S. Navy satellite; and wire-guided anti-tank missiles.1 Furthermore, amidst intensifying debate within the CIA over the extent of U.S. involvement in the war, Reagan made the decision to equip the mujahidin with sophisticated U.S.-made Stinger antiaircraft missiles. American-trained Pakistani officers were sent to Afghanistan to set up a secret mujahidin Stinger training facility, which was complete with a U.S.-made electronic simulator. By 1987, the CIA was sending a steady supply of 65,000 tons of arms to the mujahidin.

While it funneled equipment, intelligence and money to the mujahidin, Washington maintained its armchair supervisory role in the war by entrusting Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI) to handle direct contact, operations with, and training of the mujahidin. In all, the United States provided over $2 billion in weapons and money to seven Islamic mujahidin factions in the 1980s, making this last Cold War battle the largest covert action program since World War II.2

Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev announced the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1988. With the Soviets out of the picture, however, the victorious mujahidin focused next on fighting the Afghan "puppet government" now headed by Mohammad Najibullah, who had replaced Karmal in 1986. Najibullah fell from power when the mujahidin finally captured Kabul in the spring of 1992. But the guerrilla factions proved unable to unite, and began another arduous power struggle amongst themselves. Afghanistan thus became a fragmented country of several independent zones, each ruled by different warlords. These political divisions exacerbated the schism already present between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, and between the many tribal and ethnic groups that reside in the country.
Terrorism - Afghanistan and U.S. Foreign Policy

f57862220ff9c187f0ba1bb6fc854090.jpg
 
.
@ S-2 and gambit
I'm not sure you understand that this is more a battle of the minds than just killing of some extremists mastermind. So in order to root out extremism from the minds; its important to understand WHY it came about in the first place.

AFAIK, Imtiaz Gul as a journalist has never minced words when giving blame to Saudi or Pakistani establishment as well in other articles were relevant and in his recent book The AlQaeda Connection(I just started reading it).

Before the 80s, these were fringe lunatic groups similar to say KKK or white supremacists in the US. Other than holding small rallies and having wild ideas, no importance was attached to their political Islamist and takfiri worldview. Along with Saudi and Pakistani support, the US was instrumental in making these same fringe extremist groups capable of setting the world agenda as we know today. Left alone, they would probably have remained fringe groups as they had no backing from traditional ulema.

Instead of promoting grass root democratic govts., the US has traditionally supported despotic regimes at different times in the ME with allies like Shah of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and even in Pakistan. I'm sure you will not disagree with this. Suppression of dissent is not given as much importance as in say China or Iran(the usual obsessions).

I think Hilary's candid acceptance of their involvement and support to these extremist groups is a step in the right direction. The new policy to support the Democratic setup in Pakistan rather than military dictatorships is also welcome and hopefully will apply to other countries eventually as well.

Like I said before, this is mainly a battle of the heart and minds. To do that, Saudis, Pakistanis and the US should all admit that their short sighted policies of supporting extremists who had a fringe view of political Islam was wrong and backfired. Saudis and Pakistanis more so because they allowed their religion to be used for unscrupulous political agenda.

Once this truth is exposed to the people and media, the blame game that some sections in the media and public want to indulge in in maligning Islam and muslims as a whole would end (atleast at the mainstream level). Neither is it just about blaming only the Pakistanis or only the Saudis.

Blaming everything on the US for the current phenomenon is clearly wrong, but so is blaming it all on the "muslims" as a monolith. Would the world have been a different place if there should be no differentiation between good (sunni) terrorists and bad (shia) terrorists in the 80s? I agree with the author that Hillary's admission of guilt went un-noticed, and it should have not; especially by the western media.

We all hear about how the Frankenstein that the ISI nurtured for its foreign policy objectives in Afghanistan and Kashmir has now turned on itself. Is that similarly not true albeit to a lesser extent for the US? This acceptance and discussion at the national level in the US would result in a flow down affect throughout that would definitely cut into sympathizers for AQ when people realise where they came from.

Fortunately or Unfortunately nothing kills popular support to extremist Muslim groups than a connection of some kind to the US establishment. Hence you see a large majority of AQ ideologues in videos and audio statements denying any sort of connection to American, Pakistani or Saudi establishment, but claiming that they defeated the Soviets by themselves alone.
 
Last edited:
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom