Shireen Burki's One Cent: Afghanistan

Thirty years ago today, on the outskirts of Peshawar (Pakistan), desperate, starved and abused Soviet and Afghan prisoners of war undertook what turned out to be a heroic and defiant uprising. However, the barricaded prisoners demand for access to the Red Cross, or the Soviet Ambassador, was denied.

Instead, the revolt was brutally suppressed by Burhanuddin Rabbani's* Jamiat-i-Islami (Tajik) militia/muj and the Pakistan military. A handful of Soviet prisoners who survived were executed on the spot in violation of the Geneva Convention.

This seemingly insignificant footnote, during the ten year Soviet invasion/occupation of Afghanistan, encapsulates the duplicity of General Zia-ul-Haq and his generals.

Disclosure of the Badaber uprising of Soviet and Afghan prisoners held illegally in a presumably "neutral" state threatened vested interests. There was the real prospect of the Cold War turning into a Hot War given Pakistan's various double/triple games as Zia sought to exploit the situation (Soviet occupation of Afghanistan), damn the long term implications for the country and its people, not to mention the entire region. As long as the military junta could make a killing, every thing was on the table or fair game.

Pakistan's involvement in Afghanistan during the 1980s was never altruistic but mercenary in nature. Afghans, however, were under no illusions and viewed Zia's (and American) support of Afghan Islamists such as Hikmatyar, Rabbani, Sayyaf, Haqqani etc as a betrayal.

Why discuss this particular uprising? Because the worst aspects of history (genocide, religious war, civil war, coup d'etats, assassinations) tend to be replicated unless there is a certain degree of awareness, and respect, for the historical record; followed by active policy measures enacted/implemented by the state(s) designed to prevent or mitigate such horrors.

The real possibility that this illegal prisoner confinement, and subsequent murder, of Soviet citizens would constitute the straw that would break the camel's back was overlooked/under-appreciated by the Pakistani regime. Worse, Zia's somewhat cavalier response (and his regime's initial denials) roused the Russian bear.

So there'd be a reckoning.

The Pakistani generals, who've always overestimated their own cunning and smarts, thought they could get away with their brazen duplicity, which wasn't limited to the Soviets but included the Afghan people (not to mention fellow Pakistanis).

After the Badaber massacre, there was widespread speculation that the numerous terrorist attacks in Peshawar and elsewhere in Pakistan, to include the spectacular Ojhri Camp "fireworks" (an act of sabotage) in April of 1988, were retributive in nature.

Furthermore, one popular conspiracy theory in Pakistan links the Badaber prisoner massacre to Zia's own demise in mysterious circumstances at Bahawalpur, when one of the world's most reliable aircraft, a C-130 Hercules, crashed soon after takeoff on August 17,1988, killing most of Pakistan's senior Army generals.

In stark contrast to the Soviets' response, the Americans have tolerated Pakistan's double dealings, notwithstanding Pakistan being caught red handed "hosting" (read: house arrest) Bin Laden in one of their military cantonments.

To date, there's been no American "reckoning" for a rogue state that "sponsored" the masterminds of 9/11.Worse, Pakistan continues to be generously "rewarded" with billions of US tax payer's dollars despite its military's track record at home (East Pakistan, Baluchistan and NWFP/Khyber Pukhtunkhwa) and abroad. A perplexing reality that should raise legitimate questions vis-a-vis all the "players"/participants at great cost to Americans (lives, limbs, and treasure).

A sick cycle of dysfunctional dependency between a former Superpower and an artificial state with an embarassing name ("Land of the Pure") that has been faltering, and now failing. A state distrusted by most (to include "friendly" brotherly Muslim states) countries that has no respect for Washington (or anyone else for that matter) notwithstanding the generous "aid."

Although a forgotten footnote of history, the Badaber uprising offers lessons/insights on state behavior and "diplomacy."

* Burhanuddin Rabbani, (September 20, 1940-September 20, 2011), was hated for his brutal track record by a majority of Afghans (Pushtuns, Hazaras and Uzbeks) notwithstanding the official narrative. On June 28, 1992, he wrestled control of Kabul from the other mujahidin factions and declared himself President. He then instituted draconian social measures which made many urban Afghans nostalgic for Soviet rule. Under his dictatorship, urban females and other ethnic groups risked rape and murder for being "modern" and/or belonging to another ethnic group. Rabbani refused to step down from the Presidency once his "term" was up, and thus helped fuel the civil war that all but ensured the emergence of Mullah Omar's Taliban who restored law and order at a great long term cost to the populace.

Since the narrative within Afghanistan currently/officially being bandied about on Rabbani is that of a "war hero" and religious patriot, one is encouraged to dig deeper. Rabbani (a Badakhshani Tajik), along with Gulbuddin Hikmatyar (Kharoti Ghilzai Pushtun) and Abdul Rasul Sayyaf (Kharoti Ghilzai Pushtun) was instrumental in the destruction of Afghan society, with the help of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia (Iran's role/track record is a murky one).

Like Sayyaf, Rabbani was a graduate of the Al-Azhar University in Cairo in the late 1960s where he established a close and long term relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). Sayyaf went one step further and widened his ties to include the Wahhabis for generous remuneration.

Given the ties between Tehran and the MB, Rabbani also established a friendly close relationship with the Khomeinists and had just returned from a conference with the mullahs in Tehran when he was assassinated. Rabbani introduced Sayyid Qutb's banned (in Egypt and elsewhere) works to Afghanistan when he translated Qutb's Milestones and other writings into Persian sowing seeds of intolerance and violence of which the Badaber massacre is just one footnote.

Farkhunda's brutal death at the hands of a lynch mob last Thursday in the heart of central Kabul has shocked many. But not all. Afghanistan lost its humanity/soul during the last four decades. Just like their neighbors, Pakistan and Iran.

Farkhunda's only "crime" was she objected to fellow Muslims offering prayers at the famous Shah-Do Shamshira (King of Two Swords) Sufi Shrine and chastised the tawiz (amulet) sellers outside for selling gullible visitors fraudulent religious artifacts.

According to a number of sources, one version involved a group of women nearby, cooking food to distribute to the street urchins, who shouted/screamed that she was burning pages of the Quran in the metal waste bin outside the shrine. Later, when the ensuing hysteria and violence had died down after her death at the hands of an eager lynch mob, it turned out she never burned anything; and, if she did, it was mere snippets of paper from an amulet which she'd objected to. Whether or not they might have contained some ayat (verse) of the Quran is debatable; but she did not burn pages torn out from a copy of the Quran. The women's outcry against a Muslim sister ensured her demise.

Another version of what transpired --more plausible in light of the power hungry mullahs-- was that while at the shrine she confronted a mullah there and asked him to stop deceiving people by writing false tawiz (folded scraps of paper with Quranic verses). The mullah, apparently threatened, shouted that the girl had burnt the Quran. And, the rabid mob outside quickly took care of the rest.

As always with events in the Muslim world, this travesty of justice was characterized by certain ironies.

First, Farkhunda was known as a devout Muslim who'd studied extensively at a local madrassa,wore hijab, memorized the Quran, and had just completed her Islamic studies to commence teaching. She followed the requirements of her religion and, as a literalist (the literalist Wahhabis, Jama'at Islami and Misri Ikhwani have made huge inroads among the Afghan populace since the late 1960s), she probably viewed the use of amulets and praying at Sufi Shrines as bida (heretical behavior characterized by innovative practices).

In short, she epitomized the world view of many Taliban and groups like Al Qaeda and Da'ish/IS when it came to their views of authentic Islam. *

The sad irony is that her devoutness didn't save her from the mob who, in predictable Pavlovian style, reacted to the bogus hue and cry to vent their complex internal frustrations by beating and stoning her to death. Then driving over her body and, finally, burning her corpse, while thousands cheered, photographed and videotaped the crime.

Her Muslim "brothers" arrived in the thousands within minutes to mostly witness the tamasha (spectacle), while the eager sociopaths amongst them quickly went about their business with great relish judging from the video.

None, however, were "fundo" (i.e. religious) in appearance. All were young (teens/twenties) with the exception of one old fellow, without any sort of head covering or beards. They wore nice shalwar kamiz with jackets, and others wore pants and shirts (western attire). Many of the spectators, as though on holiday, were busy filming the unfolding torture and murder with their smartphones, ipods etc. A lot shouted "Allah Akbar" with Dari/Tajik accents. Others were Pashtun.

In short, they didn't seem like a particularly devout lot. Sure, there was one mullah on the opposite side of the metal railing shouting but the main perpetrators did not fit the "devout" profile with scraggly long beards, shalwars worn above the ankles, and, most importantly, some sort of head covering (namaz/prayer cap, pakul or pugri/turban), which is essential gear for a devout mosque attending Afghan and/or a tribal.

The takeaway irony is that here was a mob of pretend "devout" Muslims (who in the West would be identified as "moderate"), many wearing western attire and holding western technology in their hands, stomping the life out of a practicing Muslim female in their insincere quest to defend the honor of Islam.

Terrified the mob would come after the rest of the family, her parents immediately resorted to the "mental illness" defense to save the rest of the family from another lynch mob.** It was to the credit of her brother, Najibullah, who challenged this assertion and defended his sister notwithstanding the grave danger the family was in.

To those familiar with Afghanistan, it seemed these young men were acting out their frenzied sexual frustrations in the name of religion. Wonder how many of these smart phone, shirt and pants clad, clean shaven, absent a head covering lads pray 5 times a day? Given Google statistics from the region, they probably spend most of their time watching all sorts of porn on their "kuffar" devices and spend little time at the mosque except for the obligatory Friday prayers/sermon.

The hypocrisy and irony is blatant and widespread in the Muslim world. The complete disregard for human life; the party scene of what transpired here is the behavior of sociopaths using religion as cover.

Which begs the question: Does Islam condone this type of behavior? Devout or not, Islam is a legalistic religion. Apostasy, Blasphemy*** or burning of the Quran are death penalty offenses according to a literal (Shariah) interpretation of the scripture. But, there is the requirement for due process to prove such acts actually occurred given the severity of the punishment, and that the witnesses are of "honorable character."****

At this stage it is easy to fall for the "takfiri" trap narrative and declare these scum aren't therefore "Muslim." But they are. They were born into the faith and, judging from their public "display" of emotion over the purported (proven false) burning of the Quran, they were certainly playing the "devout" part. Thus, these "devout Muslims" should be punished based on Shariah.

This is where Shariah's Qisas and Diyat comes into play. These "devout" Muslim murderers should all be prosecuted and face punishment according to Qisas and Diyat. Qisas "an eye for an eye" (i..e the exact same retributive punishment videotaped for all to see), as well as diyat (compensation to the family). Not one or the other. Second, their pictures and home addresses should be widely disseminated in the media and, if they live at home, their families should be shamed/identified. A taste of their own medicine.

This is how things work in the Muslim world. Softer approaches merely fuel the fire that is raging. But very stringent measures, such as collective punishment and identifying/holding the families accountable, will help curtail such heinous behavior even by Shariah standards in an "Islamic Republic."

The worst, absolute worst, thing the Muslim world is doing is sticking their collective heads in the sand and pretending there is no problem. Everything is just fine, except for a few bad apples. Not so I'm afraid. The genie was let out of the bottle a long while ago; but the 1979 Iranian Revolution which brought about the first theocracy in the Muslim world, set the stage and inspired/emboldened the Sunni elements as well (Wahhabists) who aspired for power and conquest damn the means.

May Farkhunda's death serve as some sort of wake up call to address the degree of rot which permeates Afghan society, especially in its urban settings, where there is a sort of schizophrenic existence due to the various conflicting cultural pulls. Such cultural confusion is largely absent in the more isolated village hamlets.Though the violence there can be just as lethal, traditional concepts of honor and shame mitigate somewhat, as do familial/tribal checks and balances. These factors are absent in such large urbanized centers like Kabul, with its enormous migrant population living cheek by jowl next to those who aren't blood kin. A tinder box.

But I won't hold my breath.

In Persian/Urdu, "Farkhunda/Farkhundah/Farkhandah" means "fortunate or lucky." This poor woman wasn't either notwithstanding her devoutness. A tragic end to a difficult life. And, she won't be the last. Not by a long shot given the current regressive climate.

RIP Farkhunda. RIP.

In closing, this horrific event is just part of a trajectory we are currently on whose end may indeed bring about the "Clash of Civilizations" the likes of which we haven't seen before nor can most envision in their worst nightmares.

* Juxtaposing Farkhunda with the Taliban/Da'ish/Ikhwan Groups is not meant to imply some sort of linkage where there is none. Rather, it is meant to highlight the reality/fact that both Farkhunda and other devout literalist Muslims (Ash'arite traditionalists) share the same ideas vis-a-vis how to interpret the Quran and implement its teachings vice those who are more inclined toward ijtihad/independent reasoning and context when it comes to reading this text and its application in the 21st century.

** Estimates of mental illness in Afghanistan --forms of PTSD and worse-- are in the millions; some studies estimate that 2/3rds of the populace suffers from some form of trauma due to over thirty years of civil war and regional strife. I will delve into this curse in a later blog entry as it is a pretty significant national health crisis which began with the Soviet invasion/occupation (1979-1989); followed by the brutal Mujahidin and Taliban eras.

*** Blasphemy accusations based often on hearsay have become a popular mechanism in Pakistan and Afghanistan to destroy one's enemies reputations, and even at the cost of their lives. This is possible because the Shariah requirement for hadd punishment for slander and false statements is absent in their dual flawed legal systems; instead such cases are often prosecuted in the ta'azir category thus in violation of one of Shariah's stringent requirements vis-a-vis blasphemy or other serious hadd charges.

**** Personally, I don't subscribe to these Shariah stipulations for apostasy, blasphemy etc, as someone who believes in the strict separation of religion and state in the 21st century. However, devout Muslims do believe in Shariah. Those who are so eager to impose Shariah on their Muslim brethren should, themselves, be exposed to Shariah stipulations for their own transgressions (such as the lynch mob that attacked an unarmed female based on hearsay), to include the clergy. Furthermore, Muslims who support Shariah shouldn't be permitted to live in Western societies where they demand egregious legal and social accommodations which are antithetical to individual liberty and tolerance. Principles inherent in Western constitutions. Devout Muslims are best served in their own countries where conditions are more conducive vis-a-vis their demands.

Shireen Burki's One Cent

Sunday, April 26, 2015

30TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE PRISONER UPRISING AT BADABER, PESHAWAR DISTRICT, PAKISTAN

Sunday, March 22, 2015

ON AFGHANISTAN: FARKHUNDA AND THE LYNCH MOB IN KABUL