‘All
those killings, all those human rights violations
were not the fault of a government’
ADITI BHADURI in
conversation with Masood Khalili, Afghanistan’s ambassador to India since
February 1996
On
a mellow December after noon, I was ushered into the opulent drawing room of
Masood Khalili, Af ghanistan’s ambassador to India since February 1996.
Representing the Northern Alliance, he was a close friend of Ahmad Shah Masood,
the Lion of Panjshir, and was with him when he was assassinated by Arab
journalists in a suicide attack in September. Having himself suffered severe
injury and emerging as the sole survivor, Dr Khalili returned to Delhi after
treatment in Germany and remains confined to the house.
Though busy — the phone kept
ringing every five minutes with updates from either Bonn or from Delhi itself
— he made time for an interview and my being a Bengali from Kolkata turned out
to be a trump card. I was someone from the land of Tagore, a favourite of his.
Though Afghanistan is the hottest
topic right now, Dr Khalili preferred to dwell at some length on the pathos of
‘Kabuliwallah’ and the serene hours he spent in Shantiniketan, which he
hopes to revisit again in the near future. An extraordinary and erudite person,
he did his Masters in Political Science from Delhi University. Excerpts:
For a long time now you’ve been
representing the Northern Alliance and the Rabbani government in Delhi. You were
a close friend of Masood Shah and were with him when he was killed. In fact, you
were the sole survivor of that suicide bombing.
It’s hard to talk of that incident. I’m very sad my friend was killed by two
Arab terrorists. I was severely wounded too, but I’m glad I was with him till
the end. We stayed up that night till four in the morning and talked of
everything, including poetry. I’ll never forget that night. It’s very hard
when you lose a friend.
The National Alliance or the United Front and all parties that constitute it
amassed quite a deplorable reputation for human rights violations between 1992
and 1996, which is why the Taliban were able to come to power.
Well, there was fighting going on after the Soviets left. Hekmatyar, who was
planted by Pakistan, by the ISI, in Kabul, was killing people in the name of
Afghanistan, in the name of Islam, in the name of things he himself didn’t
believe in. But all those killings, all those human rights violations were not
the fault of a government.
There was so much foreign
interference going on and we were still trying to consolidate our hold. There
were problems in Kabul when we were there. We honestly couldn’t control the
situation, couldn’t protect people from that kind of chaos, but we still tried
to keep the offices open for women, tried to deter extremists from disturbing
them.
You say your government was
trying to protect the rights of working women, yet one of the Rabbani government’s
first decrees was to ban women newsreaders from TV.
No, I tell you we never said or did that. We never said women should not go on
TV or radio. In fact, we were encouraging them to go out and work. But they were
seeing violence out there, there was a war going on, rockets were being launched
on Kabul, civilians were being killed. Those poor newsreaders left Kabul. We
never told them to leave, to stop working; we wanted to protect them. For
example, there was one newsreader, Miss Kohzat. She read news on TV and radio
and we escorted her to work every morning.
Why then, in spite of such a policy, was the Revolutionary Association of the
Women of Afghanistan not included in the Bonn talks?
First and foremost, RAWA doesn’t represent a lot of women in Afghanistan.
They are Maoist, communist. I don’t question why they are so — that is their
choice. But the people of Afghanistan are traditional and against communism and
I think it will take time for the communists to prove they are not traitors.
But RAWA was also anti–Soviet?
But they are Maoists, communists. When we had a communist government and a
communist movement in Afghanistan, 1.5 million people were killed during the
Soviet invasion. So it would indeed have been difficult to include them in
anything because they were called traitors.
But RAWA has been doing a lot of good work in spite of whatever ideology they
might follow?
As I said, I don’t know much about RAWA. They are mostly vocal on their
computers, websites, but inside Afghanistan (laughs) indeed we have no woman
belonging to RAWA.
Would you say the women
delegates at Bonn were more representative of Afghan women?
Of course. They were introduced by different factions in Afghanistan. And
they are not parties like RAWA.
There were massacres in Mazar–e–Sharif.
Yes, that was not a policy, hundreds of Pakistanis were there, hundreds of
Arabs were there, hundreds of Chechens were there, so we had to defeat them.
The NA is welcoming many
Taliban defectors to their side as "brothers". What about the foreign
fighters – would you be offering them amnesty if they surrender?
According to all values that we cherish — spiritual, moral, traditional
— if they do surrender we will ask international organisations like the Red
Cross and others to take care of them, as we did. We asked the UN to take care
of them but they fired back. I hope they have learnt the lesson not to fire back
and instead honestly surrender.
The NA’s history has been quite complicated. Each faction has changed and
switched sides and loyalties as and when the situation demanded. Were these
differences manifesting themselves at Bonn, for example, between Rabbani and
Qanooni?
We’ve always had differences but thank God we are doing very well
ethnically, socially. We are not creating problems but helping each other. Bonn
was a very good example that in the NA or UF, we have indeed been making history
by cooperating with each other politically to build Afghanistan’s today and
tomorrow.
Unfortunately, again it was
Pakistan that was trying to create animosity between one ethnic group and
another. They failed. Now Pashtuns, Tajiks, Hazars, Uzbeks and other
nationalities are working together to set up an interim government for six
months.
Most of the world feels a new government in Afghanistan should be headed by
the king as a symbol of Afghan unity and peace. Rabbani is, however, against
that option.
When we entered Kabul, we did not want to lead or be No. 1 in Afghanistan or
in the interim government. Then it was proposed the king lead and we welcomed
it. If he can do it, why not? The king can be a symbol, a democratic–minded
person. After all, he had ruled Afghanistan for 42 years, introduced democracy.
We had four elections during his time. He’s also a Pashtun — a community
which constitutes 40 per cent of Afghanistan’s population. If he can lead, why
not? We are 100 per cent ready. But if he’s old and can’t do it, we would
still say someone else should be the head, not us.
Obviously, a UN peacekeeping
force for Afghanistan is on the cards.
Of course. We accept any international force that can ensure peace, security
and order.
Would you impose any time
frame?
No, in a war you cannot have a time frame. It may take a week, it may take a
year. Until the war is over, until terrorists are curbed, until al–Qaeda is
chased out of Afghanistan, until we are safe. This is what we’ve wanted for
the last five years from the West, from America, from India, from the regional
powers, from Russia. Please help us to help the world, to break the backbone of
terrorism in Afghanistan.
Yet it was the NA that first hosted Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan by Yunus
Khales in Jalalabad.
No. Yunus Khales was a chief and he was independent enough to accept Osama
Bin Laden and he did not do it with any bad intention. Khales did not accept him
as a terrorist and the NA was not there in those days. Even Khales cannot be
condemned for this. It is the Taliban and Pakistan’s ISI which paved the way
in 85 per cent of the areas controlled by the Taliban for Osama Bin Laden and
the thousands of al–Qaeda members to manoeuvre.
If you get Mullah Omar what would you do with him?
I hope we can capture him, but I don’t think we will. He will die or commit
suicide. Osama Bin Laden would be handed over to an international tribunal, to
the Americans and they can do whatever they want with him.
It is well known that the USA is seeking a foothold in the region to access the
oil and gas of Central Asia and the Caspian Sea.
No, I don’t think this is their aim. In the new scheme of things, their goal
is to destroy terrorism.
It was with your active cooperation that India was able to send in a mission to
Kabul, reopen its diplomatic mission and station a medical team.
India has played a very positive role as far as Afghanistan is concerned in the
past 10 years. First, they did not interfere in our internal affairs. Second,
they always wanted sovereignty and self-determination for Afghanistan and
respected its independence. Third, in times of any difficulty, floods or
earthquakes, India rushed its doctors, established clinics. Despite being poor,
they have always sent help. India is a great country, which has had relations
with Afghanistan for centuries, independent of any other country.
How do you view future Indo–Afghan relations? We had made ourselves unpopular
with the Afghan people when we supported the Soviets in Afghanistan.
The relation over the past 10 years shows the future. We can’t wait to see our
fruits back in Indian markets. This is a country with which we’ve had
relations for centuries.
TOP |