On Monday, the Iranophobia of US president George Bush was once again on display.
The occasion was the joint press conference he gave at his Camp David resort along with Afghanistan's president, Hamid Karzai.
Contradicting Karzai's statement in a CNN interview on Sunday that Iran was "a helper and a solution" to his country, Bush urged him to be "very cautious about whether or not the Iranian influence there in Afghanistan is a positive force".
Such a statement could only come from someone ignorant of the recent history of Tehran's relationship with its eastern neighbour.
Long before 9/11, the Iranian regime was at loggerheads with the Taliban who captured Kabul in September 1996. As orthodox Sunnis of the Hanafi code, the Taliban held Shias in low esteem, and banned their annual ritual of Ashura.
When the Taliban authorities held a dozen Iranian diplomats hostage in Mazar-e Sharif in the summer of 1998, relations between the two neighbours deteriorated to the point when a war between them seemed imminent. In the end cool heads prevailed. Iran withdrew the revolutionary guard troops it had amassed along the Afghan-Iranian border.
Following 9/11, as the Bush administration prepared to attack the Taliban, the Iranians shared intelligence with it surreptitiously.
At their urging, Ismail Khan, the anti-Taliban Afghan leader based in the Iranian city of Mashhad, along with his fighters, coordinated his attack on the Taliban in western Afghanistan with the Pentagon's campaign in the north and the east. Ismail Khan's militia captured Herat, an important city near the Iranian border.
At the international conference held in Bonn, Germany, in late December 2001, Iran's foreign minister, Kamal Kharrazi, actively co-operated with the Americans to install Hamid Karzai as the leader of the post-Taliban Afghanistan.
At the subsequent international donors' gathering, in Tokyo, Iran pledged $500m aid to Afghanistan over five years. Unlike many other nations at the Tokyo conference, it has fulfilled its initial promise. It has been involved in several infrastructure and health care projects, particularly in western Afghanistan.
In 2003, when Ismail Khan, an ethnic Tajik, refused to send an envoy to Kabul when Karzai, an ethnic Pashtun, was formally installed as president, it was the Iranian government which persuaded him to fly his son for the inaugural ceremony. In return, Karzai appointed Khan's son as a cabinet minister.
Furthermore, ever since the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979, the Iranian regime has been battling the Afghan drug dealers who use Iran as a transit route for shipping their products to Europe. In the course of hundreds of fire fights between the smugglers and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards (charged with monitoring the national borders), a few thousand guards have lost their lives.
The anti-narcotic campaign by Iran, which has continued since the overthrow of the Taliban in December 2001, has been praised not only by the Karzai government but also by the UN.
However, given Bush's deep-seated aversion towards the Islamic Republic, it was unlikely that a brief history of Iran's anti-narcotic campaign was conveyed to him during the "more than a fair amount of time" he spent with Karzai discussing the fact that Afghanistan accounted for 95% of the world's poppy production used to produce heroin.
Overall, in the light of the recent history of the region, Karzai's description of Iran as "a helper and a solution" of Afghanistan was rooted in facts.
By contrast, Bush damaged his already low credibility in foreign affairs when he went on to claim that Iran had a government "that has proclaimed its desire to build a nuclear weapon."
This statement is false. On September 12 2004, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamanei issued a fatwa (religious decree) that it was "un-Islamic" to use an atom bomb.
In his Friday prayer sermon on November 5 2004, Khamanei declared that "developing, producing or stockpiling nuclear weapons is forbidden under Islam" and for "our believing nation", and added: "They accuse us of pursuing nuclear weapons program. I am telling them as I have said before that we are not even thinking about nuclear weapons."
But then again, in George Bush the world is dealing with a politician who prides himself on acting on gut feeling - rather than facts, expertise or historical experience.
Dilip Hiro was educated in India, Britain and America, where he received a master's degree at Virginia Polytechnic and State University. He settled in London in the mid-1960s, and became a full-time writer, journalist and commentator. He has published 27 books.
www.westministerbookshop.co.uk
| By Ahmad Shahnawaz, 08-10-07, 04:23 AM |
Bush has gut feeling Karzai wrong about IranYour article is off topic.
a)Ismail Khan is Not Tajik but afghan. Tajiks are turkic people looks like the Uzbeks and Ismail Khan doesn’t look anything like that.
b) Tajik is a wrong miss-used word by the Russian taken from the Uzbeks which only applied to Turkic origin or non-Turkic speakers ie Fersi speakers of Central Asia (Turkistan)means they are Turkic and like Ottaman and Indian they were influnce by this new Islamic language.
c) Pashtun comes from the word Pashtuwan which means someone who speaks Pashtu, by Race all Pashtuwans are Afghan.
d) The other group of Speakers are Farsiwans (Whom the world calls Tadjiks which doesn’t fit with the 70% Turkic people Tajikistan)
In Afghanistan there are two major groups Farsiwans (Mistakenly called Tajiks) and Pashtuwans (Pashtuns)
Please don’t make it sound like they are two different race. They’re not, infact Race,
Its true in 1919 over 500,000 Tajiks came into Afghanistan during Russian invasion and another 600,000 in 1990s of Tajik civil war, and 300,000 went back to Tajikistan if you guys add up the total would be less then 1.5 million, or less then 5%
The Uzbeks also makeup another 5% and Hazaras (Pure Mongolians ) makeup 10-12%.
As you can see 80% of Afghanistan are Afghans by origin. |
| By S Z Hussain, 08-10-07, 04:17 PM |
Reply to Ahmed ShahnawazYou are out of Topic. |
| By sanmustafah, 08-22-07, 08:44 AM |
Ismail KhanIsmail Khan is an Afghan national, though I believe he is of pashtun descent (nakalee). Tajiks are not turkic, they are persian. Your numbers are very radical. Your gonna have to provide some data to back up those claims. The hazaras have been in this land for hundreds of years. To think they are still pure mongolians is counterfactual. |
| By Ahmad Shahnawaz, 10-10-07, 01:09 AM |
reply to Ismail Khan.My data came from
Hazaras mongolian and later forced to become Shia is from http://www.afghanmagazine.com/2004_06/articles/hsadat.shtml
This http://www.everyculture.com/Africa-Middle-East/Hazara.html[/url] UN related links talk about Tajiks coming into Afghanistan.
And this is about Tajiks moving into other Afghan provinces
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1996/Tajik.htm
As you can see adding those numbers you would know why Afghans have also mentioned about Afghanizing Tajiks. The million or three million Tajik population leads to Westerner’s believes that Dari speaking of Afghan origin (Farsiwans) are same as Tajiks. Which is very wrong. One can travel to see that majority of Tajikistan are turkic looking and share no looks come to People of Farsi speaking Afghan Race.
“Tajiks are not turkic, they are persian”
Dear sir Please define words which you used. Tajiks are Persian speaking of Turkic Origin. Or Persians of Central Asia. I also speak English and I can be called English by others but I cannot be Anglo-saxion. My point is Language doesn’t define Race, Languages change all the time. Over years Dari dialects (Persian, Tajik which is Turkic version of Farsi) have been used around the world mainly in India, Central Asia (Turkistan or modern Tajikistan), Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran. These are home of many people, and they happened to borrow languages. |
| By SanMustafah, 12-23-07, 06:49 AM |
HazarasHow does hazaras being of mongolian decent (obvious) make them PURE mongolian. This was obviously the issue, prove these people have only mongolian genes instead of posting generic links to common knowledge. |