Conflict has raged in Afghanistan since April 1978. It has
been marked by brutality on a massive scale. Although the major
fighting ended with the defeat of the Taliban in 2001, conflict
continues especially in the south and east of the country, and many
of those responsible for war crimes in earlier phases of the war
continue to wield power. During every phase of the fighting, Afghan
and foreign armed factions committed crimes against humanity and
serious war crimes. These included large-scale massacres, disappearances
and summary executions of tens of thousands of Afghans, indiscriminate
bombing and rocketing that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians,
torture, mass rape and other atrocities. There has never been any
serious effort, international or domestic, to account for these
crimes.
Afghanistan’s quarter-century of war began on April 27, 1978,
when the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA),
a small, Marxist-Leninist party, launched a coup, overthrowing and
killing then-President Mohammed Daoud Khan and most of his family.
The PDPA then embarked on an ambitious and ruthless campaign to
transform Afghanistan into a modern socialist state. Mass arrests
and executions began shortly after the coup. Among the thousands
of victims were individuals (or entire families) that the new regime
considered as potential opponents: leaders of social, political,
or religious groups, professionals of every kind and other members
of the educated class.
Lacking popular support to carry out its political agenda, the PDPA
found itself in a situation spiraling out of control. The repression
sparked uprisings throughout the country and mutinies within the
Afghan army that threatened to destabilize the regime. The disintegration
of the army marked a turning point for Soviet policy and led to
the decision to invade on December 25, 1979, ostensibly in response
to a request for military support from the exiled deputy prime minister
Babrak Kamal, who was then installed as a puppet leader.
The Soviet occupation brought about a shift in tactics in the war
as the resistance forces began to coalesce around a number of factions
largely organized along ethnic lines. They did not control the cities,
but moved mainly in the rural areas where they enjoyed popular support.
Most of the factions maintained headquarters or political representatives
in Pakistan or Iran, where they also established conduits for vast
amounts of military assistance that began to flow principally from
the U.S. through Pakistan. Aware that the mass arrests and executions
carried out earlier by the PDPA had only fueled the resistance and
nearly destroyed the Army, the Soviets employed more systematic
means of intelligence gathering. The secret police, the KhAD, was
modeled on the Soviet KGB. It engaged in widespread summary executions,
detentions and torture of suspected mujahidin (resistance) supporters.
Torture survivors from this period whom I have interviewed regularly
identified Soviet personnel supervising the torture.
In the countryside, Soviet forces bombed routinely and indiscriminately;
the aim was both to demoralize the civilian population supporting
the resistance and to destroy its means of providing food and shelter
to the mujahidin. Thus, irrigation systems, cropland and other rural
resources were bombed as well as villages. The bombing killed countless
civilians and devastated the countryside. From the early 1980s on,
most refugees arriving in Pakistan reported they had fled because
of the bombing. In all, some five million Afghans fled the country.
In addition to the bombing, Soviet and Afghan forces carried out
reprisals against civilians, executing any they believed to support
the resistance. Soviet forces also sowed mines throughout the country;
many remain a threat to Afghans living in rural areas today.
Desertions from the Afghan army had so decimated the military that
Soviet forces and advisors were deployed in great numbers; Soviet
personnel made decisions for the state, and for the PDPA officials
who nominally governed it. Thus, some responsibility for war crimes
committed during this period may rest with those Soviet officers
as well as with senior Afghan officials. The members of the politburos
of the two countries’ ruling parties could also be held accountable
for the decisions and policies during this period. No one knows
how many Afghans died in the ten years following the revolution,
but the number may be as high as one million.
In February 1986 the Soviet Union, under President Gorbachev, reached
a decision to withdraw its forces by the end of 1988. The head of
KhAD, Najibullah, was “elected” general secretary of
the PDPA and subsequently became president of the Revolutionary
Council. The Geneva Accords, outlining the provisions of the Soviet
withdrawal, were signed on April 14, 1988, by Afghanistan, Pakistan,
the U.S. and the USSR. Military and economic aid from the U.S. and
USSR continued to their respective clients.
Without the Soviet army, the Najibullah government increasingly
relied for its defense on regional militias, paying for their loyalty
with Soviet-provided cash and weapons. Although some were regular
army divisions, the militias operated outside ordinary chain of
command within the military, and were largely autonomous within
their areas of control. Militia forces were responsible for waylaying
and robbing travelers, including returning refugees, extorting money
from traders, kidnapping, looting property, forcibly taking land,
and planting mines without mapping or marking them.
A number of mujahidin groups also committed war crimes during this
period. Many of those based in Pakistan who had the support of Pakistani
military and intelligence agencies operated with impunity and had
considerable control over the Afghan refugee population. One of
the most powerful of these was Hizb-i Islami, headed by Gulbuddin
Hekmatyar. These mujahidin carried out assassinations and maintained
secret detention facilities in Pakistan; persons detained there
included Afghan refugees who opposed the mujahidin leaders, or who
worked for foreign NGOs, especially those employing women.
The demise of the Soviet Union meant the end of Soviet aid, and
of the Najibullah regime. When the Najibullah government collapsed
in April 1992, Kabul was engulfed in civil war as the multiple factions
that had participated in the struggle against the PDPA regime and
the Soviet occupation, along with the militias, fought for control
of territory. Despite efforts by the UN and some of the neighboring
countries to mediate, there was no agreement on a power-sharing
settlement. The factional fighting fell largely along ethnic lines,
and groups frequently targeted civilians from rival ethnic groups.
In many cases, the atrocities were carried out on the orders or
with the direct knowledge of senior commanders and party leaders.
However, senior commanders secured the loyalty of their subordinates
at a cost, and operated with the knowledge that any effort to weaken
the power of the commanders under them might lead them to switch
sides, taking their troops with them. While this fact does not absolve
the leaders of responsibility for the actions of their forces, it
is critical in understanding command and control within the armed
factions.
On April 26, 1992, most of the party leaders in Pakistan announced
that they had reached agreement on an interim government that would
hold power until a council could be convened and elections subsequently
held. As defense minister of the new government, Ahmad Shah Massoud
attempted to gain control first of Kabul itself—an objective
that eluded him for three years. His principal foe was Hizb-i Islami,
whose rocket attacks killed thousands of civilians between 1992
and 1995. Every major armed faction in Kabul had an arsenal of heavy
weaponry that they used in battles that raged in the streets of
Kabul during this period. Rape, as well as other targeted attacks
on civilians, was ethnically based. In many cases, it was used as
a means of ethnic cleansing. In one of the most notorious incidents
of the civil war, hundreds of ethnic Shia Hazaras were raped and
killed in a February 1993 massacre. Survivors I have spoken to identified
commanders responsible for the killings and rape who continue to
operate with impunity in Kabul. The leader of one of the factions
responsible, Abdul Rasul Sayyaf, was elected to parliament in September
2005.
The Taliban emerged out of the chaos of the post-1992 period. In
this group’s first successful military operation, the Taliban
disarmed and executed a notoriously predatory commander in Kandahar.
The Taliban moved on to take on other commanders and very quickly
attracted the support of Pakistan, who needed a client it thought
would protect Pakistan’s interests. By 1995 the Taliban took
control of Herat, and in 1996, Kabul. The Taliban’s actions
with respect to women have been well documented, as they imposed
harsh restrictions on girls’ schools and employment for women
The Taliban were highly centralized, with regional governors in
all strategic provinces reporting directly to the group’s
leader, Mullah Omar. The influence of non-Afghans over Mullah Omar
increased after Osama bin Laden returned to Afghanistan in 1996
and in 1997 moved to Kandahar.
In May 1997 the largest single massacre of the war took place. Mainly
Uzbek troops under General Malik Pahlawan captured over 3,000 Taliban
soldiers at Mazar-i-Sharif and executed them. Some were taken to
a desert location and shot; others were thrown down wells. One of
the few survivors described to me how he crawled from under the
bodies until he reached a village where the residents were willing
to shelter him. Gen. Malik continues to live in Kabul.
The major war crimes of the Taliban were committed between 1997
and 2001 as they moved outside their ethnic Pashtun heartland. In
areas where they encountered resistance, Taliban forces responded
by massacring civilians and other noncombatants, and burning down
villages. In August 1998, they massacred at least 2,000 people,
mainly Hazara civilians, in Mazar-i-Sharif, exacting what they said
was revenge for the massacre of their own troops the previous year.
In July 1999, the Taliban launched a major offensive across the
plain north of Kabul known as Shamali (meaning “North”),
summarily executing civilians, and burning down villages, fields
and orchards. The devastation was incalculable. In both of these
operations, the Taliban had considerable support from Pakistan.
When the United States intervened in Afghanistan in late 2001, its
forces sought allies on the ground among the commanders of the so-called
“Northern Alliance” opposed to the Taliban. The U.S.’s
overriding objective in Afghanistan was to defeat al-Qaeda and remove
the Taliban from power with minimal U.S. casualties. The fact that
many of these new allies had records that included not only grave
breaches of international humanitarian law, but in some cases criminal
ties to narcotics trafficking and other illicit activities, apparently
posed no obstacle. The U.S. provided arms, cash and other support
to commanders whom it believed could keep the Taliban and al-Qaeda
at bay. But the U.S. failed to achieve that objective. Athough a
new central government was established under President Hamid Karzai
in 2002, the Taliban remain a lethal force, with support flowing
across the border from the “tribal areas” of Pakistan.
Meanwhile a number of the commanders the U.S. has backed have strengthened
their positions against rivals, and have continued to engage in
abuse and criminal activities.
In mid-November, 2001, Northern Alliance forces surrounded the last
Taliban stronghold in Kunduz. When the Taliban forces and the Pakistani
and Arab fighters with them surrendered, thousands were taken into
custody and transported to prison facilities under the control of
General Dostum at Shiberghan and Qala-i-Jangi, near Mazar-i-Sharif.
At least two hundred detainees (and, according to some sources,
many more) reportedly died en route in the overcrowded container
trucks used to transport them and were buried in mass graves in
the desert area of Dasht-i-Leili near Shiberghan. Gen. Dostum later
acknowledged that some two hundred prisoners had suffocated due
to inadvertent overcrowding. A full investigation of the incident
has never taken place.
Not all Afghan commanders and leaders involved in the long years
of conflict engaged in war crimes; many should enjoy the right to
participate in politics. However, too many with criminal records
have secured places in political office or security agencies. By
allying itself—for the sake of political expediency—with
local commanders with long records of past crimes, the U.S. has
jeopardized prospects for establishing stable and accountable institutions
in Afghanistan, and has helped reinforce a pattern of impunity that
undermines the legitimacy of the political process.
U.S. forces have also committed grave abuses. These have included
crude and brutal methods of torture that have sometimes led to death,
the use of secret detention facilities that facilitate torture;
and unacknowledged detentions that are tantamount to disappearances,
in violation of prohibitions on prolonged arbitrary detention in
customary international humanitarian law and human rights law. During
Cherif Bassiouni’s tenure as UN Independent Expert on Human
Rights in Afghanistan, the U.S. blocked his efforts to inspect U.S.
detention facilities. Bassiouni had particularly condemned the United
States’ use of “firebases” to hold detainees—facilities
not accessible to the ICRC. Under U.S. pressure, in 2005 the UN
Human Rights Commission did not renew Bassiouni’s mandate.
In January 2005, the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission
published the results of a national survey which showed overwhelming
support for measures to keep war criminals out of power and to begin
a truth process to account for past crimes. Before the September
2005 parliamentary elections, an electoral complaint commission
received hundreds of submissions from Afghans charging candidates
with war crimes and human rights violations. The fact that many
candidates known to have illegal militias were not removed from
the ballot was seen as one factor in the low voter turnout. After
months of delay, in December 2005, the cabinet of President Hamid
Karzai’s administration adopted an action plan on transitional
justice that was based on the Human Rights Commission’s recommendations.
A year later, few of the recommended steps had taken place. While
some Afghans see the need to find a way to address the past, others,
as well as some senior U.S. officials, argue that rocking the boat
will lead to greater instability. In fact, the failure to scrutinize
the records of those vying for power has led to the entrenchment
of persons who continue to terrorize civilians and otherwise undermine
the political process.
(See detention and interrogation;
Guantanamo; terrorism.)

|