If there is one thing that we in North America have little modern understanding of it is the daily affects of warfare on a society. It’s true that we have participated in wars abroad, but it has not been since the 19th Century that North Americans have been directly effected by the true destructive and traumatizing realities of prolonged conflicts.

The last major incidents on this continent were polar opposites. One involved the planned and executed destruction or internment of Native Peoples, the other was a war between two halves of a nation that began as a fight over State’s rights and union, and ended as a struggle for the emancipation of an enslaved people – though it should be said that the latter was, by no means, realistically achieved.

During both of those conflicts we saw first hand what war looked like. Atlanta, Vicksburg, Gettysburg, Fredericksburg, and numerous others besides – all of them decimated. So too were Native communities that either chose to fight back or stood in the way of western expansion – something that we like to refer to as ‘manifest destiny’ (of all things).

Our participation in the First and Second World Wars saw grief land on our doorsteps, but it did not expose us to the reigning of bombs, the devastation of our homes, or civilian deaths on a constant and significant level. When the Second World War came to an end, Canada and the United States were two of the only participants that remained completely untouched by the realities of the war, the attack on Pearl Harbour aside.

Thus, we have existed here in North America, despite those brief occurrences, detracted from the true realities of conflict. Only those that were sent to fight in foreign lands have any real understanding of what the ramifications on a society actually are when, on a daily basis, it is exposed to it.

In the case of Vietnam, the people of that country had been embroiled in conflicts for the better part of 1,000 years prior to US military involvement there. That fact was something that was largely overlooked by the Americans at the time, and, in no small way, the same historical reality exists in the country in which the Canadian Armed Forced currently find themselves.

So how do we view those that have endured decades, if not centuries, of continued strife? How do we place histories of conflict into proper context with regards to our own actions and beliefs? To the average Canadian, Afghanistan automatically brings to mind numerous things: al-Qaeda, the Taliban, the War On Terror, poppy cultivation, and religious fanaticism. But refusing to properly examining the history of the region, and the causes and affects that have led us to this point, only reveals our limited vision regarding it and, more importantly, the justifications that we are currently clinging to with regards to the perceived results of our military participation there.

A Crossroads

Studies and archeological evidence suggests that some fifty thousand years ago Afghanistan was inhabited by a farming culture, one of the earliest in the world. The region itself is literally a crossroads, one that bridges three crucial points of the Asian compass – East, West, and Central Asia, which led to the influencing of the region by a variety of different cultures, the earliest being that of the Iranians.

Like most regions of the world that have been influenced by countless other cultures, Afghanistan has been invaded and occupied countless times throughout its history. Among the more notable were the Median Empire, the Persian Empire, the Greeks under Alexander, the Kushans, the Hepthalites, the Arabs, the Turks, the Mongols, and the British. The introduction of Islam into the region occurred during The Islamic Conquest of Afghanistan between 652-870 CE, when it was invaded by the Arabs. Thus, Islam, and it’s tenets, have influenced the region for some 1,350 years.

Like the history of much of central Asia and Persia, that of Afghanistan is extremely complex. In fact, to properly examine it in detail from the creation of the Airyānem Vāejah nation to the Anglo-Afghan wars fought between 1839 and 1880 would require years. But the central point is that it is a part of the world that has been gripped by conflict for ages, and one whose people, no matter the time of their arrival or initial historical origins, have been affected by it for centuries.

This fact, in and of itself, is of extreme importance when examining the current attitudes of Afghanistan’s various factions, their goals, and their allegiances. As I have said, despite our cultural foundations, those primarily being Northern European for the most part, we are not a people (North Americans, that is) with a prolonged history of domestic conflict experiences. That point is utterly crucial when examining events in Afghanistan today and our disconnect between what we perceive as a righteous cause and what others perceive as simply another military invasion and occupation of their country, something that they, and their ancestors, can place into context only too well.

The Great Game

It is vitally important to remember that Afghanistan has long since been used by foreign powers as a means for imperial expansion and buffering. In the case what is historically referred to as The Great Game, which, given its arrogance, was aptly titled, it was used as a buffer between British and Russian imperial interests, though the British would have more to do with interfering with its internal politics.

The first Anglo-Afghan War, often referred to as ‘Auckland’s Folly’, began in 1839 and lasted until 1842. For all intents and purposes, this action was, as far as the British outcome was concerned, a total disaster. After placing Shah Shuja on the thrown in Kabul, something that caused immense disdain amongst much of the population, the British were forced to maintain a permanent military presence to ensure the survival of his rule (sound familiar at all?). Unfortunately, numerous Afghan tribes opposed British interference and Shuja’s station, many of whom banded together under the leadership of Mohammad Akbar Khan, the son of Dost Mohammed Khan.

Given the realities of the discontented forces arrayed against them, the British eventually, after several incidents involving the killings of senior British officials and failed attempts to negotiate terms to remain in the region, secured an agreement that allowed for the safe passage of British forces and their supporters back to the British outpost in Jalalabad.

While in retreat, the British were harassed by Ghilzai fighters and eventually massacred at the Gandamak pass, with only one British officer of the contingent surviving the ordeal. The massacre at Gandamak pass lead to the creation of the region’s now famed moniker - ‘the graveyard for foreign armies’.

As expected, Shah Shuja’s reign lasted a handful of months after the British exodus. He was eventually assassinated in the Spring in 1842 and in 1843 Dost Mohammed Khan regained the throne.

The diversity of the Afghan population has always been at the center of its problems, there is no questioning that. But when a foreign power is thrown into the mix, especially ones that choose to support certain rulers that placate their needs, it is more common than not for those diverse elements to band together in defense of their right to self determination, even if on a local level.

British and Russian complicity in Afghanistan throughout the latter half of the 19th Century is no secret, nor is it a secret that they supported those that best suited their objectives in the region, laying the primitive groundwork for the economic and military activities that we now employ to influence others for our benefit. It is also here, in Afghanistan’s past, that we find examples of the sort of foreign arrogance which has helped shape the views of many Afghans with regards to foreign interference.

In 1907, Russia and Great Britain signed the Convention of St. Petersburg, an agreement that divided the region into various areas of Russian and British influence. This was done, of course, without the participation of the ruler of the country at the time.

The usury of Afghanistan’s various rulers was not a lesson lost on their 20th Century counterparts. Habibullah Khan, for example, played both sides against one another during World War One, securing weapons and other incentives from the German-Turkish alliance in exchange for his agreement to attack the British in India. Instead, he used the opportunity to negotiate an end to British involvement in Afghan foreign policy - which, in truth, only produced little more than a respite.

Habibullah Khan, who died in 1919, was succeeded by his son, Amanullah Khan, who during his tenure began modernizing, establishing relations with other nations, and then finally declared Afghanistan an independent nation. The ‘audacity’ of this declaration sparked the final Anglo-Afghan War, the Convention of St. Petersburg having been rendered moot following the revolution in Russia.

During the conflict, King Amanullah’s home was intentionally targeted by the British air force, an occurrence that led to the penning of a statement that is just as relevant today as it was then. In response to the attack, King Amanullah wrote…

“It is a matter of great regret that the throwing of bombs by zeppelins on London was denounced as a most savage act and the bombardment of places of worship and sacred spots was considered a most abominable operation. While we now see with our own eyes that such operations were a habit which is prevalent among all civilized people of the west”.

The Looming Effects Of Unrealized Arrogance

Like the landscape of Afghanistan, its faces are varied and rugged and complex. Centuries of instability, tribal clashes, foreign interferences, and being viewed as somehow ‘primitive’ with regards to self governance play a significant role in the current Afghan mindset. In many ways, like Iraq, Afghanistan consists of nations with a nation. And the only unique circumstance in their history that has defused those boundaries is the cooperation of its people to rid the country of those that would attempt to use it for their own purposes.

In my lifetime, Afghanistan has been a nation decimated by conflict, extreme poverty, and countless human rights violations. But through all of it, it should not be overlooked that the determination and dedication of its people, when push comes to shove, has always been the most overlooked and underestimated factor. There is no excusing the actions and policies of the Taliban, just as there is no excusing the conduct of the Northern Alliance during the invasion of the country in 2001 and US abuses of Afghan detainees both in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo during that period. Those factors alone point to why there has been a resurgence in support for the Taliban, whose face might be one of religious fanaticism, but whose numbers may be swelling not because of their ideology, but because they are the only ones willing to stand up to occupational forces.

History repeating itself.