Afghans Sacrificing War Crimes Justice for Peace?

Peter Graff of Reuters reports that the Afghan government is now confirming that a 2007 law passed by two-thirds of the Afghan parliament, but not needing signature from President Hamid Karzai, gives blanket immunity for anyone accused of war crimes committed before 2001. Say wha-?

This is one of those hard reality examples where upon first hearing, or remembering, this, one loses all faith in the Afghan parliament, and the peace process. Maybe one will want to throw turnips at the representative from Kandahar or the staffer from Kunduz, or stage a mass protest.

There is much, much reason to be disappointed by this law. Afghanistan's war has been raging now for thirty-two years. From 1978 to 2001, there were horrific crimes from mass murder to rape to torture to purposeful isolation of whole groups of people based on their ethnicity. But -- and I am not forgiving this legislation, which I myself vehemently oppose -- there is a logical reason why the proponents of this amnesty bill voted it into law.

The Afghan government -- whether backed by NATO or not -- cannot survive unless it is unified, and unified against the insurgency. For years there were multiple insurgencies. The Northern Alliance, which went legit and now controls most of the government, was an alliance of many factions, some of whom had fought each other. Even the Taliban was just a leader in a collection of factions.

Imagine a government made up of factions trying to fight several insurgencies, with leaders constantly changing sides. That was the bloody mess the country experienced -- much worse than the current fighting, in my opinion -- from 1992 to 1996. It was so bloody that many moderates, even democrats, were relieved to have the Taliban take over and ruin the economy and society with its draconian laws simply so there would be consistency.

Many Afghan leaders believe that the best way to firm the unity of the current government at a time when unity is a pre-requisite for winning peace over the Taliban insurgency, is to make sure many leaders inside the government are not worried that as soon as the Taliban is defeated, that they will be arrested for something either real or manufactured. Internally, this law saves controversial figures like the strong man of Mazar, Abdul Rashid Dostum, who could really ruin things for the government if he were to defect.

But there is also a belief that the amnesty law could help woo over the less radical Taliban insurgents and their allies. This would include the even more controversial figure of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who is accused of many crimes of war committed prior to 2001 and who leads men alongside the Taliban against the government despite not really being much committed to their extreme doctrine. While Taliban founders are fundamentally opposed to a unity government based on the fact that they believe it to be sinful, Hekmatyar might consider defecting from them if he is permitted to run for office without fear of arrest (!).

Afghan leaders who believe in the amnesty law would ask people to consider how the tide of war would shift toward peace if internal government leaders were more confident in their future role, and Taliban allies defected from the insurgency for an opportunity to join the government.

Now that I've explained the reasonable logic for why two-thirds of the Afghan government voted for a blanket amnesty law, let me share why this law will backfire. Despite the very logical arguments for how the law could earn unity and perhaps woo insurgents away from fighting, the law will so disappoint the country's peaceful, civilian majority, those who are not former warlords or sitting beside a former warlord at the parliamentary dining room, that it will counter the benefits. In other words, the law encourages warlords to stop fighting by offering them great benefits at the cost of the people who suffered under them. There must be another way to win over the large constituencies who follow leaders like Dostum (in the government) and Hekmatyar (in the insurgency) without letting the leaders off the hook for the crimes they committed.

Photo credit: U.S. Army (U.S. Special Forces meet with elders in Helmand Province)