Page Title

August 2008

ISI’s Role in Afghanistan: Sayed Mohammad Husaini Madani Talks

Sayed Mohammad Husiani Madani is the editor of Payam-e Mujahed, an Afghan weekly. He also contributes to other publications as an expert on international relations, Iran and Pakistan. Previously he served in the cultural commission of the National Front. Mr. Madani earned his Bachelor’s degree in political science at Iran. Kabul Direct interviewed him at his residence in Kabul.

Kabul Direct: Pakistan and Afghanistan have had to face many challenges recently, and relations between the two countries seem to be colder than ever. How do you think relations between the two countries will change now that Musharraf has left the scene?

Husaini Madani: Throughout Pakistan’s history, two major players have driven events there: The militarists, or high-ranking military officials, and the politicians. The militarists are under the influence of the Pakistani intelligence organization – that is, the Inter-Service intelligence (ISI). Whenever the military’s role has been reduced, the politicians become the more powerful force. I think that now that Musharraf is gone, the ISI will remain powerful, even though the new civilian administration in Islamabad would like to transform the situation and transfer control of the ISI from the army to the interior ministry. Because the ISI has influence over every branch of the Pakistani government, I don’t think there we will see major changes in Pakistan’s foreign policies towards Afghanistan.

Kabul Direct: You mean that Pakistan’s foreign policy is determined by the ISI?

Husaini Madani: Since the Taliban emerged in Afghanistan in 1994 I think it has been obvious that it is the ISI that has become the main decision maker in Pakistan. Although there is still a diplomacy channel open in Pakistan’s foreign ministry.

Kabul Direct: Why would the diplomacy channel of Pakistan conform to the agenda of the ISI?

Husaini Madani: I think the reasons are quite obvious. First and foremost, Pakistani diplomats in their dealings with the western countries have made a concerted effort to blow up the crisis in the region. Pakistan needs to manufacture crisis conditions in our region in order to be able to attract an outsize share of political and financial support. Pakistan benefits the most from all the attention being paid to Afghanistan and more generally South Asia. Notice that in the war on terrorism, Pakistan has been the largest beneficiary of Western aid. Second, when it comes to the Pakistan-India rivalry in the region, the ISI plays the leading role. The ISI is determined to isolate India and weaken its power in the region, and especially in countries like Afghanistan. If India is weak, this is a victory for foreign diplomacy in Pakistan. Third, because extremism is growing in Pakistan, along with demands for national liberation, particularly in the Balochi and Pashtun areas, Pakistan’s diplomats need the ISI to be involved in order to create tension and conflicts inside these communities so that they will fight each other as opposed to unite and succeed in fulfilling their dream of having an independent Pashtunistan, for example, in the border regions.

Kabul Direct: You named the ISI as the arbiter of foreign policy in Pakistan. The ISI is alleged to be under the influence of Islamist radicals. Do you think that this is the reason why the ISI is meddling in the internal affairs of Afghanistan? Are they behind the insurgents for ideological reasons or for political reasons?

Husaini Madani: Let’s look back at its origins. The ISI was founded for ideological reasons. When Gen. Zaiul Haq came to power in 1977, he imposed the ideology on the agency. Gen. Zia, as we know, was the first traditionalist or fundamentalist who came to power in Pakistan. When he took over the country, he instituted many very far-ranging changes. Under his leadership, the fundamentalists and extremists were put in charge of the ISI.

He also changed the country’s seminaries. Entrance requirements were changed. Before paying students were able to attend these schools. But after Gen. Zia came to power, he announced that the government would now cover all costs of entering these seminaries. This is how the religious seminaries of Pakistan came to proliferate the way they did. ISI established close links with these seminaries. And through these seminaries, the ISI was able to accelerate the development of fundamentalism inside the country and the region.

Kabul Direct: You mentioned that when the military is in control of the Pakistani government, the ISI plays the central role. But now that President Musharraf, the symbol of militarist power in Pakistan has gone, will the ISI still have the same influence on the new civilian government? Will this new civilian government perhaps change some of the militarist’s regimes policies towards Afghanistan?

Husaini Madani: I think there will indeed be some changes in the way Pakistan couches its diplomatic overtures. But realistically and practically, I am not optimistic that there will be any real changes in the way Pakistan deals with Afghanistan.

Kabul Direct: So how should the Afghan government deal with Pakistan? Has Afghan diplomacy been too weak to change the situation on the ground?

Husaini Madani: Yes, clearly Afghanistan’s foreign policy has been weak. The Afghan government has been weak. The Afghan government in general has not been able to coordinate an effective policy in dealing with Paksitan.

For example, President Karzai accuses the Pakistani government of interfering in the internal affairs of Afghanistan affairs, and indicates that it is the ISI that is controlling the situation. But then shortly after that, in Europe, Afghanistan’s foreign minister talk to Pakistan’s foreign minister and make a great show of the friendship between the two countries. No wonder the conference ends and Afghanistan has not sent the message it needed to Pakistan and the international community. Afghanistan then tries to rectify the situation by suspending its negotiations with Pakistan. So, yes, the Afghan government has not been able to rally the necessary foreign support that would make Pakistan change its policies which are harming Afghanistan.

Kabul Direct: It is said that Pakistan is able to interfere in Afghanistan’s affairs using all sorts of channels. Pakistan uses the ISI, its madrassas, its former ISI and military officials to interfere with nation-building in Afghanistan. How should Afghanistan react to this situation? Is it enough to criticize Pakistan in the mass media or are there other approaches the country could be taking?

Husaini Madani: I think Afghanistan has many ways it could deal with Pakistan to put a stop to this negative interference once and forever.

Afghanistan’s greatest strength right now is in the international community that is helping Afghanistan build a nation in the post-Taliban phase. Now that the Afghan security and the international forces have each concluded that Pakistan is indeed the source of terrorism in Afghanistan, the Karzai administration needs to change its foreign policy and disavow Pakistan of this idea that it is Pakistan who determines what happens in Afghanistan.

Kabul Direct: Don’t you think that the international community has indicated that it is unwilling or unable to halt Pakistan? While some pressure is put on Islamabad, it is widely believed that because Pakistan is a nuclear power, the international community is willing to let Pakistan take a leading role in the region, regardless of whether this role will be negative or not.

Husaini Madani: I do think that up to last year, the international community was hopeful about the role Pakistan could play in the region. But now I believe everyone is convinced that Pakistan’s interference in Afghanistan is largely geared toward supporting and expanding terrorism and now I do think the international community sees Pakistan’s role differently and it has started to change the way it deals with Pakistan vis-a-vis Afghanistan. I think the Bush administration has become noticeably more critical of what Pakistan is doing in Afghanistan. I also think that if the Democrats come to power in Washington, then they will put even more pressure on Pakistan and will better combat the extremist element inside Pakistan itself.

Kabul Direct: Could we talk about another issue? Pakistan seems to be fighting a covert war against India here in Afghanistan. Perhaps this is an extension of its conflict with India over Kashmir.

It is widely believed that this started after President Musharraf became alarmed about India’s positive role in Afghanistan when he visited Kabul last year. A Pakistani journalist criticized India’s role in Afghanistan and wondered why India has fourteen consulates in Afghanistan. President Karzai was quick to correct this perception by going on record to say that the actual number of Indian consulates in Afghanistan is four, not fourteen. But still this was taken as a sign of how alarmed Pakistan is about India’s presence in Afghanistan. Do you think now that Musharraf is gone Pakistan will end its covert war with India here in Afghanistan?

Husaini Madani: I think Pakistan has indeed tried to undermine Afghan-Indian relations. And I do not foresee any change in this policy now that Musharraf is gone. I do not foresee the new government substantially altering its negative attitude toward any positive Indian presence in Afghanistan.

Kabul Direct: Do you think this is ultimately bad for Afghanistan to allow Pakistan to use it as a front in its war against India when India is trying to play a productive role in the reconstruction and democratization of Afghanistan? Should Afghanistan allow itself to be used as anyone’s battlefield? Should Afghanistan permit itself to be used, say, by Iran and the US, while they work out their hostilities?

Husaini Madani: Yes, indeed. That is the case. Unfortunately, the friendship between Afghanistan and India is one-sided, not mutual. India has supported Afghanistan politically and economically. The people of Afghanistan should be thankful to India. But the government of Afghanistan has not reciprocated.