Written by: Sabet Mahdi
The pages of Afghanistan’s history are filled with golden lines of heroism, epics, sacrifices, and popular selflessness. This glorious history was not created as a result of emotional slogans but was built on reasonable leadership, a clear goal, and a legitimate strategy. Anyone who considers themselves the true heir to this history must fully respect the sentiments and dignity of history and the Afghan people, rather than exploiting painful historical events for their own malicious purposes.
During the withdrawal of Russian troops from Afghanistan in 1367 AH, the Russians troops killed approximately 1200 civilians in the Salang district of Parwan province.
Ahmad Massoud, In his final remarks at a gathering commemorating the 38th anniversary of the Salang massacre, instead of condemning the mass killing of Afghans and calling for unity among them, used the symbolic condemnation of this event as a prelude to inflammatory rhetoric against the Afghan government. Such behavior and speech in a gathering not only disrespect the memory of the martyrs but also contradict historical logic.
The legitimate uprising of the Afghan people against the Soviet Union was a religious and jihadist uprising. The legitimacy of that uprising was established due to foreign invasion, open occupation, and direct threat to religious values. This uprising was not aimed at internal ideological differences or regime change, but rather at the freedom of the country and the end of foreign occupation. Ahmad Massoud is inciting the Afghan people against a government and attempting to distort the truth by claiming that there is no foreign occupation, the government leaders were elected from among the people, there is no prejudice or oppression, there is no foreign interference, and the government is being run solely according to Islamic Sharia law, in line with the sacred aspirations of the Afghans.
Ahmad Massoud compares the jihad of that time to the current situation and calls on the Afghan people to rise up against the Afghan government. This request is highly illogical and childish, especially coming from an honorable, intelligent, and wise people. Furthermore, it distorts Afghanistan’s glorious history and insults the Afghan people. Because today Afghanistan is free from foreign occupation and the master of its own will, it is a strong, stable country that has established a regular system for the Afghan people after the fatigue of war.
In his remarks, Ahmad Massoud also mentioned rights; today, the term of “human rights violations” is only used as a slogan and for political purposes; human rights are not mentioned absolutely in international legal documents, but are linked to the religious conditions and culture of societies; for Islamic societies, the highest standard of rights is Sharia, not political and emotional sentiments.
Ahmad Massoud’s statements and unfounded objections regarding the Afghan government’s penal code demonstrate his ignorance and lack of knowledge of religious science and jurisprudence. The penal code has legal derivations, each article is taken from jurisprudential texts, and the prevention of corruption and the protection of human dignity are ensured in this code. From the time of Dawood Khan until today, there have been written laws and regulations for punitive punishments.
During the fallen republic, there was a law called the Penal Code that was applied in the courts. The financial funding and oversight for the creation of the Penal Code were provided by foreigners. Many articles in this Penal Code were in conflict with Islamic Sharia and Afghan culture. It assigned very simple punishments for some serious crimes. This was the reason why moral corruption, bribery, embezzlement, and other crimes were widespread and not prevented in any way.
But there was no criticism of the penal code, despite its many shortcomings and Sharia’s issues. The basic point is that Ahmad Massoud and other similar opponents do not disagree with the constitution but rather have a problem with Sharia law. Ahmad Massoud presents himself as a leader, but leadership is not proven by slogans and emotional videos alone. Leadership requires legitimacy, popular support, clear policies, and a deep understanding of realities.
The claim of leadership is not based solely on emotional messages and popular appeals; those who call the people back to war but are oblivious to the consequences are also considered responsible for the people’s renewed crisis. The Afghan people have breathed a sigh of relief after the past four decades and have now come to understand very well that not every slogan is a path to liberation. The Afghan people consider security, stability, and freedom from war to be among their fundamental demands.
Note: The articles, essays, and comments published by the Voice of Hindukush only reflect the views of the authors & writers and do not necessarily represent the agreement of the Voice of Hindukush.