September/October 1993, Page 55
Central Asia
On the Tajik-Afghan Border The Russians Are
ComingBack
By Michael Collins Dunn
As July ended, northern Afghanistan was under persistent Russian
artillery fire. This may seem curious, since Afghanistan has no
common border with Russiain fact, there are now several countries
in between. Nevertheless, since Russia and Uzbekistan intervened
in the Tajik civil war, Russia has been very much involved in that
remote portion of its former empire.
Throughout the former Soviet Union, remaining Russian troops are
a problem. They continue to cast a shadow over the newly liberated
Baltic states, the new republics of the Caucasus and the Muslim
states of Central Asia. Russian forces have reportedly fought on
the Abkhazian side in the war between that separatist part of Georgia
and the Georgian government. The Russian parliament recently declared
that Sevastopol, in the Crimea, which is part of Ukraine, is a Russian
port. Russia has not by any means given up its interests in its
former empire.
In the case of Central Asia, however, Russia has warned of "Islamists"
and the danger of Islamic fundamentalism as a justification for
intervention to protect the local Russian populations. And so "Islamic
fundamentalism" becomes the bete noire used as an excuse
for military action. At the very moment Israel was shelling southern
Lebanon, claiming to be acting against Hezbollah, Russia was shelling
northern Afghanistan, and claiming it was a defensive action against
an Iranian and Islamic threat. The Russian actions had the advantage
of being more remote from television cameras, however.
This argumentthat radical Islamists are a threat to ethnic
Russiansis increasingly heard, and not just to justify Russian
intervention in Tajikistan. It has raised concerns in the Islamic
world, but it has been virtually ignored in the West.
Why the Russians returned from defeat in Afghanistan to become
militarily engaged there again may prove to be an important lesson
for the future of Central Asian independence.
The civil war that broke out in Tajikistan last year was really
between different regions of the country. One side identified with
the old Communist leadership and the other included a democratic
movement, the Islamic Revival Party and other groups. The Communist
side argued that if the democrats and Islamists won, Tajikistan
would become "another Iran," and that the Russians living
there would be in jeopardy. Russians now constitute only about 10
percent of the population, perhaps 500,000 people at most.
Since about 23 percent of the population of Tajikistan are ethnic
Uzbeks, neighboring Uzbekistan also took up the call. Uzbekistan's
President Islam Karimov is, despite his first name, an old Communist.
He has used the argument that Islam constitutes a threat to Central
Asia to crush opposition inside Uzbekistan, and not merely the Islamic
opposition.
This view of a major threat of Islamist revolution in Central Asia
was translated into action when Russian and Uzbek forces simply
intervened in the Tajik civil war to assure victory for the ax-Communist
forces there. Such blatant intervention in, say, Lithuania or Latvia
would have created a major world crisis. In Tajikistan it was largely
ignored. Many from the noncommunist side in the Tajik war fled either
into the high Pamirs or across the border into northern Afghanistan.
Since the fall of Kabul last year, the northern part of Afghanistan
has been generally under the control of ethnic Tajiks under the
command of Ahmed Shah Masoud. Ironically, both Masoud and his arch-rival,
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, are supporting the Tajik rebels. There has
been a flow of people, and no doubt of arms, across the border into
Tajikistan.
Since Tajikistan does not yet have its own army (although one is
forming), Russia said its intervention was to maintain stability
within the Commonwealth of Independent States and prevent formation
of a hostile state which would threaten Russian interests. Some
Russian commentators portray this as analogous to the United States'
Monroe Doctrine for Latin America: Russia is pledging to help its
former subject states fight off any "external" threat.
By charging Iranian and Afghan involvement on the other side in
the Tajik civil war, Russia justifies its own intervention. Russian
commentators also cite Western willingness to intervene in the Gulf
when oil supplies are in jeopardy.
The problem is that Russian involvement seems to be developing
without much reference to the nominal Tajik government in Dushanbe.
During the civil war, the one Russian unit still stationed in Tajikistan,
the 201st Motorized Rifle Division, was well below its normal peacetime
strength. Today the 201st has been brought up to wartime levels
of some 12,000 men. Russian border guards also have been stationed
along the Tajik-Afghan border to defend "the southern border
of the Commonwealth of Independent States," although the CIS
has ceased to exist in almost every other way.
The presence of Russians in the midst of an ongoing civil war,
and of Russian border guards on the volatile, porous Afghanistan-Tajik
border has led to casualties. On July 13 a force of Tajik rebels
and/or Afghan mujahidin attacked Russian Border Guard Detail
12 on the border. In the fighting, at least 25 Russian border guards
and three members of the 201st Division of the Army were killed.
A "Second Afghan War"?
This led democracy activists in Moscow to warn of a "second
Afghan war" in the making; Yelena Bonner and other activists
called for an immediate withdrawal from Tajikistan.
But the nationalist voices have been stronger in Moscow, and many
call for intervention not only to protect Russian interests in Tajikistan,
but in all the former republics of the Soviet Union. (It should
be noted that there has been no evidence of the civilian Russian
population in Tajikistan being in any jeopardy. All of the Russians
killed were combatants guarding the border.)
Defense Minister Pavel Grachev, generally not a hard-liner (he
is a Boris Yeltsin appointee), pledged to punish the Afghans for
their action. Efforts were stepped up to reinforce the 201st Division,
and Russian troops and border guards began interdicting movements
out of Afghanistan. It was then that they began shelling areas of
northern Afghanistan from which the infiltrators allegedly have
been coming. Afghan officials now complain that the border area
is becoming uninhabitable.
Grachev sees himself as fighting the "Islamists" and
defending the Russians of Tajikistan. Russia claims a right to protect
its national interests in its former empire, and it defines those
national interests as including the security of the local Russian
population. In some countries, such as oil-rich Kazakhstan, that
Russian population is equal to the Kazakh population. In most of
Central Asia, however, it is a much smaller percentage, like the
10 percent in Tajikistan.
Russians argue that the boundaries of their former empire are
Russia's "security borders," and that they cannot tolerate
outside intervention within those boundaries. Russians speak of
the CIS as a "common strategic space," although with the
CIS in disarray, that seems increasingly like a claim to re-imperialization.
Russian intervention in small and remote Tajikistan is no great
threat to the West, of course. But Russian intervention in Kazakhstan
or, even more credibly, Ukraine could be. If Tajikistan is a rehearsal
for such interventions, it could be a real warning bell for the
world.
In any event, long after Russia pulled out of Afghanistan and the
Soviet Union has ceased to exist, Russian troops are far from Russia's
borders, firing into Afghanistan. That the world is not complaining
may have a lot to do with the fact that Russia claims to be fighting
"Islamic fundamentalism" and that in many capitals anything
goes in the name of that new crusade.
Michael Collins Dunn is senior analyst of The International
Estimate, Inc., and editor of its biweekly newsletter, The
Estimate. |