12.07.2015 Views

Lessons Learned from the Soviet Experience in ... - Cornwallis Group

Lessons Learned from the Soviet Experience in ... - Cornwallis Group

Lessons Learned from the Soviet Experience in ... - Cornwallis Group

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

194 THE CORNWALLIS GROUP XII: ANALYSIS FOR MULTI-AGENCY SUPPORTmujahid<strong>in</strong> commanders were appo<strong>in</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> 14 districts and 4 prov<strong>in</strong>ces as governors(Giustozzi, 173). The first non-PDPA Prime M<strong>in</strong>ister s<strong>in</strong>ce 1978 was appo<strong>in</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> 1988(Giustozzi, 163).Despite <strong>the</strong> failure to achieve a compromise with <strong>the</strong> opposition parties, successes wereregistered <strong>in</strong> accommodat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> tribal leaders and mujahid<strong>in</strong> commanders. This wasaccomplished through offer<strong>in</strong>g concessions for more local autonomy and material support. Infact, those will<strong>in</strong>g to cooperate with <strong>the</strong> government were offered what amounted to effectiveself-rule. The controversial reforms were first amended to <strong>the</strong> po<strong>in</strong>t of be<strong>in</strong>g irrelevant andlater completely abandoned. Former mujahid<strong>in</strong> were allowed to enroll <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> militias andgiven large salaries and landhold<strong>in</strong>gs. These two developments signaled to many mujahid<strong>in</strong>commanders and tribal leaders that <strong>the</strong> government had corrected its mistakes and hadrecognized <strong>the</strong> limits of its authority. From <strong>the</strong> po<strong>in</strong>t of view of <strong>the</strong> mujahid<strong>in</strong> and <strong>the</strong> tribalchiefs, it simply paid better than <strong>the</strong> cooperation with <strong>the</strong> opposition parties. From <strong>the</strong>population’s po<strong>in</strong>t of view, chang<strong>in</strong>g sides to <strong>the</strong> government was not surrender but ra<strong>the</strong>r areturn of <strong>the</strong> power and <strong>the</strong> autonomy to <strong>the</strong> tribe (Giustozzi, 173).As a result of National Reconciliation, by 1989, 70-80% of mujahid<strong>in</strong> commanders hadceased military operations aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong> government. By <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> war, 25% of all nongovernmentarmed units had signed “reconciliation” agreements while 40% had ceasefireagreements with <strong>the</strong> government. It is estimated that only 12% of <strong>the</strong> mujahid<strong>in</strong> rejected anydeals (Guistozzi, 188-189). As already mentioned earlier, <strong>the</strong> number of governmentcontrolledvillages almost doubled <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> period 1986-1989 (Graph 16).The National Reconciliation was <strong>in</strong> general l<strong>in</strong>es very similar to <strong>the</strong> “pacification” policypreviously pursued. The difference was that while <strong>the</strong> latter was deemed an auxiliary to <strong>the</strong>ma<strong>in</strong> thrust of sovietization, <strong>the</strong> former was now was considered <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> policy of receiv<strong>in</strong>glegitimacy.140,000120,000100,00080,00060,00040,00020,000-114,000120,000125,00082,00042,00060,00045,0006,000 6,913 11,5331986 1987 1988 1989Mujahideen go<strong>in</strong>g over to <strong>the</strong> governmentMujahid<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> discussions with governmentMujahid<strong>in</strong> signed ceasefire agreementsGraph 16: National Reconciliation Process, 1986-89 (based on data <strong>from</strong>: Guistozzi,282).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!