In "Out of line: Musharraf Keeps A Wide Gap Between Declarations & Deeds" in The Statesman, Jagmohan, former Governor of Jammu and Kashmir and former Union Minister of Urban Development, Culture and Tourism, feeds the loony conspiracy theorists with the proposition that the jihad -- or more precisely, "an extremely narrow interpretation of Islam" -- is the product of the U.S. and Pakistan. I'm surprised he didn't mention the Zionists, but in any case he rather swiftly contradicts himself.
An extremely narrow interpretation of Islam was formulated and propagated amongst the Afghan Mujahideens by the American and Pakistani policy makers as a part of their war strategy against the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. The sole objective was to create a fanatic Islamic zeal in the fight against a “godless nation”. Sophisticated weapons, communications equipment and funds were supplied to them in abundance. A similar approach was adopted by Pakistan in causing large-scale subversion and terrorism in Kashmir from 1989 onwards. This approach was virtually abetted, in the earlier phases, by the United States and other European powers by talking more about the “human right violations” than about the primitive savagery of the militants. All this whetted the appetite of the fanatics and they became so highly motivated and resourceful that they attained the capacity to strike anywhere they chose, be it in New York, New Delhi, Madrid, London, Cairo or Bali. Their tentacles are now practically spread all over the world.
Shades of the fiendish Mr. Yaqub cooking up the white race on Madagascar, a staple of Nation of Islam mythology. But here comes the contradiction:
According to a research study (2004) of the London Institute of International Security, about 18,000 potential Islamist terrorists are functioning in about 60 countries, and “there has been a terrifying jump in terrorist incidents ~ 175 in 2003 to 651 in 2004”. Terrorism has become mega-terrorism, and its sponsors have established strong bases for supply of recruits and their indoctrination. Thousands of madrasas have come up. For example, in Pakistan, there were 137 madrasas with a total enrolment of about 20,000 students in 1947. The number of these madrasas has now swelled to about 10,000 and students to about one and half million. In theory, they are meant for providing free religious education, board and lodging to poor students. But, in practice, a large number of them have become vast breeding grounds for orthodoxy, narrow sectarianism and militancy. They promote the culture of jihad and inject fanaticism in young and impressionable souls.
Now wait a minute, Jagmohan. Breeding grounds for "orthodoxy"? Islamic orthodoxy? But if the jihad ideology that fuels terrorism was created by America and Pakistan, and it's an extremely narrow interpretation of Islam, how could it be "orthodoxy"? Wouldn't orthodox Muslims be fighting against it?
In line with the madrasas are special institutions, like Markaz-e-Dawa al Irshad, Muridke, near Lahore. They run a vast publicity and propaganda machine. For example, the above Markaz’s monthly publication Majallah-al-Dawa, has a circulation of over 400,000. Its weekly ~ Jihad Times ~ has over 200,000 buyers. The madrasas and the special institutions are creating an overall environment which breeds religious fanaticism and violence. No wonder, in 2001-02, there were as many as 58 religious political parties and 24 religious militias in Pakistan.
Amazing that this tiny minority of extremists, proponents of a false Islam created by the United States, have become so numerous and powerful.
'Now wait a minute, Jagmohan. Breeding grounds for "orthodoxy"? Islamic orthodoxy? But if the jihad ideology that fuels terrorism was created by America and Pakistan, and it's an extremely narrow interpretation of Islam,' -
Take it at its face value Mr. RS. He is probably using the word 'orthodoxy' in a different manner than a native English speaker would, however.
The US did encourage Jihad against the Russians did it not? Lets not run away from facts and behave like the Muslims.
Isn't amazing how much credit Muslims and other Third Worlders give us Americans when they want to stick us with something bad. You'd suppose that Americans were geniuses by assessments like this guy's. But, the rest of the time we US infidels just can't get anything right!!!!!
I suggest this guy hand his 'theory' over to the Hindus for consideration. Does he mean that the subcontinent's Hindus have been fighting American invaders for the past 1200 years?? If not, then who HAVE they been fighting against??? Muslim jihdists??? NO???
Hmm-it sounds to me that the man is implying that the Jihadists are basically robots gone amok. Once the US created Frankenstein kicked out the Soviets it should have ceased its destruction but instead it goes on destroying. So this means the Jihadists aren't peaceful missionaries, faithful Muslims or even human? Somebody better tell Bin Laden and his fellow cultists this because he might get miffed and behead this liar for denying one or two suras of the Koran.
*Markaz’s monthly publication Majallah-al-Dawa, has a circulation of over 400,000. Its weekly ~ Jihad Times ~ has over 200,000 buyers* -
This is very worrying for the fact we gave Pakistanies over $5bn to get a handle on such propaganda material. I wonder what the Pakistanies spent my tax $ contribution on, perhaps killing some infidels in Kashmir in the name of self-determination. What a f... joke.
MusHuntCowboy: In the case of the US-assisted Afghani jihadists against the Russians, you are aware that the Russians, by invading Afghanistan at the time, had violated Afghanistan's sovereign rights as a nation, are you not? Although Afghanistan was and is still Islamic, Russia's motives were not that much better than any Muslim nation's (it was expansionism and ideological imperialism, Communist style).
If Russia had invaded America (I assume you are a US citizen) would Americans have behaved much differently than the Afghanis did?
The US at the time was not out of line by implementing this policy of assisting Agfhan jihadists. The mistake made by the United States was expecting gratitude for helping these people. As we all know by now, any trust placed in Muslim societies by non-Muslims is a total waste of energy.
*pythagoras - If Russia had invaded America (I assume you are a US citizen) would Americans have behaved much differently than the Afghanis did?*
If Russia had invaded us, I don't think I would be here writing today. I would have marched against them on the front line.
My view about this article is that in order to keep the proportionality of our contribution to Jihad the correct prospective, I am prepare to accept that we made an error to support the Muslims the way we did. We should have handled Afghanistan the way we handled Serbia/Bosnia. Granted there was a danger of direct war with the Russians, my guess is the Russians would have turned back, knowing what we've learnt about them since then. We never needed 'help' from Muslims.
You can see why Jagmohan rose to the rank of Governor and Government Minister: He mastered the art of smoothly and eloquently blaming everything on the Americans (or Jews).
The "smooth-talking finger pointer" is the epitome of the muzlim statesman.
MusHuntCowboy: I don't think we understood the nature of those we aided in Afghanistan's struggle to throw out the Sovs. Some appear to still not understand. Hindsight being 20/20 and all.
pythagoras: You write "...any trust placed in Muslim societies by non-Muslims is a total waste of energy." My take: any trust placed in Muslim tribes by other Muslim tribes is also a total waste of energy. Cheesh! What a history!
Logical inconsistancy is one of the great Muslim contributions to the world.
I thought Arabic Coffee was one of the great Muslim contributions to the world...
http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com
In defence of Jagmohan
He is a senior bureacrat
originally with congress and now with the pro-hindu BJP
In 1976, under the orders of Sanjay Gandhi,
Jagmohan sent in armed police squads to thrash mullahs and enforce laws in muslim ghettos in Delhi
He lacks the mastery of english and polish and often his english books are mis-translated by handlers
Without Jagmohan, India would have lost Kashmir in 1989
I think what Jagmohan is trying to say is that
the US encouraged jihadism in Pakistan, to fight the russians in Afghanistan and the jihadi infrastructure was later used for Kashmir
Madeline Albrights father Jan Korbel was involved in the UN dispute on Kashmir, and held a notoriously anti-India position
The US state dept under Albrights guidance set up
a forum of kashmiri separatists , Hurriyat, in India, under the direct guidance and weekly meetings with the US embassy in India
The notorious Robin Raphael of the US state dept, made several anti-India speeches on kashmir
and repeatedly met with Hurriyat leaders to encourage their secession
Under the Clinton administration Hurriyat was pampered
Anyways in 1989, the Jihad started in kashmir
Jagmohan was the governor
The entire kashmiri muslim civil service, including kashmiri muslim cops went on a intifada
200,000 muslim civil servants on intifada
and they started to murder the local hindus
Jagmohan's central police shot the intifadists
by the dozens and Jagmohan prevented the secession for several months until the Indian army got deployed
Jagmohan also arranged the safe evacuation of hindus
Jagmohan not only believes in a tactic of using brute force against jihadists, he is not squeamish of using any and all methods against active and passive jihadists
He has a strong and successful anti-muslim
track record
The leftist media and muslims hate Jagmohan
Because he was successful in rolling back the intifada
Under pressure from the leftists and secular hindu politicians who depend on the muslim vote bank, Jagmohan was removed from the kashmir governors post and the kashmir situation was allowed to fester
Jagmohan then joined the pro-hindu BJP
I guess the CIA, via a time machine, went back to the Koran's beginning and inserted the parts that Jihadis love most. If only the CIA had the powers conspiracy kooks around the world believe it does!
I agree with Shyamsunder. You have to know Jagmohan's background to appreciate his stand. For Indians, it is essentially the US-Pak nurtured "mujahideen" that we have been fighting over the last so many years. Once, the Russians left Afghanistan, these very guys were diverted to Kashmir. And Jagmohan was the Governor when the militancy started. My Kashmiri Hindu friend tells me that they used to announce from the mosques for Hindus to get out or else they would be killed.
He and his whole family had to leave Kashmir, leaving bheind all their posessions. A few of his relatives were killed. 450,000 Kashmiri Hindus were driven out (genocide?/racial purification? whatever). about 350,000 of them live in refugee camps in Delhi.. Nobody pays any attention to them since that won't get them many votes.
This friend told me that if it hadn't been for Jagmohan, many more Hindus would have been killed.
So for us Indians, especially in Kashmir it is the mujahideen that we have been fighting all along. And pray who set up the mujahideen in the first place if not the US and Pak?
Here is a short list of US politicians who support the kashmiri islamists
Madeline Albright
Robin Raphael
Republican Congressman Dan Burton of Indiana
Democrat Gary Condit
Democrat Edolphus Towns
and many many more
Here is the flak that Jagmohan has faced from the US congress for his ruthless anti-islamist actions
---
""1. India's campaign of terror against minorities is clearly designed to wipe out the minorities. It is time to declare India a terrorist state and it is time to cut off American aid to India to help strengthen the hand of human rights there. And we should support self-determination for all the minority nations seeking their freedom from India."
"We should demand self-determination for the people of Khalistan, Kashmir, Nagalim, and the other minority nations under Indian rule in the form of a free and fair plebiscite on the question of independence. "
Joint Statement in 2000 by Edolphus Towns, John Doolittle and Dan Burton
----
In 1997, HR 182, the Human Rights in India Act, was sponsored by Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN) and Rep. Gary Condit (D-CA). to cut-off U.S. development aid to India until the president certifies to Congress that India has taken "certain steps to prevent human rights abuses" in India.
----
Dan Burton introduced H.R. 4641 in 1990 to terminates United States developmental assistance for India in regards to "barbaric atrocities were being committed against the Sikh and Kashmiri communities by the India regime"
---
Interestingly, now that the Indian economy is booming, to get a piece of the pie, the same shameless Dan Burton
http://www.rediff.com/news/2005/nov/29inter.htm
"Given that you have a reputation as the harshest critic of India for years now, I must ask this question -- did the Indian embassy give you all the assistance you required in organizing this trip?
Yes. I know that in the past, members of the Indian government have not liked some of the things I've said, or the positions that I have taken, on issues such as Kashmir. But let me just say that they have been very kind, very helpful, and I am looking forward to working with them and getting to know them when I come over"
Open encouragement to the islamist kashmiri Hurriyat by the US administration
--
Search google for US embassy and hurriyat
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=hurriyat+us+embassy
In 2003
The Hindu : U.S. Embassy team meets Hurriyat leadersU.S. Embassy team meets Hurriyat leaders. Srinagar May 27. With peace overtures between India and Pakistan gaining momentum, a three-member delegation of ...
www.hinduonnet.com/2003/05/28/stories/2003052808141100.htm - 13k
In 2000
The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Jammu & KashmirNEW DELHI, May 12 — A team of the officials of the US Embassy is currently in Srinagar to meet the All Party Hurriyat Conference leaders. ...
www.tribuneindia.com/2000/20000513/j&k.htm - 35k
PDF] CRS Report for CongressFile Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
It is with this policy that the United States sent a. team of State Department and U.S. embassy officials to Jammu and Kashmir to meet the. Hurriyat ...
fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/19700.pdf
--
http://kashmirherald.com/profiles/hurriyat.html
Another version claims that the Hurriyat is a creation of the US interests in Kashmir and was formed through the efforts of a Washington based think-tank US Institute of Peace (USIP ) under the then presidentship of Robert Oakley, a former US ambassador to Pakistan. Certain developments do indicate that it has had active backing from US official sources, particularly the US embassy in India (when prominent Hurriyat leader Abdul Ghani Lone was injured during a security force action in the early Nineteen Nineties, he was reportedly rushed to New Delhi and visited each day by officials from the embassy).
The Hurriyat came into the limelight during the March 2000 Clinton visit. The audience granted by the President to a two-member delegation in Washington prior to his South Asia visit and speculation that he would meet the Hurriyat top leadership during the visit, contributed to an increased legitimacy that the alliance now commands
Mr. Jagmohan is the voice considered often towards the extreme right and if even he lacks courage to speak the truth, then I wonder who in India would. But the history tells us that ignoring the danger does not mean anything.
Let us all remind Mr. Jagmohan that his party has struggled for long for a symbol of series of Muslim atrocities, which occurred even before United States and Pakistan were born. Let him read the Muslim historians documenting the violence against the infidel Hindus, long before Columbus discovered America. Let him go and see various mosques in India standing on the ruins of HIndu temples, walls,architecture is so clearly visible. Let us tell him that the Pakistan itself was created on the basis of demand that Muslim can not live with infidels. Let him read about the Calcutta Koran petition dated around 50 years or so back. Let us tell him about the begining of Kahsmir problem was attack in 1948 by the colloaboration between Pakistan Army and same Afghans Muhajideens, where was US involvement then. Let us remind him above all, that contrary to the popular perception in INdia, it was the US which was used by the same collborative effort for overthrow of Russians and still working for the establishment of Taliban rule.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/FK05Df04.html
It was Clinton who, despite the strong advice of his counter-terrorism experts, avoided declaring Pakistan as a state-sponsor of terrorism in 1993. It was Robin Raphael, his assistant secretary of state, who in October 1993 publicly supported Pakistan's stand that Jammu and Kashmir is disputed territory. Before joining the State Department, it was she, while posted in the US Embassy in New Delhi, who had instigated Kashmiri militant leaders to form the All-Party Hurriyat Conference to wage a united struggle against the government of India.
Well of course it was the Americans and the Pakistanis. They were behind the whole thing from the start.
You know: Constantinople, the destruction and subjugation of the eastern Latin and Jewish communities, islamic slavery, Saudi Arabia intolerance, dhimmitude, jizya and the massacre of the Bani Quraysh.
Frankly, I'm surprised it didn't occur to us sooner.
Geoff
I have noticed that even Modi is hesitant to condemn islam directly
Togadiya the VHP leader has openly condemned the koran
At a conference of hindu religious leaders
He distributed a copy of the koran with all the violent passages highlighted and asked these swamis to stop the blather about respecting islam
Under the previous BJP regime, VHP activists used to publicly burn the koran
Jagmohan is fully aware of islam
but even BJP politicians mostly hesitate to attack islam directly
At the beginning of the kashmiri problem
there was open collaboration between the british and pakistan
Ever read up on the Dixon plan promoted by the US to donate most of kashmir to pakistan
Every muslim concentration area is a problem and the kashmiri muslims were a low level problem until 1989 when the mujahideen were diverted to kashmir
Geoff
read my previous posts on the constant harassment by so called human rights groups and the US congress on hard nosed people like Jagmohan who were crushing the islamists
The kashmiri muslims were a low level problem until the mujahideen were diverted to kashmir
Robert,
You are correct in pointing out the glaring inconsistency in Jagmohan's article--on the fact that if Islam is not inherently orthodox/fundementalist/extreme that the mujahiddeen in Afghanistan would not be what they are with or without American coaching. However it is a fact that one pillar of the modern day terrorism is a direct result of American approach to beat back Soviet Union during 1970's-80's--the other being the palestine/Israel equation.Today's Taliban, Al Queda etc are all a product of that US approach of aiding and abetting Pakistan in building up the modern day terrorist paradigm. As I mentioned that is not of course without small help from Koran/Hadith...but those are the facts on the ground.
However as Shyamsunder pointed out all of you must appreciate where Jagmohan is coming from--when he was actually fighting on the ground with these beasts, US was on the other side actively siding with terrorists. I have no doubt that hundreds or possible thousands of Indians were victims of the bullets/bombs supplied by US to these people. Of course the trick lies in not blaming the weapons but identifying the people and thier motivations of using those weapons but you can forgive a man for confusing them.
When Bush is breaking fasts with Muslims in Iftar parties while simaltaneously waging war on terror I guess you should view a provincial politician for not having a global view of islamic terrorism with more sympathy.
But the analysis is right...US did not invent Jihad...though it did help Jihad when it was viewed as serving US purpose.
RT
The question of Kashmir, however different colour it may take is rooted in the two nation theory. Whether Bristishers encouraged it or not, the ultimate reason for it was the refusal of Muslims to live with infidels. Britishers might have their own share of credit, I am neither supporting it or denying it, but hte main root of relgion inspired violence by Muslim rulers has been the main course of Indian history right from around 1000 AD. The politicians, in their attempt to appease Muslim and keep Hindu Muslim unity have always pretended as if Hindu and Muslim were living like two inseparable brothers with great harmony till evil Britishers came with their divide and rule policy. If I go into details, it will be too long, but execution and torture of sickh gurus and mosques stading on three holiest sites of Hindus are example enough. But forget history for the moment as coming back to the question of Kashmir, it inevitably boils down to the two nation theory, which essentially boils down to exclusivity of Islam as it is not only India, where ever Muslims are there, there is separatism. It is ridiculous to say that Kashimir is a different nation or that bullshit.
A person native of Punjab or Uttar Pradesh is much more closer to Kashmiris than to a Malayali. But when the latter two can live in peace what prevents Kashmiris. If it is not the question of two nation theory, why there are hundreds of thousands of Kashmiri Hindus living in India as refugees in their own country. Though it would be not entirely incorrect to blame Britain or USA, it is totally futile and counter prodcutive as it ignores the something much more fundamental and root cause of the problem. We all know how Britishers played different Indian princely states against one another to strengthen their rule, but those divisions were transient and lost relevance as soon as India was Independent.
They can not live under the control of infidels and democracy, which is verified again and again by millions of moderate Muslim reformers who say that they will like to see their nations under sharia. These are not some jihadists, but very educated, modern Muslim who proclaim Islam to be religion of peace. So the question, I think again is can Muslim live together with non muslims. In my opinion there should be clear debate about this issue and all humanity should resolve it peacefully.
It sounds ridiculous but I think the only solution one can think of to the present crisis is this. If majority of Muslim (I am sure more than 99% would belive in that) thinks that they can not live with infidels and would like to live under sharia rule, and if they would like to have peace after that, we should arrange for a partition again, like it was done in the case of India, this time only of the Planet along the same lines. However, this time, it should be ensured that there should be no populations of either group left in another part.
Agreed that Jagmohan took some decisive action against islime terrorists.
But the fault lies squarely with Indian mindset nurtured on gandhi's enigmatic brand of masochism.Because of the muslimes and their sympathizers' presence amongst us in overwhelming numbers,we have never been able to annihilate them.
Be it America or China,any country would only focus on its welfare.India is the only exception; a country that is so willing to strike at its own roots. Its muslime President is toying with the idea of granting pardon to afzal cheered by muslime ministers. Would Jagmohan detect *American hand* behind this? Was it CIA that taught pukistanis to gruesomely torture and mutilate our Army Personnel during successive wars?
Hijacking of planes was pioneered by yasser arafat (who said muslimes have not discovered anything?) whose hand was held aloft by India's ex President Venkatraman at the airport while being welcomed. Now of course you can find him pottering around some Hindutva organization dithering about saving "Hinduism".
"An extremely narrow interpretation of Islam was formulated and propagated amongst the Afghan Mujahideens by the American and Pakistani policy makers as a part of their war strategy against the Russian invasion of Afghanistan"
Oh really?? So islime stands for peace? And was hijacked by Americans?!?
Dear Mr.Robert,
Mr. Jagmohan is the finest Officer the Govt. of India has ever had. His continuance as the Governor of Jammu & Kashmir would have broke the backbone of Islamic militancy there. Unfortunately, the Indian govt. bungled in removing him from the post, mostly due to pressure from the Islamic countries.
As for the US using Islam for its interests, I should say that the fact is sadly true. The concept of Jihad was used to inspire the Afghan anti-Soviet fighters, which unfortunately is now rebounding on the US itself. Isn't it too true that if you play with edged tools, you would one day cut your hand ?
Also, the US and UK failed to appreciate Indian requests to declare Pakistan a terrorist state. Even now, when the US and UK are well aware of the Pakistani terror connection they are hesitant to either declare Pakistan a terrorist state or declare an Afghanistan-style war on Pakistan.
My opinion is - the world is shrinking. At least now, the US and UK should realise that they cannot have peace without thinking of peace and prosperity for the other countries. So they should not support Islamic ideologies--however urgent their goals and motives may be.
On behalf of the United States, sorry.
Excuse us for trying to beat back communism.
Fighting and dying with our real allies in other countries to keep it from spreading.
Supporting unsavories who seemed like less of a threat than global Marxism/Leninism.
All of you sharpshooting about us supporting anti-Soviet groups in Afghanistan, how about you show us how to take on a large, powerful, international, multi-front movement for world conquest?
Please teach us.
Maybe we can stay home, save money and the lives of American, British, Australian, and (many)other allied nations' soldiers while you show us how it's done the right way.
And when you do so, all the while pissing off someone else because you did what you thought was necessary, we can sit back and Monday-morning-quarterback you from our high-horses.
Just walk to blackboard, grab the chalk, ring the bell, and start the class.
Any volunteers?
Eisenhund
How about the ongoing support of the kashmiri islamists after 1990 till today, by the US embassy in India , US congress and US state department, in the name of human rights as I posted earlier
Here is the more relevant excerpt from Spencer's post on Jagmohan
"This approach was virtually abetted, in the earlier phases, by the United States and other European powers by talking more about the “human right violations” than about the primitive savagery of the militants. "
Are you high?
You're equating American talk of "human rights violations" that doesn't support your side with supporting jihadis?
People like you are the reason why many of us don't give a rat's ass about your problems with mohammedans.
Where's India's support for the fight against jihadis?
How many troops do you have outside your borders carrying the fight to them?
None.
You'd rather sit on your asses and complain about America.
The opinions of self-righteous cowards are worthless.
Here's a newsflash for you. The US does not exist to further Indian interests. Furthermore, you are getting as much sympathy and support as you've earned. Which is prescious little. While I sympathize with some of the Indian posters here who support the US and, in fact, reciprocate with my support of their anti-islamic actions, those of you who want to whine about the US not running its foreign policy according to what's best for India can go take a flying leap.
Eisunhund,
What he means is, that the Indian forces in Kashmir have their hands tied because of the Human Rights and the Amnesty people breathing down their necks. The jihadis are supposed to have "human rights" when all the time they are killing infidels. The allied forces in iraq are stifled in a similar manner. They are not fighting ; they are only allowed to maintain the status quo. Relative peace. And they are paying with their lives to maintain this peace.
Buddy, I would really like to have our troops outside our borders, fighting the jihadis. Trouble is, one of the biggest state sponsors of jihad, pakistan, is, according to the U.S. policy makers, "our staunch ally". This is what Shyamsunder is griping about.
It is the communists and pc media in India that clamours about "human rights" of terrorists. India does not send its troops to fight the jihadists without as it wants the support of jihadists within to stay in power.
Why blame others when it is India that lacks the WILL? As KPS Gill says " It is an irreducible ideological confrontation between a pluralist secular democracy, on the one hand, and a religious fundamentalist, intolerant and exclusionary ideology, on the other, that denies not only rights, but also basic humanity, to those who do not submit to its belief system".
Indians still wallow in self deception believing islam to be a "religion". Islamic terrorism predates 9/11. Still India has always taken only ad hoc half hearted conciliatory gandhi styled measures.
I, an Indian(Hindu) am not able to trust its rulers including Hindutva peddlers as they recoil from talking about islam. Enough of this finger pointing and plaintive bleating.
RT: If the US believed that Afghani jihadists were serving its purposes that was a mistake on the US' part as they weren't.
The jihadists never had the slightest intention of working for American interests; the US had been fooled if it thought otherwise. 9-11 was the work of these same jihadists.
Still, none of this means Russia had any right to invade Afghanistan, nor were the Russians there for reasons other than self-aggrandizement of the Communist empire (had they been we could make allowances for it but there weren't). Forcing Russia out of Afghanistan was therefore not a negative thing, and had the US seen another way to repel Russians from Afghani territory it might well have done so. Except for the mujahidin, there was little else in the place to work with, and a direct military confrontation with the Soviets in a land the US didn't know from Adam could have backfired on it. So as far as I can see, the US had few other viable options than to work with the mujahidin there (which in hindsight wasn't such a good idea either!). Leaving Russia to occupy Central Asia wasn't an option either since Communism isn't much of an improvement over Islam. And Communism too requires its followers implement its ideologies to all corners of the globe by dint of violent revolution.
When will humanity ever learn?