History Should Not Be Reserved for Post Mortems

by
William Krehm

There is nothing more important in humanitys survival kit than a knowledge of history - our own, and now that we have been conned into unlimited so-called “globalization” - that of other peoples.

It is late in the day for the Americans and our own government that chose to collaborate with the American military in Afghanistan - mistaken for a mere peanut to crush as compared with Iraq. Those in the top levels of our military, our diplomacy, and of course, our universities, who recommended that that backward country as a military pushover should be awarded PHDIs - Philosophical Doctors in Ignorance.

Particularly since the Americans supported the disastrous resistance to the Russian conquest of that backward land that contributed in no small degree to the ultimate collapse of the Soviet regime.

Now we are learning even from Russian sources all about Afghanistans record as a trap for some of the worlds more formidable conquerors. It is late in the day for Western press to be recounting to us the drubbing the Soviets took in Afghanistan (The Globe and Mail, 12/07, “Its Impossible to conquer the Afghans” by Paul Koring): “Moscow - Head bowed, exhausted, the statue of a young soldier back from Afghanistans killing fields is flanked by long, grim lists of his dead comrades. Its a cautionary monument for Western politicians and generals who boast they will succeed where the Soviets failed.

“In Russia, a country chock full of heroic memorials to enormous military sacrifice, the uniquely dejected pose of the helmetless combat veteran in the Ural city of Yekaterinburg is a sobering reminder that great powers have an unhappy history of overreaching and then being driven ignominiously from Afghanistan.

“Canadians and Americans are learning the hard way. You have been there seven years and you have no prospects of an early victory, said Ruslan Aushev, a highly decorated veteran who served two tours, totalling nearly five years with the Soviet army in Afghanistan. We knew by 1985 that we could not win. It then took Moscow four more years to extricate hundreds of thousands of troops from Afghanistan, while claiming victory on the way out.

“Most Afghans still live in a feudal society, in villages far from the cities, he said. For them, there is no difference between being bombed by the Soviets and now being bombed by the Americans and it wont succeed. We could take any village, any town and drive the mujahdeen out, Mr. Aushev said, recalling his two combat tours, first as an infantry battalion commander and later in charge of a full Soviet regiment. But when we handed ground over to the Afghan army or police they would lose it within a week.

Koring provides a list - available to anybody in the Encyclopedia Britannica or any public libraries of the forerunners of President Bush and Prime Minister Harper in trying unsuccessfully to conquer Afghanistan. These include:

“Darius the Great. In the later sixth century BC much of this country was absorbed into the Persian empire of Darius the Great. However, plagued by constant uprisings, the Persians never established effective control.

“Alexander the Great. In the third century BC, Alexander the Great invaded. The harsh mountainous terrain and brutal weather were only part of the challenge. The Afghans themselves were no less formidable. Constant revolts undermined whatever glory he could claim.

“Genghis Khan. In 1220 the Islamic lands of Central Asia were overrun by the armies of the Mongol invader. But even Genghis Khan failed to destroy the strength of Islam. By the end of the 13th century, his descendants were themselves Muslims.

“Britain. There were three major interventions by the British Army between 1838 and 1919, Each ultimately failed.”

This and much else in the history books can be absorbed in comfortable libraries at home, without writing it in the blood of tens of thousands of our young men.