AFGHANIS GET RHETORIC INSTEAD OF ACTION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00552R000605700115-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 2, 2010
• Sequence Number: 115
• Publication Date: August 11, 1983
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/02 : CIA-RDP90-00552
ARTICLE A??1LR>D
ON PAQ8 C' - i
Z. MICHAEL SZAZ
Aighanis
get rhetoric
instead
of action
The other night television
showed how our govern-
ment is sending Redeye and,
Stinger missiles to the
armed forces in Chad in order to
shoot down attacking Libyan air-
planes and helicopters.
While not begrudging the weap-
ons to the Chad soldiers fighting
Libyan aggression, I felt angry and
frustrated because I knew how
much these weapons are needed by
the Afghan freedom fighters and
that we are not making any delivery
to them.
Vice President Bush traveled
recently in Pakistan, went to the
border area of the Northwestern
Province and assured Afghan rebel
leaders on Pakistani soil that we
support them wholeheartedly. The
rhetoric was excellent, but the facts
of life in Afghanistan as to our
material support are very difficult.
The few supplies we have pro-
vided the Afghan freedom fighters
come via Egypt out of outdated
Soviet stocks that the Egyptian
military bought before 1972. To
quote a well-informed con-
gressman on the aid: "It is gar-
bage"
The most important arms the
freedom fighters have been seek-
ing since the beginning are Redeye
missiles. These can be fired by indi-
vidual soldiers holding them
against their shoulders and they
have homing equipment to hit heli-
copters and low-flying planes. They
are not too expensive or sophisti-
cated (it is really an anti-aircraft
bazooka) and could be used by the
freedom fighters very success-
fully, as could Stinger missiles
directed primarily against aircraft.
'Ib the best of my knowledge,
these arms never have been pro-
vided to the Afghan freedom
fighters.
It is true that the freedom
fighters still inflict casualties on
the Soviet occupation force of
WASHINGTON TIMES
11 August 1983
105,000 and that they capture
Soviet ordnance. it is also true,
however, that these losses are pin-
pricks to the Soviet forces which, in
the meantime, gain valuable battle
experience against insurgencies.
We have no equivalent to the Ho Chi
Minh Trail to supply the freedom
fighters and lack of supplies ren-
ders them unable to resist the occu-
pation troops in several provinces
of Afghanistan.
In the meantime, the Soviet
atrocities multiply. Even our media
reported the killing of all young
men of one village who had taken
.refuge in an underground ditch and
were set,afire?bythe Soviet forces.,
No longer is the Soviet High
Command in Afghanistan inter-
ested in winning over some of the
tribes; terror and extermination is
now the aim against those still
resisting the Soviets. Thus, there is
a hardening in the Soviet method of
conducting the campaign, while
there is considerable weakening on
the part of the Western "Powers,
including the United States.
We never have decided what to do
with our unsolicited, but valuable
Afghan allies. Sure, the Reagan
administration is in favor of their
cause and wants to'use them to tie
down Soviet troops which could
otherwise conquer the Pakistani
province of Baluchistan and reach
the Indian Ocean, thereby
threatening the Persian Gulf. But a
comprehensive policy was never
worked out; no real pressure has
been exerted to form a united front
of the various freedom-fighter
groups, or to devise ways and
means to ensure adequate supplies.
The CIA armed 10,000 Nicara-
guan freedom fighters in less than
a year, but is still unable (or unwill-
ing) to supply the needed anti-
aircraft weapons and other ord-
nance to the Afghan freedom
fighters after three years of
fighting. Something is radically
wrong.
The Afghan freedom fighters
are on the front lines of our
struggle against communism: They`
do not ask'us-te fight their war for
them. With unprecede-ted hero-
ism, they are enduring the bomb-
-
ings and shellings of the armed
forces of the greatest land power of
the earth. They only ask us to pro-
vide the means for defense against
the Red Army. How can we fail to
answer their plea?
Of course, the lackadaisical atti-
tude of the administration, led by
the State Department, which does
not want to interfere with the U.N.
mediation efforts, is only a result of
the complete lack of attention by
the media. to the struggle of the
Afghanis.
Could you imagine such an atti-
tude if the Afghanis were Sandin-
istas or other enemiesof.the United
States? We hear the Nicaraguan
officials constantly blasting the
United States on our national teli
sion networks, but lately absolutely
nothing on Afghanistan. And even
before that, the coverage was mini-
mal.
Yet worse is to come if we do not
wake up in time. Ahmad Shah Mas-
soud, the hero of the struggle south
of Kabul, has made a truce with the
Soviet forces, if only temporarily.
He will either become neutral and
lost to the cause, or he will be the
next target of a renewed Soviet
offensive. Right now, he is aggravat-
ing the situation of the other
fighters in Afghanistan.
How long can freedom fighers
hold out successfully against the
overwhelming power of the Red
Army if not supplied with the
proper weapons? How long can
human sacrifice and heroism bal-
ance the scale against the sophisti-
cated weapons of the Soviet Union?
We might not have to wait that
long, however, to see a Soviet vic-
tory. The mission of the United
Nations mediator, Diego Cordovas,
might accomplish the Soviet aim in
Afghanistan, while insisting upon a
phased withdrawal of Soviet forces.
The best the U.N. mediation would
offer is such a withdrawal while
keeping the Soviet-backed Babrak
regime in power. With all supplies
to the Afghani freedom fighters
shut off, they would either wither
away or be killed by the commu-
nists. Were resistance to continue
successfully, there is no question
that the Soviets would cry foul and
return in force.
In these negotiations the people
of Afghanistan are not repre-
sented, only the outside powers and
the puppet Babrak regime. Are we
greasing the skids for the Afghani
freedom fighters?
Some months ago, I requested
the administration to conduct a
comprehensive policy review; sup-
ply the Redeye missiles to the free-
dom fighters, plus exert pressure
in favor of a united government of
the freedom forces in Afghanistan
which could request outside mili-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/02 : CIA-RDP90-00552R000605700115-8
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/02 : CIA-RDP90-00552R000605700115-8
tart' aid. I also favored a clear defi-
nition of our aims in Afghanistan.
Looks like nothing has happened
and the ardent efforts of Rep. Don
Ritter in Congress, and Karen
McKay at the Committee to Free
Afghanistan are not finding the
response either in the State Depart-
ment or the media which they so
richly deserve. However, those in
the government and.media who are
negligent' in helping-the Afghan
freedom fighters will. have to pay
manifold after they are defeated
and the Soviets march south.
Z. Michael Szaz is a specialist on
Eastern Europe.
2,
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/02 : CIA-RDP90-00552R000605700115-8