Mahmood Karzai Defends Brother’s “Warlord” VP Pick

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


A few days before departing Afghanistan for his meeting Wednesday in Washington with President Obama, Hamid Karzai announced the second of his two vice presidential picks: Mohammad Qasim Fahim, former leader of the militant group Jamiat-e-Islami. Fahim is a deeply controversial figure accused of numerous human rights violations during his time as a militia commander during the Afghan civil war. Human Rights Watch says that, by picking him, Karzai is “insulting the country.” In 2005, the group put out a report called “Blood-Stained Hands,” (.pdf) which found “credible and consistent evidence” that Jamiat-e-Islami had been involved in “widespread and systematic human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law.”

Fahim previously served as Afghanistan’s vice president in the years immediately following the 2001 US invasion, but was ousted by Karzai in 2004 in favor of Ahmad Zia Massood, brother of the slain Afghan commander Ahmad Shah Massood, assassinated by Al Qaeda just days before 9/11. Why the Afghan president has decided to resuscitate Fahim’s political career was among the questions I posed Wednesday to Karzai’s brother Mahmood, who spoke with me by phone from Afghanistan. He defended his brother’s VP choice, describing Fahim as a true Afghan patriot. Some edited excerpts from our conversation:

How do you respond to accusations that your brother has selected a warlord as his running mate?

I have heard some criticism of Marshal Fahim saying that he was a former warlord. Well, if the US really wants really top-notch, educated people in Afghanistan to run the country, then investments should have been made… these people should have been supported… In Afghanistan, when you attack somebody like Marshal Fahim as a warlord, it’s like saying in the Civil War in the United States that generals on both sides were warlords. You cannot say that. This guy was supported by the United States. It gave him plenty of funds to defeat the Taliban, and he did it.

To what extent was he selected for his tribal affiliation?

He is from a Tajik tribe. You cannot have a Pashtun president and vice president, because the society is not ready for it. It would not accept it. Just like in Iraq we had a problem…. Mr. Karzai doesn’t have a political party. Marshal Fahim doesn’t either. Basically we are running this country on tribal affiliation, each with its proper role in politics according to its section of the society. In order to enter the modern age, modern institutions need to be established, and we have to work slowly in order to achieve that.

Couldn’t your brother have picked a less controversial Tajik politician?

My personal opinion is that Marshal Fahim, with the shortcomings that we have in Afghanistan because of the jihad and seven years of the Taliban and all that, is the most decent and stable. He is really in love with the country. I know him. Mr. Karzai fired him four years ago, and he stayed so calm and kept in the mind the national interest. It was always in his mind… He is a sensible man and was instrumental in defeating the Taliban. I hope that the West will give him some credit that he is a very prominent person in defeating the Taliban and forming this new country… We’ve never had such good representation of all the people taking into account all the tribal issues. The Hazaras are happy. The Tajiks are happy. The Pashtuns, who have always dominated the political scene in Afghanistan, are not so happy, but they’d better get used to it. This is not a monarchy anymore. This is a democracy. Everybody’s got their proper place, and we must work together to build this nation. The tribal issue might dissipate and become less important in time, but not now… In the current situation, Mr. Karzai picked the best choice, in my opinion, when he selected Marshal Fahim.
 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate