A Rope and a Prayer (49 page)

In the end, American success or failure will hinge on the Pashtuns. The Pashtuns dominate the area from southern Afghanistan to northwestern Pakistan that is the focus of Obama’s surge. After thirty years of conflict, the Pashtuns are arguably more disenfranchised, fragmented, and religiously conservative than ever in their history. Pashtun tribal networks remain influential but any young Pashtun with weapons, cash, or a false claim of religious authority can seize control of a tribe from weakened traditional elders. Halting the Pakistani military’s backing of radical Pashtuns in the tribal areas, brokering political agreements with Pashtun insurgents in southern Afghanistan, and improving education in both countries will gradually strengthen Pashtun moderates. Pakistan must regain control of the tribal areas and enact long-promised reforms that introduce an independent court system, reduce the power of un-elected political agents, and allow political parties to campaign there.

Pashtuns say they want stability, security, and an end to corruption, but on their own terms. Outsiders—whether they are American soldiers, Pakistani intelligence operatives, or foreign militants—will never be able to impose stability on the Pashtun belt. Only the Pashtuns can. I remain convinced that Captain Nadeem is the true Pashtun, not our Taliban captors. And in the wake of this experience, I believe more than ever that patiently engaging, empowering, and revitalizing moderates is the way forward in an age of extremism.

 

 

I am still in touch with Captain Nadeem. When I spoke with him once by phone, in the spring of 2010, I asked him why he was so kind to me that night. His answer was immediate.

“It’s only natural,” he said. “One man can see another man’s suffering.”

One of the most vivid memories I have of our time in captivity was seeing religion at its best and at its worst. On one level, religion was a nefarious force that gave our captors their rationales for abducting us, terrorizing our families, and trying to extort staggering amounts of money from them. I also saw religious faith as a positive force that gave Tahir the strength to survive and Captain Nadeem the compassion to see us as human beings. Personally, praying proved invaluable in keeping me centered, hopeful, and rational.

I do not believe that religion itself is inherently divisive or destructive. For me, religion in moderation brings out our better angels. If I follow a faith at this point, it is the Unitarian Universalism that my father introduced me to as an adult. Religion in extremes, though, frequently brings out our worst. It plays upon what is perhaps our gravest flaws as humans: our ability to lose our compassion, to be dogmatic, to think our ideological beliefs are right and others’ are wrong, to turn members of different groups into a dangerous other.

I have reported on or heard of members of every major faith committing tremendous acts of kindness as well as horrible atrocities. In general while covering religious conflicts, I find that people who did unspeakable things to their fellow man were not sadists who knew they were doing wrong and perversely enjoyed it. Instead, they were people who believed they were acting in self-defense and saving their faith, group, and culture from attack. They believed they were acting righteously, just as my captors did.

My feelings toward my captors are fluid. Most of the time, I rarely think of them. At times, I despise them again for what they did to our families and us. I, of course, am guilty of the sins of selfishness, recklessness, and ambition. Tahir and I spent hours in captivity talking about how we had wronged our families by going to the interview and been punished for it. During my flight back to the United States, I wrote down three things as Kristen sat next to me. “This world is fleeting,” “I had my chance,” and “Now everyone else first.” Since I have returned home I try harder to live by those principles. Sometimes I succeed. Often, I do not.

For me, what I witnessed in Miran Shah is still vastly worse than the many mistakes of the American effort in Afghanistan and Pakistan since 2001. There, an unrelenting ideology made nonbelievers subhuman. It brainwashed young men into carrying out depraved acts of brutality. It disparaged human life instead of cherishing it. I believe that no God would support such hatred. Many Afghans and Pakistanis agree with me. They say the ideology that exists in the tribal areas must be challenged militarily, politically, economically, and religiously. I agree. I believe that type of bigotry is something we all must fight.

In the wake of this experience, I have an even deeper respect for people who are religious, but also believe that they have more in common with other faiths than they realize. And I passionately believe that if you are skeptical of organized religion—as I remain—you can still have ideals.

Professionally, my days as a war correspondent are over. I intend to make my calling the continued pursuit of truth through journalism, public service, and teaching. Personally, I recommit myself to supporting my wife and family. My family, friends, and editors never gave up on me.

Most of all, Kristen never gave up on me. For that, I owe her the world.

During the weeks after David’s return, we compared notes. Few of the reports we received and few of the rumors we heard from local sources matched his actual experience. David maintains that if he had not escaped, he would probably still be in Miran Shah. We may have made some mistakes on our end—trusting some reports, overlooking others, perhaps inadvertently raising David’s value by reaching out to American and foreign officials. But neither David nor I felt the kidnappers were ready to negotiate. I think it’s likely that their demands would have continued to shift and that they would hold David indefinitely. This is not to belittle the efforts of our security teams, government officials, and advisers. Many of the people who worked on our case devoted long hours and expertise, often with personal sacrifices, to help bring some semblance of clarity or conclusion to our case. We appreciate their efforts. And thank them for never giving up.

Over time I came to learn that kidnapping is a global phenomenon with entrepreneurs on all sides. Its aim is to terrorize people and to exploit suffering for profit. The effect is to make family members feel responsible and hopeless simultaneously. It is maddening to be singled out in this way. But it is also empowering to have survived the experience.

I also realized the limits of our own government in dealing with the issue of kidnapping. I’ve learned firsthand about our government’s limitations in dealing with the Taliban as well. It is not only a matter of political or strategic disagreement; it’s a much deeper cultural divide. We inhabit two incongruous worlds—or, as one of our good friends put it: They are playing Parcheesi and we are playing Monopoly. Our ordeal was an ongoing process of sifting through information and misinformation as well as dealing with a cast of ever-changing characters. I listened to all opinions, but trusted no one completely. At times it felt like the different agencies and consultants involved in trying to secure David’s release were at odds with one another. Each held vehemently to their own beliefs based on their allegiances and experience. As a result, we often received well-intentioned but conflicting advice. In the end, I realized I had no control over the situation. Despite our collective efforts back home, it seemed only the captors had the power to release my husband and his colleagues. We thought our fate was in their hands.

I am most grateful to former hostages and their family members who reached out to me, shared their experiences, and in the process demystified a strange emotional terrain. I will always appreciate their emotional honesty and bravery in revisiting their awful memories in order to help me.

Our family, friends, and colleagues provided support and sustenance. As a result, existing relationships were strengthened and many new friendships were forged. For this, I am grateful.

My mother used to joke that for a couple to live happily ever after, they’d have to both expire after saying their vows. I often thought of that statement during the seven months David was gone. I took our vows to heart, but never thought that “worse” would come so soon. While happily ever after is a false claim, sometimes adversity can transform circumstances into something better and propel you forward. This experience has tested my own level of commitment and endurance. It has given me faith in my own resiliency and an appreciation for the fact that while things can go horribly wrong, they can also improve unexpectedly.

My mother went back to Maine, but we talk all the time—more than before. I have a greater appreciation for my mother and for motherhood in general—I now realize that this relationship, while so basic, is vast and dynamic. Lee has become a big brother to me as well. He and his wife, Christie, have been great confidants and supporters to David and me both.

The only journey of which I am certain is the inner one. The spiritual insights that I held tightly during the kidnapping still resonate. This experience ultimately taught me how to let go without giving up, and that sometimes there is strength in patiently waiting. And I learned a few things about myself along the way. When the depths of my own sense of loyalty and commitment—an extreme interpretation of wedding vows—were tested, I did not waver. This was something I could not have predicted in the early days after David disappeared, when I was overwhelmed with fear, anxiety, and loss.

I kept faith throughout. I knew my husband would do everything he could to survive. I knew his patience, tenacity, intelligence, and reserve would serve us well. I also knew David would be able to be low key and appear meek as a cover. In reality, there is nothing meek about my husband. I am so thankful he had the courage to seize the opportunity to escape and the patience and endurance to wait for the right moment to do it.

I would have preferred that David had consulted me on his decision to go to interview the Taliban commander. But I cannot say I would have stopped him. I knew I’d married a war correspondent. I am simply grateful that in going through this experience, we have safely fulfilled our purpose and have another chance to move forward in life together.

Wherever possible, we have consulted news stories, e-mails, and other sources to verify our recollections of what occurred and ensure the accuracy of the dates given in the book. The following notes are designed to give additional background and describe suggested readings on various topics.

6 A European journalist:
The journalist asked not to be identified.

6 An experienced journalist:
The journalist asked not to be identified.

10 The driver punches the accelerator:
Rohde wrote a five-part series on his time in captivity for
The New York Times
. See David Rohde, “Held by the Taliban,”
New York Times
, October 17-21, 2009. For the full series, videos, maps, graphics, and reader comments, see:
www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/world/asia/18hostage.html
.

15 wean Afghans from Soviet influence:
See Cynthia Clapp-Wincek, “The Helmand Valley Project in Afghanistan,” United States Agency for International Development (1983), 1-3. The full report is a detailed history and assessment of the Helmand project.

15 “Little America”:
For elegant descriptions of Cold War Lashkar Gah see Arnold Toynbee,
Between Oxus and Jumma
(1961) and Nancy Dupree,
An Historical Guide to Afghanistan
(1977). For an exhaustive collection of the USAID-commissioned studies of the projects during the Cold War see Richard Scott, “Scott’s Helmand Valley Archives” at
www.scottshelmandvalleyarchives.org
.

16 a 5,000-year-old tribal code of honor:
See Louis Dupree,
Afghanistan
(1970), 104, 126-27.

16 The grand American project:
Dupree is very critical of the project, particularly in its early phases. See Dupree,
Afghanistan
, 482-85, 497, 499-507, 634-35. Nick Cullather also criticizes the project; see Nick Cullather, “Damming Afghanistan: Modernization in a Buffer State,”
Journal of American History
89, September 2002, 2: 512-37. For USAID descriptions of the project see Lloyd Baron, “Sector Analysis: Helmand-Arghandab Valley Region” (1973), 2, 7-9, and Mildred Caudill,
Helmand-Arghandab Valley, Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
(1969), 31. Residents of Helmand and former USAID officials generally praised the project in interviews conducted in Afghanistan and the United States between 2004 and 2010.

17 a cycle of Kabul-based, elite-backed:
One famous example is the 1929 uprising by conservatives that deposed King Amanulllah Khan. After he returned from a seven-month trip to Egypt, Italy, France, Germany, Britain, Russia, Turkey, and Iran in 1928, he convened a grand council and announced sweeping reforms. A new national parliament elected by male voters would be created. All young men would be conscripted for the army and all boys and girls would receive education. In the most shocking move, he declared that all visitors to Kabul should wear Western dress and all women should no longer wear veils. An uprising by conservative Afghans forced him from power the following year. See Willem Vogelsgang,
The Afghans,
Blackwell Publishing (2002), 281.

32 the Afghan government exchanged:
Figures stem from Sami Yusufzai, “For the Taliban, a Crime That Pays,”
Newsweek
, September 6, 2008, and “Taliban Say S. Korea Paid over $20 Million Ransom,” Reuters, September 1, 2008.

37 Foreign armies:
Leon Poullada describes the phenomenon in his book. See Leon B. and Leila D. J. Poullada,
The Kingdom of Afghanistan and the United States: 1828-1973
(1995), 1. Poullada quotes from Arnold Fletcher,
Afghanistan: Highway of Conquest
(1965).

37 Afghans deftly cultivated an image:
This argument comes primarily from Sarah Chayes, whose survey of Afghan history is incisive, exhaustive, and thoughtful. See Sarah Chayes,
The Punishment of Virtue: Inside Afghanistan After the Taliban
(2006), 68, 101, 202, 247.