Recent photographs of Pakistan’s Special Service Group have surfaced in which members of the group are conducting mountain warfare training in the snow. Of particular interest is of the group conducting their Salat, or daily prayers. The prayers themselves aren’t so much as interesting as is what the soldiers are doing with their weapons. The M4s and in another picture, Kalashnikov patterned self-loading rifles are stuck into the snow in front of the soldiers praying, butt first.
Although not really utilized today throughout the Islamic world, the practice dates back to the early Islamic period where one would place an object in front of them so other people would know not to walk in front of them during their salat. Specifically, it is called a Sutrah, or سترة in Arabic, meaning screen, or cover. There are some Hadiths on the topic but again it isn’t in wide use today.
Sahl ibn Abu Hathmah narrated: إذا صلى أحدكم إلى سترة فليدن منها لا يقطع الشيطان عليه صلاته The Prophet said: When one of you prays facing a sutrah he should keep close to it, and not let the devil interrupt his prayer.
The Messenger of Allah said: لا تصل إلا إلى سترة، ولا تدع أحداً يمر بين يديك، فإن أبى فلتقاتله؛ فإن معه القرين Pray facing a sutrah, and let no one cross in front of you while praying. If he insists, then prevent him by force because he is accompanied by shaitan.
In a previous article on Silah Report authored by Ali Parsa and generously donated by him from his website Aliparsa.com, Ali specifically mentioned an interesting practice done by Iranian Shi’a Imams during Friday Khutbah Prayer services. Imam’s in Iran are known to hold on to various rifles while giving their Khutbah sermons. Ali mentions that this comes from a Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) where it mentions that the Prophet always held the “Weapon of the Day” while giving his own sermons. Going into a little searching I found this paragraph on Islam QA that gives some background behind this-
In a tradition recorded by Imam Abu Dawood, it is narrated that the companion, Hakam bin Hazn Al Kulfi (RA) said, ‘We witnessed Juma with the Prophet (SA), and while standing (to deliver the khutba), he was leaning on a staff or bow. (Abu Dawwood – Chapter of a person who delivers a khutba and leans on a bow). Based on this narration, scholars have stated that holding the staff while delivering the khutba is commendable, as it was a practice of the Prophet (SA). In this regard, the great jurist, Allama Shami recorded the following: – ‘Certainly taking the staff is a Sunnah just as standing’. (Raddul Mukhtar).
Now, I’m not nearly as versed in the Sunnah as Iranian Shi’a clerics, but in this instance it makes no mention of a “Weapon of the Day”, which Imams in Iran appear to interpret as meaning whatever primary weapon is issued that is used to defend the Islamic Republic of Iran. That is certainly one interpretation of “Weapon of the Day”, perhaps similar how a “Uniform of the Day” is in many armed forces regulations around the world informing troops what uniform to wear. The explanation above refers to a “Staff”, which the Prophet appears to simply mean something to lean on, gain physical support from, and show to emit a sense of authority in front of a congregation. We have similar examples of Prophet Moses’s staff and there are other religious texts that reference a staff as well.
A key note to mention here is that this practice is only adhered to in the Islamic Republic when it comes to gripping actual firearms during the Khutbah sermons. It doesn’t appear to even exist in other Shi’a dominated countries or countries under Iranian influence to the extent that it does in Iran.
Now, going back to sort of the entire reason why Silah Report exists (apart from general small arms & light weapons analysis), is that we serve to make sense of these cultural phenomena when it comes to the intersection of small arms and the regions we are interested in. A prime example is this Blaze post in 2015 that is entitled “Can You Spot What Iran’s Khamenei Was Holding During His Speech on the Nuclear Deal? The Mainstream Media Ignored It”.
The post goes to great length to try and psychoanalyze the geopolitical ramifications of Imam-i-Khamenei gripping what is most likely a Chinese export copy of the 7.62x54r mm SVD Dragunov marksman rifle.
The article mentions that-
To drive home the point, the supreme leader’s official website posted a close up photo captured from beside the podium of the gun which even showed the magazine jutting out
…
But the most potent sign of all reflecting his message – the gun balanced under his left hand holding his speech notes – was left unmentioned.
It’s unlikely that if the speech had been given by an American or any Western politician that this scene setting detail would have been overlooked, especially given the hotly debated issue of guns.
The AP’s website had this photo of Khamenei holding the gun, but it was not mentioned in the copy in the accompanying article
By now, I hope readers of this article will realize the odd stance that The Blaze is taking on this Dragunov. Of course the Iranian media didn’t mention it because this is in fact actually a completely routine practice done by Imams at every organizational level throughout the religious hierarchy in Iran. Should the Iranian media have thoroughly mentioned the microphone in front of Imam-i-Khamenei’s face as well?
Now, this post isn’t to slander a conservative news outlet for getting something wrong. Any viewpoint from any source at all that is worthy of correcting in a cultural, historical, or social light will be equally scrutinized. This one just so happened to stand out as a prime reason why we at Silah Report are dedicated to our jobs at hand, to fill this void of historical and cultural knowledge by analyzing the technical with the cultural.
For more information on other Imams holding small arms during sermons, check out this Farsi language post on the topic, literally discussing what certain Imams prefer to hold during their Khutbahs.
From the post, in Farsi-
به گزارش پارسینه، برکف گرفتن سلاح توسط امام جمعه، سنتی است اسلامی که ریشه در صدراسلام دارد، نمادی از آمادگی دفاعی در برابر دشمنان اسلام حتی در محراب و محل نماز، بعد از پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی، مرحوم آیت الله طالقانی که با حکم امام خمینی، احیاگر سنت نماز جمعه بود، بار دیگر این سنت اسلامی را زنده کرد. آیت الله طالقانی در برابر پیشنهاد برخی از انقلابیون که به وی پیشنهاد کردند از شمشیر به عنوان سلاح خطیب امام جمعه استفاده کند، این پیشنهاد را رد کرد و “سلاح روزآمد و مدرن” را به دست گرفت.
در اوایل انقلاب اسلامی، سلاح ژ-3 تفنگی بود که امامان جمعه تهران و شهرستانها در حین ایراد خطبه جمعه به دست می گرفتند که در سالهای بعد، اسلحه از رده خارج “برنو” جای ژ3 را گرفت.
در میان ائمه جمعه، آیت الله حسنی امام جمعه ارومیه به داشتن سلاح های متعدد از جمله کلت و گرینوف در نماز جمعه شهرت دارد و معمولا بر خلاف ائمه جمعه دیگر از سلاح کلاشینکف در محراب نماز جمعه استفاده می کند.
As a quick sidenote by scanning photographs online, it doesn’t appear that the initial Supreme Leader of Iran, Imam-i-Khomeni adhered to the practice. Although it should be noted that senior Imams during his time did partake in it, as evidenced in the black and white photographs above.
“Krinkov”, where does it come from and how have we gotten to it? There are a number of theories about it, some truer than others, but we’ll examine each one, and I will provide what I have come up with so far.
The first theory is that it is Russian. At face value, this could seem true, by simply hearing the word “Krinkov” to a non-Russian speaker, it might sound Russian. However, this is by far, not the case at all. Tim from Military Arms Channel has an excellent dialogue on this, explaining that the Russians have an entirely different nickname. I’ll take an excerpt from Maxim Popenkers site, World Guns:
Since its introduction the AKS-74U, unofficially known as a “Ksyukha” (variation of a Russian woman name) or “okurok” (cigarette stub)
In addition from Max’s book Assault Rifles, we have this entry:
Since its introduction the AKS-74U, unofficially known as a “Kysusha” (a variation of a Russian female Ksenia), “Suka” (bitch), “Suchok” (small tree branch) or “Okurok” (cigarette stub)
And this is Tim from Military Arms Channel, explaining some of that from the Russian side.
Tim is correct in his explanation of what Russians would call it, but the biggest problem I have with his explanation is that he completely dismisses the role of the Afghan Mujahaden, saying that it is a “nonsense word”. In addition, he speculates that maybe the first AKS74U taken off a Russian who was named Krinkov. The theory doesn’t hold any weight because for one, Krinkov isn’t a Russian name or in any sort of Russian vocabulary. Also, the fact that Pashtun speaking Mujahideen could speak or even read Russian is very, very rare, many of them being illiterate in their own language of Pashtu (illiteracy is an extremely large problem even in current day Afghanistan/Peshawar, and was much more so in the early 1980s). Furthermore, the circumstances of the Mujahideen capturing weapons from the Russians involved very little live prisoners. We’ll get into this in a bit as well, but for the overwhelming majority of the time, the AKS74U was issued to helicopter and armored vehicle crew members. Contrary to popular belief, the amount of Russians captured in Afghanistan during the war, and the amount of Russians fleeing to the Mujahideen side was extremely low as well. Most of the time, the only way Mujahideen could get their hands on Soviet equipment was through disabled vehicles wherein the Russian occupants would already be dead, or through the corrupt selling of Russian arms to the Mujahideen by either Russians themselves, or Afghan government troops.
Most of the Mujahideen and Pashtun speakers that would have contributed to the name “Krinkov” would have been near Peshawar and in the eastern regions of Afghanistan.
The second theory is much more recent, but it originates from a gun shop in Naples, Florida. The shop was called “Krinks” and was run by a certain Paul Mahoney, who in the early 1990s was one of the first AK builders in the States to really take advantage of deactivated AKS74U kits, and put them together. The quality of them left much to be desired, but the fact of the matter is that the first mass producer of “Krink” kits in the United States was this guy Paul Mahoney with his gunshop “Krinks”. This might have certainly been one of the reasons why the name started to gain in popularity in the States, but it doesn’t help us at all in the actual etymology of the name.
My problem in the whole name origin is that we constantly see this theme of loosely attributing it to the Mujahideen, but yet there hasn’t been a single effort to get right to the source and really examine how that name might have even come about. Maybe it is ethnocentrism, maybe it is on account of laziness, maybe it is just accepting the status quo and not moving on. Either way, I’m going to present evidence that points to that fact that the name is actually a Pashtu word that has entered into our vocabulary, and is a testament to a twist in linguistics in the Pashtu language.
To begin with, we have to examine how the existence of this carbine became known about in the United States. I’ve often heard the claim that Soldier of Fortune magazine was the first entity to bring knowledge about the AKS74U, and even the AK74 to the West. I think this claim is more of a support for Soldier of Fortune’s reputation than any actual truth. Because just by looking at the facts, the famous Soldier of Fortune article that was run about the AK74 was in 1982, and the article about the AKS74U was in the July 1984 edition of the magazine. Looking at Jane’s Infantry Weapons from that era, and before, we see entries for the AKS74U, Sometimes labeling it as an AKSU 74, an AKSU and also as an “AKR”. This name most likely originates from Ian V. Hogg, as he was tied in with various intelligence circles at the time, that somehow came up with AKR. We still see this name in 1989, with Edward Ezell’s book, Small Arms Today.
Above is from Small Arms Today, and below is from “The AK47 Story“, both by the late Edward Ezell. Above he refers to it as the AKR/Krinkov, and below the “AKSU”. Both published in the late 1980s
But going on to who actually deserves the credit of “discovering” the AkS74U, we have a sentence from the July 1984 edition of Soldier of Fortune, in which David Isby does an entire article about reviewing this new carbine, while he and an American Army Major are in Pakistan. He claims that initial knowledge of the carbine is from Ian Hogg, who in turn heard about it from a certain Peter Jouvenal. This guy was a video journalist, who has been in and out of Afghanistan since the late 1970s, and is extremely important because he captured one of the only video shots of Taliban leader Mullah Omar in person.
Below is the text from the Soldier of Fortune article detailing the origins and name of the AKS74U.
Peter Jouvenal, right, with Osama bin Laden. Probably the actual “discoverer” of the AKS74U in the West.
Within the Soldier of Fortune article, David Isby takes the name from the Afghans he was with. However, he mentions two other names “Shrinkov” and “Shesakov”. These two names are also important, but because of the linguistics involved, I’ll get to that in a second.
As mentioned earlier, the difference between this article, and any other article on the internet, is that I’m going to the actual source of the name, which is from the Pashtu speaking peoples of eastern Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The name is not a “nonsense” word, it is a Pashtun word. I’ll start this off by showing a clip from a movie called Son of a Lion. Quite an interesting movie, it was made by an Australian EMT on his own dime, after 9/11, going to Peshawar and filming a storyline about a young boy who works in the arms trade but really wants to go to school to become educated. The culture and language displayed in the movie are phenomenal, but from a firearms perspective, it gives us an in-depth look at the arms trade in Peshawar. Apart from a few actors, the rest of the movie is completely shot amid the markets and daily life of the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan. There aren’t any “props” or staged settings. The locations are real, and so are the small arms portrayed. But in it, we have this one scene where the main character takes a “Krinkov” out to a customer to test fire it. He also mentions the connection with Osama bin Laden.
https://youtu.be/KzN1-M37RiY?t=17m40s
Now, to understand why the reference to Osama bin Laden was even mentioned, we have to understand a little behind why the AKS74U became prominent among first the Mujahaden, and then today among families of status. As mentioned previously, the weapon was only ever issued out to crew members of helicopters and armored vehicles. Contrary to popular belief, this wasn’t a favorite of the Spetsnaz at all, although it originally started out as a proof of concept for Soviet Special Forces. It was quickly ditched for the AKS74 because the longer barrel proved to be better in the vast distances that the Spetsnaz found themselves operating in. This from an interview that I conducted with Marco Vorobiev, a Spetsnaz Veteran of the Afghan war.
Miles Vining- I noticed in some of your talks that you don’t have much love for the AKS74U?
Marco- Well its alot of fun. Lets talk about it from a far away point here. The gun is a tool in a toolbox to complete a certain job. And the job could be a regular contact fight, lets say 500-400 meters, to include maybe clearing houses or compounds. So from that regard you want something small, maybe be able to use it in close quarter combat, something really, easy to handle, easy to maintain. Well that is fine, considering if you are a police officer going through a house. It shoots 5.45 as well, so thats good for wounding. On the other hand, as a carbine, you need to be able to hit targets out to 300 meters. You can do that with an AKS74, no problem, even with an M4. But the AKSU? You might if you spray half a magazine in that particular direction. But I even have one, I shoot it for fun, I get a big old smile on my face. It’s fun to shoot, it’s just like rrrrrrrrrrp, almost like a little toy so to speak. Mikal Kalshanikov himself told me that he loved it, although he was a very anti 5.45 guy, but he was a big fan of the AKSU for some reason. But you put yourself in an actual gunfight, with people screaming everywhere, trying to get comm up, you taste the metal of adrenaline in your mouth, and now you are trying to pick out targets in the distance… it’s really hard with that gun. We were always trying to get rid of it for the AKS74.
Thus, the weapon was strictly for crew members. And if we look at the context of the Soviet-Afghan War, the biggest hinderances for the Mujahideen, were the Hind attack helicopters, and the BMPs. In fact, if you look through Soviet photographs of the war, there is much evidence to attest to this, with helicopter crews even having thigh holsters carrying their AKS74Us. Thus, taking one of these monsters out of the fight would be one enormous victory for a small band of fighters, but more importantly, proving that you took one down would show everyone how brave or good you were. And what better way to prove it than to take a weapon that only these troops would have on them, an AKS74U? It not only proves that you were competent, but it also gives you something to defend yourself with. Even in the Soldier of Fortune article, we see just how rare and sought after these things were, even rising in price after word was passed around that an American was looking for one in Peshawar.
Now, Osama bin Laden claimed back to his Yemeni and Saudi buddies back home that he fought in the Soviet-Afghan War. But the actual truth of the matter is that he probably was never near any of the fighting, most likely staying in a rear echelon capacity, directing funds and supplies to the front (if he even did that). But, on his return to the area in the mid-1990s, we have a multitude of pictures of him, with an AKS74U by his side in the camera frame. This was very deliberate, to the point of the gun sellers in Peshawar even telling the customer that “This is the Osama gun”. Although Osama never took down a Soviet armored vehicle or Hind, the fact that he was carrying the carbine showed a status symbol, and he was able to identify much more easily with local Pashtuns who didn’t understand his Saudi background but absolutely understood his choice of weapon.
The placement of that AKS74U in the camera frame is entirely on purpose.
Somewhat off track, but this is important to understand how the name came to be, because even today, the AKS74U occupies a very lofty position as a status symbol in eastern Afghanistan and Peshawar.
A close Afghan contact from Jalalabad mentions two names for the AKS74U, the first one which is popular in Jalalabad, is “Kalakov” and the second one is “Krinkov”. If you hear somewhat of an “F” sound at the end of the word, that is because there isn’t any “V” consonant in Pashtu, speakers instead using an “F” or a “W” sound to simulate a “V”. Now, remember what David Isby said the other names for the carbine were? “Shrinkov” and “Shesakov”? Using a little knowledge of the Pashtu language, the names pair up to be the same word. There are two dialects of Pashtu, the southern, or Kandahari, and the eastern, or the Nangahari. So looking at this words, “Krinkov” and “Shrinkov” are actually the same word, just pronounced differently, while “Kalakov” and “Shesakov” are a little more different, but dropping the “la” sound, the words are also the same.
From the full form of the word on the right, going into the nickname for the AKS74U on the left, the differences between the top and bottom are in different Pashtu areas of speaking.
But how exactly did these words come about? As my friend mentioned, adding an “ov” to any word makes it Russian-ized in Pashtu. So that explains the last part of the word, and the first part is probably a bit of vocabulary added on, to signify the importance of the AKS74U as a status symbol. Because it isn’t just any old “Kalashnikov”, its a “Krinkov”, and you know I got it from that Hind I blew out of the sky a week ago. Another tidbit that my friend brought up after the camera was off, is that for some reason, in Jalalabad, the Pashtuns refers to the Kalashnikov rifle as that, a “Kalashnikof”. However, in other parts of eastern Afghanistan, the same name is actually pronounced “Krashnikof”. And this might actually be the truest jump to “Krinkof”, as going from “Kalashnikof” to “Kalakof” is very similar, as is going from “Krashnikof” to “Krinkof”. In both cases, the “L” in the first one, and the “R” sound in the second one are maintained in their nickname for the short rifle.
I hope this was an informative article and was able to really get to the point of “Why do we call it this?”. If anything, the most important part of all of this, is that the word isn’t a made up, nonsense word, but instead has very important historical and cultural attributes and an etymology that comes from a defining moment in history. There is much evidence to point to the fact that Afghanistan might just have been the straw that broke the Soviet Unions back, and this word directly came out of that struggle. In addition, it is a Pashtun invention, and is still very much alive and well in eastern Afghanistan and Peshawar.
Silah Report took some time to ask a native Afghan from the province of Mazar-i-Sharif to talk about various colloquial names that Afghans have for popular small arms in use by the Mujahideen and in the modern era. This interview is not verbatim and has been edited for clarification.
SR- Please explain the Dragunov?
Interviewee- So the Russian name Dragunov actually isn’t used in Dari, or in Afghanistan. Instead, we call it “Draz-nuf” (درازنف) In this case, “Draz” (دراز) Dari means long or lengthy, and that name is given to that rifle due to its overall length being longer than most small arms such the Kalashnikov, Krinkov, and Shinkov. That’s why they call it “Draz-nuf”, the “Draz” for “Lengthy” or “Long”. Likewise, with names like Krinkov, or Shinkov, these are names given to various small arms by the Mujahideen in the Soviet War. They don’t represent the actual Russian name for them.
SR- Was the “Draz-nuf”/Dragunov a special rifle among those who used it? Only choose Mujahids would use it?
Interviewee- I think so because they used it as a sniper rifle due to the optics that came with it. You can focus your target very well and then shoot it. That’s what I have seen in movies as well. But it isn’t as expensive or as sought after as the Krinkov as far as I know. Carrying a Krinkov is sort of a show-off, something a Captain, a commander, would do. Everyone would talk about how “That guy was carrying a Krinkov, or his bodyguards carry a Krinkov”. But that status symbol isn’t the same with the “Draz-nof”.
SR- What are some other names? Such as PKah, Makarov, etc…?
Interviewee- Yes, PKah, they call it by another name of “Grin-nuf”.
SR- What about the RPG?
Interviewee- This is sometimes called a “Rockeet” (راکت) or “Rockeet-Tandaz” (راکت تندز) This is because “Rockeet” is obviously the missile that is fired out of that barrel, and “Andakhtan” is the Dari verb “To Throw” (انداختن) so “Rockeet-Tandoz” is an instrument that is used to throw a “Rockeet”.
SR- What about the .303 Lee Enfield?
Interviewee- We call these “See-Sahd-See-Bor” ( سه صد سه بور) See-Sahd-See means three hundred and three in Dari, meaning the caliber .303, and “Bor” for the diameter of the barrel. I’ve seen these rifles in old people’s houses and people would say “My grandfather carried this”. And “Karabine”, is another kind of gun, but it isn’t a rifle, it is shorter, shooting single rounds instead of automatic fire. We also have “Dushka” for the DShK Heavy Machine Gun.
Afghan fighters hide during Soviet bombardment, Jalalabad, Nangarhar, Afghanistan, 1981
Ali Parsa is an Iranian scientist who has a lifelong passion for sailboats. He also knows a great deal about the history of the Mauser bolt action rifles that initially entered service in Iran at the turn of the 20th Century. He wrote this article examining the history of the Persian Mauser with its roots in the Czech VZ24 being license produced in arms factories outside of Tehran. This article was written almost a decade ago and he has very generously allowed Silah Report to republish it with express permission from himself. It initially appeared on the website that bears his name, Aaliparsa.com. This edition has been lightly edited.
Mauser rifles first appeared in Iran before the First World War. Looking at pictures of Iran’s Constitutional Revolution era, one can spot Mauser rifles and handguns in the hands of freedom fighters of Sattar Khan and Bagher Khan, as well as other Constitutionalists in different regions of Iran.
Iranian Constitutionalists, with their Mausers, in 1906
At the end of World War I, and as a result of the Versailles treaty arms ban, Germany no longer produced these rifles, but an almost exact copy was in production in Czechoslovakia. After Hitler became the German chancellor, the production was resumed in Germany.
Later, with the invasion of Czechoslovakia, the identical rifle was produced in Germany and Czechoslovakia.
Czechoslovak Army Drill, 1938
A major production center was in Brünn, or Brno, as the city is called in the Czech language. The rifles made in Brno, the Czechoslovakian model, are known as VZ24 (for Vzor24, or Model 24 in the Czech language) and had the word Brno imprinted on them.
Czechoslovakian VZ24
Markings of a VZ24
Officially, the Mauser rifle was selected for the Iranian army during Reza Shah’s time. But Iran didn’t go for the original German and ordered the identical Czechoslovakian version, the so-called Brno. The Czech firm provided Iran rifles made of many German parts. It was similar to the longer barrel version Germans designated as K98. Some official test results are available from antique arms dealers today, featuring signatures of the Brno factory representative, the Iranian in charge, and of course, satisfactory ‘grouping’ or bullet marks.
A 1934 test result document
Full length ‘Brno’ with markings in Persian
At that time two other rifles were in use and very well known in Iran: the British Lee Enfield and the Russian Mosin Nagant (Noghaan, or Naaghaan, (نوغان- ناغان) in popular parlance in those days). The exact reason for preferring Brno over its rivals is not known, but one can speculate that those in charge of the Iranian army, or maybe Reza Shah himself, tried to avoid dependence of Iran to either of the two neighboring powers. Besides, the Brno and it’s Mauser original were considered to be the best military rifle of its day.
The Iranian government ordered three versions of this weapon. It was manufactured in Czechoslovakia by two firms. One was called Ceskoslovenska Zbrojovka, or CZ. These rifles are known to collectors as Persian CZ98, Persian Mauser or Persian Brno.
A Pahlavi crown, lion and sun crest appears near the feeding ring, as an inscription in Persian (in Nasta’liq script) on the side of its magazine giving the model and the factory name, which was in Brno. From then on the name, Brno was used by Iranians to refer to this rifle.
Lion and Sun crest of a Persian Mauser
Persian markings of a Brno made rifle
One typical such inscription read “tofang-e nemoone 1309 karkhane-ye aslahe sazi berno” (“Rifle model 1309 Made at Brno Arms factory.” The number 1309 refers to the Persian year 1309 which is the year 1930 in the Gregorian calendar).
In the late 1940s Iran’s Taslihat-e Artesh (Arms Factories of the Army), popularly known as Mosalsal-sazi (the machine-gun factory), in Tehran started production of these Brno rifles. The needed machinery and technical assistance were provided to Iran through the industrial firm Škoda, which had a long history of cooperation with Iran. Iran produced two models: the regular VZ24 rifle (similar to the German Kar98k, overall length 1110 mm) and the short version (similar to the German G30, overall length 993 mm) known as “Berno kootah” (short Brno).
Berno Kootah (short Brno)
Under a licence from CZ. The difference was only in the markings on the side of reciever: instead of naming Brno as the maker, it was written “sakht-e aslah-e sazi-e artesh” (made by the Army arms factory).
Markings on an Iran made short Brno
The products are known among the collectors as Persian Mauser and are regarded to be the best and smoothest of the Mauser family of bolt-action rifles.
For many years Brno was the standard personal weapon of the Iranian armed forces, until it was replaced by the more modern, semi-automatic, American Garand M1, and later by the German Heckler & Koch G3.
The rifle was especially cherished by Iranian tribes, who are known to be firearms aficionados and able shooters. A tribesman sharpshooter would settle for nothing less than a Brno. Tribal rebels did everything to acquire one of these rifles, and they did get their hands on these in many tribal wars during Reza Shah and Mohammad Reza Shah’s time. And probably the tribal chieftains, or Khans, did get shipments from foreign sources, to be distributed among their savars (mounted fighters). One single event, which contributed to the widespread availability of Brno rifles among the tribes in Iran, was the fall of Reza Shah following the invasion of Iran by the Allied forces in 1941. At that time the Iranian army, after a short resistance, was almost disbanded and many people, especially tribesmen, got hold of the Brnos left after the soldiers abandoned the barracks.
There are many stories of the gun’s accuracy among the tribes. When Dadshah rebelled against the shah’s government in Baluchistan in the 1950s, people said that his wife, Bibi Khatoon, who accompanied him in the mountains, at one occasion, took her Brno and shot a bullet right into the barrel of the gun of a poor gendarme who was aiming at her over a long distance. Its popularity among Iranian tribes was so much that it was mentioned in some of their songs. A version of a well-known Boyer Ahmad song has a refrain that says “Mastom, Mastom, Brno kootah be dastom” (I’m drunk and have a short Brno in my hand).
For the politically minded intellectuals of 1950s and 1960s, the rifle was a symbol of the Shah’s repressive rule. It can be seen in the pictures of soldiers attacking the house of Dr. Mossageq on the fateful day of 19 August 1953 (the infamous day of the US-British coup).
Soldiers attacking the house of Dr. Mossadiq, Aug. 1953
Gory pictures of executions of Tudeh party officers in the Chitgar shooting range in 1955 shows defiant young officers strapped to the stake minutes before execution, with Brnos present to do the task. When Navab-Safavi, the fundamentalist leader of Fadaiian Islam was arrested, Iranians saw his pictures being transferred to a prison under bayoneted Brnos.
Dr. Yazdi, the Tudeh party leader, after arrest in 1953, surrounded by soldiers with Brnos
Navab-Safavi, the Fadaiian-e Islam leader arrested
You can see it in pictures of 15 Khordad (June 1963) uprising in Tehran. In fact, when the Shah’s opposition cried against his “rule of the bayonet”, it was the sight of these Brnos with their bayonets attached that they were referring to.
Ordinary people usually had their first encounter with the rifle while passing a guard in the street, or when they were (willingly or otherwise) recruited for the military service.
A deserter is taken to military service in a Gilan village, circa 1955
In the 1960s the semi-automatic US made M1 replaced Brno in the Iranian army, and Brno use was confined to the gendarmerie and the game wardens for a while, before it was decommissioned from active use. In the 1970s it was used mainly in ceremonial occasions.
Girl cadets of the police academy in graduation ceremony, circa 1972
During the 1979 revolution, the gun reappeared in the hands of the revolutionaries and tribesmen, who never abandoned their Brnos. When Kurds challenged the newly established Islamic government, they used mostly modern assault rifles. But Brno still had a use: The Kurds claimed that with special cartridges that can pierce 2cm of steel, Brno can down aircraft and helicopters.
Kurdish ‘Peshmarga’s with Brno
Besides the rebels, the Islamic government too had a use for Brno: It was, and is, used in official Friday prayer ceremonies. The speaker is required to have ‘the weapon of the day’ by his side, according to the tradition of the Prophet (he apparently used a sword).
A different news source, but this shows a handgun being held by an imam leading the Khutbah.Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei with what appears to be a Dragunov derivative. https://www.theblaze.com/news/2015/07/20/can-you-spot-what-irans-khamenei-was-holding-during-his-speech-on-the-nuclear-deal-the-mainstream-media-ignored-it
The most likely reason for its use in such ceremonies is that it is long enough for the speaker to hold it like a walking stick while he is standing and preaching. The Mauser brothers would have been happy to hear that their rifle would be considered a ‘weapon of the day’ a century later.
For people of my generation Persian Mauser, or Brno, brings back many bittersweet memories. The coup, the executions, the NoghlAli (Iranian version of GI Joe) with his Brno in a watch-cabin, the pain of being hit by its butt in street demonstrations, the greedy gendarme guy looking for a chicken to steal, the poor poacher in a remote town using the old rifle to feed his family with meat once in a while. You see it in the old newspaper pictures of battles, ceremonies, riots and executions. It is a piece of history.
Thank you Ali Parsa for contributing to Silah Report!
The Tokarev (colloquially known as TT in Pakistan), received a cult following since its arrival in Pakistan somewhere in the late 1970’s, that somehow has still maintained its status as a fearsome self-defense weapon. In fact, during that period, post-Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the two weapons that made it to Pakistani markets were the AK-47 and the Tokarev pistol. For gun aficionados, no collection was complete without these two weapons in one’s inventory. The TT was a much sought after weapon, it was semi-auto, had a very potent round and the thing to possess.
Later Chinese, as well as Serbian variants of the Russian TT, found their way in the country. For quite some time the TT ruled as a weapon of choice till the venerated 9x19mm hit the markets and turned the tide in its favor as a caliber of choice. Around the early 1980’s Pakistani made TTs found their way into the local markets simply because these were inexpensive, the ammo was dirt cheap and available in thousands or perhaps millions. Even today the average Pakistani is confident and wants a TT as a trusted reliable weapon, the fact that it is easily available and inexpensive, around $ 20-35 only, adds to its popularity. Later these weapons started appearing in various shapes and sizes, which somehow made them appear more fearsome and attractive for the buyers. The weapon being reviewed is a local made TT, with a double stack magazine that increases its capacity from 8 to 18!! To make it more attractive this piece works only on full-auto!! Its gold plated and looks as much good as it feels good to hold in one’s hands.
Specifications
Caliber: 7.62 x 25 (.30 bore)
Length: 7.6″
Height: 5.3″
Barrel length: 4.6″
Magazine capacity: 18 rounds, double stack
Front blade, rear notch type sights
This particular piece is Fully Automatic
Weight: 1.15 kg
The weapon being made is a copy of the Chinese TT, and bears the words “Cal 30 Mauser, Made as Chine by Norinco”. Observe the gold plated, slide release, mag release, trigger and the barrel bearing. It adds to the looks of this finely finished handgun.
The magazine base plates are also gold plated and help to spruce up the looks on this TT. Observe the polished wooden grips.
Since the handgun is full auto it has a recess for fitting in a buttstock. This piece doesn’t come with one, but it can be made to order.
The barrel bearing is gold plated and gives a good contrast against the black finish.
The pistol has a standard front sight blade and rear notch fixed sights like the standard Tokarev.
The quality of workmanship isn’t all that bad. But one area in which the local weapons lack is good quality control. If this can be handled then they can really produce weapons which give consistent results.
This particular piece comes packed in an Aluminum box. Considering its features, look and price it isn’t a bad value for money weapon. TT’s have been around for quite some time, here in Pakistan. And now since POF is making 7.62 x 25 ammo so there’s choice of ammo to choose from Chinese, Russian and Pakistani and since ammo is inexpensive so TTs are common. So, for now, the TT is here to stay.
Nauman Afzal is a Pakistani based writer, and writes at his own very successful blog, My Random Ramblings as well. This is his first article for Silah Report.
In our part of the world, weapons have always followed a rather strange evolutionary path, if we talk about their development only. Darra Adam Khel or as I would like to call it, “Our Wild West” is the place where one can get a copy of almost any weapon made, at a price. The evolution of weapons here has always depended on the type of ammunition being used. In other words, it was the availability of a particular caliber of ammunition that dictated its development, unlike other places. That is akin to making cars on the availability of a certain kind of fuel. So in the 1960’s and 1970’s .32 ACP and .32 S&W Long were available in wide abundance throughout Pakistan. And one could either buy a foreign made weapon, which off course was expensive (as it is still today) or a Darra made revolver, which were available and still are being produced.
This particular piece is around 40 years old and is quite well made and kept. In those days many a “Khan” could be seen wearing this type of revolver across their chest with a dozen or more rounds inserted in the very belt holding it in place. Semiautomatic pistols were expensive and rare, so the de-facto choice was a Darra made wheeler, in .32 S&W Long, made to perfection. The local gunsmiths (who now have improved to the extent that they can and are in fact making copies of CQA the Chinese equivalent of AR15) perfected their skills to make excellent quality revolvers.
This little piece is an exact copy of the .32 Webley and Scott (Mark IV precisely), a top-break, seven shot revolver, single as well as double action brass hammer, a brass trigger and safety.
Caliber:.32 S&W Long
Weight:720 grams approx
Action:SA/DA
Cylinder Capacity: 7 shots
Barrel length:3.5”
Front and Rear Sight: Fixed
Top Break: With extractor for removing cartridges from the cylinder
Safety: Manual, Lateral Safety just behind the hammer
A dozen screws all along the body hold it in place, grips included. This revolver has its fair share of brass used in it; the hammer, trigger and the rear sight plate are made out of brass which gives it a shiny look when polished. The hammer, as well as the top-break lever, are knurled for a better grip.
Observe the Mark IV 32 marking over the left side on top of the cylinder, which is quite reminiscent of the original Webley & Scott. Other than this there are no markings or writings on the body. The hammer itself is pointed much like a nail or needle quite unlike the original Webley.
The revolver weighs 720 grams approximately, and in this size it is a good choice for a carry weapon, even nowadays. I have seen a few newer versions of this revolver selling for around Rs. 1500 that makes it around $ 15 plus or minus few today. (But off course .32 S&W Long is expensive here. ) The newer versions lack brass and hence give it a finish that appears quite dark in texture.
Frankly, I never tried disassembling one recently, but since everything is held in place by screws taking it apart is not an issue. But then there is not much point in taking apart a revolver. This particular piece has its grips changed, the original ones are made of poor quality plastic. The wooden grips were custom made for $3, both sides. Marking 32 on the inside the cylinder indicates its caliber.
These revolvers are known to stand out in reliability, a testament to the good quality workmanship in Darra. Since the advent of semi-auto pistols and the craftsmen ability to make good copies Revolvers are less in demand, still one can find them in the market. Somehow people tend to think that revolvers are inferior in performance as compared to semi-auto pistols.
This particular piece has been in my family and has passed hands from one generation to another, with no more than a hundred rounds fired through it. It now has an emotional value attached to it, and is held in much reverence amongst gun enthusiasts.
The elaborate activity known as exhibition drill within the United States is quite unique in its execution. It evolved out of a want to push the envelope when it comes to Drill and Ceremony (shortened to D&C) competitions. For many decades, militaries all over the world have held D&C competitions, even down to the academy cadet level. The United States was no different, with the tradition possibly originating from Prussian General Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben, who is credited with teaching D&C to American troops at Valley Forge during the Revolutionary War. However, it was only within the last century that competitions took on a more flashy or exhibition flare, with both armed and unarmed portions. The reasons for this could be many, but the author speculates that it has to do with D&C becoming less important on the battlefield and more of a measure of a unit’s discipline in the rear. For example, doing exhibition drill in the 1800s would probably be met with stern disappointment, because this was still the age where actual battles were won and lost due to a unit’s ability to maneuver in formation on a battlefield.
Today exhibition drill teams exist at every level from High School JROTC programs, Collegiate level ROTC programs, Military ceremonial units such as the Marine Corps’ Silent Drill Platoon, and even professional performance teams such as New Guard America. One of their performances is shared below.
But back to origins. The general beginnings of what we now know to be called “exhibition” drill are claimed to be a cadet unit called “Pershings Rifles” still active today at a university in Nebraska. Whether or not this cadet unit performed anything near to what would be labeled as exhibition, the research isn’t very clear. But the general consensus is that modern exhibition drill really took off in the years following the Vietnam War, growing to a huge network today.
However, before the Pershing Rifles, there was Hajji Sherif/الحاج شريف (normally colloquially as Hadji Cheriff). This name was most likely a stage name or something an American audience could easily pronounce. The first part, Hadji/Hajji is indicative of this man making the Haj pilgrimage to Mecca, and the second part Cheriff/Sherif, means “Noble” in Arabic. Although Sherif might have been apart of the man’s name, it really doesn’t give us much as to his family name, what part of the MENA region he was from, etc…
This video clip that was copyrighted by Thomas Edison in 1899 (he also had another clip of Hajji Sherif performing a dance at the inventor’s studio) specifically label Sherif as the “Arabian” Gun Twirler and recorded at what is believed to be the Midway Plaisance during during the World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893, taking place in Chicago. It shows Sherif effortlessly spinning what appears to be a muzzleloading Model 1855 Springfield .58 Caliber rifle.
The only other known video (described earlier) of him is also online-
But in this short movie that would have been aired or published as a silent movie, we see exactly what goes on today on exhibition drill decks across the United States. As the drill website, The Nationals notes–
[He is performing] a basic aerial toss (two, 1-1/2 over-hand thrown from the firing hammer) and also an over the shoulder technique with a rather remarkable display of over-the-head drill (OTH), and ends right after an under the leg inverted spin.
A bearded man performs a rifle twirling act on a stage with a painted backdrop of a city street corner. He wears a white turban and a dark two-piece costume of tunic and baggy pants that narrow at the knees; perhaps the costume of an Arab infantryman. The tricks he performs include throwing the spinning rifle in the air and catching it; twirling the gun in front of him, above his head, behind his back, to the side of his torso, and under his leg; and twirling the rifle as he switches hands.From Edison films catalog: An interesting exhibit by Hadji Cheriff, of the original Midway Plaisance. Twirls his rifle over shoulder, behind back, under leg, both hands and one hand. 50 feet. $7.50.
50 feet is in reference to the overall physical length of the roll if you were to purchase it for $7.50 at the time of the short’s airing at the turn of the century in 1899.
Hadj Cheriff was both an Arabian knife juggler and an acrobat. He had little to do with filmmaking of any sort, as his debut was in the 1894 Edison short film “Hadj Cheriff” which features him performing part of his act in Edison’s Black Maria studio. Cheriff later appeared in another Edison film, “Arabian Gun Twirler” from 1899. These two shorts are apparently the only films he took part in; thus, Cheriff remained a minor part in filmmaking.
We have these references in The History of Conversion to Islam in the United States Vol II, which suggest that Sherif was a circus performer, and might have been Egyptian, and even a Sufi. Some Sufi religious orders are quite known for various practices that put them in a trance-like state, most famously the Whirling Dervishes but they number very little even in Turkey. From the book-
New York Clipper, July 19, 1890, pp. 291, 294, 295, 301, 304…. Hadji Cheriff, Arabian gun juggler
The real question that I think is important to answer as researchers is where did Hajji Sherif get the idea of twirling an unloaded rifle to entertain a crowd? One body of thought is that it might have come from his Sufi roots (if he was Sufi to begin with). Another distant train of thought is that it might be related to Yowla/اليولة, which is a traditional dance routine practiced in the Gulf Countries today, but can be traced back many years. Although not often using full-size rifles (imitation ones are used), and often using swords, there could be a connection. An important here is that traditional Yowla puts much more emphasis on the dance rather than skill with the rifle. The third option is that Sherif came up with the idea on his own of course.
Traditional Yowla performance-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUvX-1g9F7M
This is an example of Yowla with muzzleloaders today, similar to what Sherif would have had-
This article will examine the design and use of improvised firearms among Palestinians in the West Bank, that are otherwise known as “Replica” Carlo’s due to their similarity in appearance to the M4s and M16 rifles in use throughout Isreal that the designs are replicating. The majority of these weapons are 9x19mm NATO, fully automatic only, magazine fed, open bolt designs that are improvised from underground manufacturers that use machinery and materials purchased on the black market or outright stolen. Due to the variance in production and origins, there is no set standard of appearance for these weapons. Rather there is a general consensus that the appearance is identical to an M4 or M16 from afar, but that there are significant differences between individual models.
Motives for Producing Replicas and the Cultural Context
Availability
The prime reason to manufacture the Carlo is to resemble as closely as possible an M-16 or M-4 is the availability of furniture and magazines in Israel and the West Bank. Both guns were and still are a major part of the Israeli armament, used by the IDF, police, civil guard etc… Because of this availability of parts, Armalite based designs are favored when theft becomes an option.
From a manufacturing point of view, it makes sense to design your gun to match the existing furniture and magazines already available than to manufacture them along with the gun.
Status and Prestige
Guns have a significant role in the Arab tradition, centuries of existence in lawless regions made it essential to own weapons for self-defense and as a deterrence against other tribes who were also armed themselves with whatever they could get their hands on.
Although civilian gun ownership is largely restricted and banned by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority many Arab families in the West Bank and Israel are determined to keep their arsenals and enlarge them as much as possible.
Alongside the practicality of owning a gun the guns are symbols of status and wealth. A family or an individual that can afford high-end weapons rather than a homemade one enjoy prestige over those who compromise with the local workshop products.
Acquiring a real military grade firearm might be expensive and the common garden variety Carlos are too widespread. The Carlo replicas are a way to bridge that gap, have a more expensive and awe-inducing gun without the cost of acquiring the M4 that the replica is based on.
Imitating Popular Palestinian Figures
Many in the Arab population view the terror organizations and terrorists as freedom fighters and role models, naturally, there are those who want to imitate these heroes and want to have their guns be as identical to those who they admire. If the genuine guns and ammo are out of reach then the replicas become the alternative, relatively cheap and available supplies of ammunition to practice and show off. It is then easy to understand why some workshops making the replicas make great efforts to produce almost identical copies.
Infiltration
It has been speculated that the M4 replicas could be used for terror attacks against Israeli civilians or IDF soldiers. Due to the apparent shape of the replicas being similar to the M16 service rifle used by the IDF. This will confuse soldiers and security guards, mistaking the identity of terrorists as IDF soldiers, making them hesitate to shoot.
A fair theory, however, none of the individuals caught with these replicas has ever been caught with an IDF uniform to match the gun. Currently, the records show that after numerous attacks done by Carlo wielding terrorists none were carrying any replicas. All of the photos released by IDF and police spokesmen show a regular Carlos.
Stolen or Lost Weapons and Magazines
An obvious source for both guns and their magazines are various stocks of small arms already existing in Israel. IDF, police, border guards, private security, armed civilians and many other groups are armed with M16s and M4s. This creates an abundance of stock from which guns and magazines can be acquired, by searching IDF training areas or breaking into a police officer’s home for example.
Commercial market
Several Israeli companies, such as FAB and CAA, known in the U.S. commercial gun market for their products, are also producing and selling M16 and M4 furniture in Israel. Many IDF soldiers individually choose to upgrade their weapons at their own expense. Such equipment is sold regularly and without any background checks and it stands to reason that some of the replicas are using such legally purchased furniture.
Paintball and Airsoft Replicas
There were some on Israeli gun web forums who speculate that paintball and airsoft replicas could be the source for the Carlos replicas’ receivers.
Indeed such guns could be cannibalized to provide the Carlo replica receivers.
The 9x19mm NATO ammunition produces less pressure than intermedium cartridges do so the light structure of the paintball and airsoft might withstand the additional pressure.
However, thought technical plausible, photos taken of captured Carlos or those surface in the Arab social media don’t indicate that paintball and airsoft are used.
The replicas’ ‘receivers’ all appear to be workshop made with all the typical welding seams, rivets and out of proportions dimensions.
Embedded Magazine
Curious readers might wonder how open bolt 9x19mm submachine guns are fed with 5.56x45mm NATO STANAG magazines.
The answer is simple, the craftsmen making the guns mimic the real guns embed pistol or Uzi 9x19mm magazine inside the real STANG magazines.
Similar to Matryoshka dolls, these magazines are inside of the weapon with few exterior modifications to the STANG magazine.
Those rivets hold the inner magazine in place.
Outside of the weapon the inner magazine is revealed protruding out of the STANAG housing magazine.
Such arrangement of small caliber magazine housed inside bigger caliber magazine shell is unusual but not unique, for example, the Philippines Armscor M16 22 is a 22LR semi-auto rifle dressed as an M16A1 with a matching STANAG size magazines containing 22LR magazines inside
Although former British Army officer Robert Johnson wrote his book, “The Afghan War of War” in 2011, his conclusions and observations are just as valuable, if not more valuable today than ever. The premise of his book is that very few authors, officers, or politicians have throughly studied the Afghan side of many of the conflicts that have taken place in Afghanistan, whether it be Afghans against foreign invaders/occupiers, or civil war within the country such as during the 1990s. What I especially liked about the book was a number of very useful points that Johnson raises, that I honestly had not thought of before. I’ll summarize some of these points below, as these were my key takeaways from the book.
A Nation of a Thousand Tribes
Johnson goes to great lengths to make the point that Western observers have seen Afghans as “unchanging”, the “Graveyard of Empires”, and “fierce tribal fighters”, and this has stereotyped impressions of the Afghans since the first Anglo-Afghan War in the 1840s. Throughout the book we have countless counter-examples where this doesn’t seem to be the case. Where Afghan tactics have changed, altered, and have been reactive to the threats faced, in addition to being proactive and forcing Western troops to be constantly on the defensive.
But there is one constant that hasn’t changed, and that is the tribal and group dynamics that have existed for several hundred years. What we see is that instead of seeing Afghanistan as a single entity, or even an ethnic group as an entity, what is really going on is hundreds of individual tribes, sub-tribes, clans, and families that are essentially looking out for the best option for their individual group. Whether they ally with the British, or with the King, whether the Mullahs decide to go to war at all, whether peace is on the table, etc… Any of these decisions are made for the benefit of the particular group (tribe, clan, village, etc…). And these often change. What is beneficial for a village one month, may be detrimental for it the next. This means that to the British, Soviets, or Americans, it can be increasingly frustrating trying to maintain alliances and agreements.
Something that Johnson doesn’t mention, but a personal observation that I’ve made is how economy plays into these decisions. The lack of a stable exportation or cultivation of any natural resource (other than crops and opium) has been a limiting detractor throughout the countries history and still affects national security today. But when local tribes and villages can’t rely on natural resources like oil, mining, etc… the need to fight tooth and nail for alliances, positions, and funds becomes even more apparent.
Foreign Invaders Unify Afghans
In the example of every invading or occupying force, one of the constant themes is that one of the only forces that has ever truly united Afghans of different ethnic origins in some fashion has been the need to expel a foreign one. Johnson doesn’t point this out explicitly but this is evident in his descriptions of the country before several conflicts. The state of the country under the King appeared to be on the brink of falling apart on numerous occasions, when senior leadership pushed for further hostilities against the British or during the time of communism, against the Soviets. Even under the Taliban during OEF, the need to unite under an Islamic banner instead of an Afghan, or Pashtun one was strategically necessary to be able to sweep tribal differences aside.
Differences in Technology
The first Anglo-Afghan War saw the widespread use of muzzleloading rifles and muskets on both sides of the conflict, with the British armed with the Brown Bess, and the Afghans with the Jezail muzzle loading rifle. Apart from the British cannon and cavalry, the two forces were somewhat equal in terms of actual hardware.
However in the second Anglo-Afghan War this dynamic dramatically changed with the introduction of breech-loading rifles that could not only be reloaded quicker, fired faster, but also more accurately and further. This changed the way Afghan tribesmen attacked British columns. They had to close in faster, not allowing the British to use their artillery, and often attacked at night.
Similarly, in the war against the Soviets, the use of Stinger MANPODS was brought up. The popular misconception is that Stingers helped win the war. Although they did strike fear among Soviet helicopter pilots, especially the Hind attack helicopters, their introduction was too late to make a difference in 1986, when the Soviet Union had already decided to being fighting a delaying action instead of an all-out offensive. In addition, by altering their flying practices to fly at higher altitudes, the Soviets realized they could go outside of the Stinger’s capabilities and lessen the risk.
In Operation Enduring Freedom, the prevalence of IEDs took precedence over light Infantry attacks that the Taliban initially tried to use against the British in Helmand, but suffered costly casualties due to the artillery and air assets. IEDs used by the Taliban deserve to be studied much more in detail due to the complex escalation’s and counter escalation’s executed on each other throughout the entire campaign.
One point I think the book could have been improved on is the OEF/Op Herrick. In retrospect, this isn’t really Johnson’s fault because the war is still ongoing, and he can’t have access to many of the after action reports, or even just the massive amount of experience associated with the current operations from hundreds of thousands of veterans and currently serving troops. He picks out specific situations and TTPs that are usually from the British perspective, that doesn’t typify what other forces might have faced in their fight against the Pashtun lead Taliban insurgency.
His conclusion though is flawless in that he identifies that any considerable gains going forward will have to be an Afghan solution to an Afghan problem. Personally I think this has to have enormous emphasis on the countries economy, and being able to become prosperous on exporting natural resources already present in order to actually provide some capitol for a government entirely propped up on international aid money.
