The King Rules: The Last Decade of Monarchy
1963-73

The decision to ask Daoud to step down had been reached not only within the royal family but also with the involvement of other members of the Afghan political elite. This set the tone for the 10 years to follow, in which Zahir Shah ruled as well as reigned but with a broad base of support within the political elite. The reaction to the dramatic change in Kabul was subdued. Although some Afghans attributed Daoud's fall to covert American intervention (because of Daoud's friendship with the Soviets), others were delighted that the unnatural strain in relations with Pakistan could be ended. A thriving black market trade had continued across the border, but the hostility had weighed heavily on the daily life of many Afghans especially city dwellers, who had experienced a doubling of prices for many essential commodities since the 1961 border closing. Dupree observes that devout Afghans expected an end to Daoud's secularization, intellectuals anticipated social and political reforms, and the population in general seemed to feel that while Daoud's economic reforms had benefitted the nation, his stubbornness on the Pashtunistan issue made his departure necessary. He notes that only three groups were unhappy over Daoud's resignation: the Pashtunistan fanatics, royal family members who worried about giving nonfamily members any power in decisionmaking, and proSoviet Afghans.

Although it could not provide the immediate transformations the public expected, the new government clearly both represented and sought change. The prime minister and at least one other cabinet member were non-Pashtuns; only four of the new cabinet were Durrani, and none was a member of the royal family. Before the end of May the government had appointed a committee to draft changes in the constitution had ordered an investigation into the abysmal conditions of Afghan prisons, and had reached agreement with Pakistan on the reestablishment of diplomatic and trade relations.

The single greatest achievement of the 1963-73 decade was the 1964 constitution. Only two weeks after the resignation of Daoud, the king appointed a committee to draft a new constitution. By February 1964 a draft document had been written, and within a few months another royal commission, including members of diverse political and ethnic backgrounds had reviewed and revised the draft. In the spring of 1964 the king ordered the convening of a Loya Jirgah-a national gathering that included the members of the National Assembly, the Senate, the Supreme Court, and both constitutional commissions. One hundred seventy-six members were elected by the provinces, and 34 members were appointed directly by the king. As Dupree notes, Afghan monarchs had abused the mechanism of a Loya Jirgah in the past by allowing only their own supporters to attend. Although the assemblage of 452 persons (including six women) that met in September 1964 was composed predominantly of officials who could be expected to support the royal line, the Loya Jirgah also included members elected from the entire nation. Dupree notes that the government did screen out many potential dissidents but concludes that "on the whole. . .delegates to the Loya Jirgah appeared to represent the full range of social, political, and religious opinion."

The 10-day deliberation of the Loya Jirgah produced heated debates and significant changes in the draft constitution. On September 20 the constitution was signed by the 452 members, and on October 1 it was signed by the king and became the constitution of Afghanistan. The constitution-and the deliberations that produced it-demonstrated several interesting changes in political thinking. It barred the royal family, other than the king, from politics and government-a provision that was viewed as being aimed at keeping Daoud out of politics. Individual, as opposed to tribal, rights were strongly championed by provincial delegates, and most conservative religious members were persuaded to accept provisions that they had previously suggested were intolerably secular. The succession issue within the royal family was settled to common satisfaction. The most interesting aspect of this discussion was one delegate's query as to why the throne should not go to the king's eldest daughter if there was no qualified male heir. Although some delegates were horrified and the question was not seriously considered, Dupree notes that the mere fact of its being asked was a sign of growing political sophistication among Afghans. Although there was lengthy debate over the use of the word Afghan to denote all citizens of Afghanistan (many people regarding it as a reference to Pashtuns alone), it was agreed by the Loya Jirgah that this term should refer to all citizens. The constitution provided that state religious rituals be conducted according to the Hanafi rite and identified Islam as "the sacred religion of Afghanistan," but it was still necessary to persuade many conservative religious members of the group that Islam had been enshrined in the constitution. Although Article 64 provided that there be no laws that were "repugnant to the basic principles" of Islam, Article 69 defined laws as resolutions passed by the houses of parliament and signed by the king, with sharia to be used when no such law existed. The constitution's provisions for an independent judiciary gave rise to heated debate among religious leaders, many of whom supported the existing system of religious laws and judges. The new constitution incorporated the religious judges into the judicial system, but it also established the supremacy of secularlaw.

The new constitution provided for a constitutional monarchy with a bicameral legislature, but predominant power remained in the hands of the king. Despite the difficulties imposed by widespread illiteracy, low voter turnout, attempts by some government officials (especially in the outlying areas) to influence the results, the lack of political parties, and the fact that Afghanistan was a tribal society with no tradition of national elections, most observers described the 1965 election as remarkably fair. The 216-member Wolesi Jirgah, the lower house of parliament, included representation by not only antiroyalists but also by both the left and right of the political spectrum. It included supporters of the king, Pashtun nationalists, entrepreneurs and industrialists, political liberals, a small leftist group, and conservative Muslim leaders who still opposed secularization. In heated early debates some members castigated the members of Yousuf's transitional cabinet. A student sit-in in the lower house of parliament was followed by demonstrations in which government troops killed three civilians, shocking many Afghans. The king nominated another prime minister, Mohammad Hashim Maiwandwal, who quickly established a firm but friendly relationship with the students. There were, of course, rumors in Kabul about outside support for these and subsequent demonstrations. Dupree, who was in Kabul at the time, finds it unlikely that they were the work of outside agitators but rather resulted from "homegrown dissatisfaction with the ministerial clique which had played musical chairs during the Daoud regime and the succeeding interim regime."

On January 1, 1965, the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) was founded. This was not an orthodox Marxist party but an entity created out of diverse leftist groups that united for the principal purpose of gaining parliamentary seats in the elections. The fact that four PDPA members won parliamentary seats suggests that government efforts to intervene in the balloting to prevent the success of its leftist opponents were halfhearted.

The press was semicontrolled. Starting in 1966, as many as 30 newspapers were established and, although some were short-lived, they provided the focus for the many political groups in Kabul that now began to make their views known. Taraki, one of the four PDPA members elected to parliament in 1965, started the first major leftist newspaper, Khalq (Masses), which lasted little more than a month before being banned by the government.

Student unrest continued and escalated into violence, which included police beatings of student and faculty demonstrators. For a month and a half in 1969 there was a citywide student strike in Kabul, but the government refused to give in to student demands, and the university was peacefully reopened in November.

The Afghan political system remained suspended between democracy and monarchy, though much closer to the latter. Political parties remained banned because the king refused to sign legislation that had passed the parliament allowing parties. The lower house of parliament engaged in free and often insulting criticism of government policies and personnel. Although unorganized as a legislative body, the Wolesi Jirgah was able to exert some influence on the royal administration.

By 1969 the PDPA had already undergone an important split, the faction of Babrak Karmal parting company ideologically with Taraki (see Evolution of the PDPA as a Political Force, ch. 4.) The new group's newspaper, Parcham (Banner), operated from March 1968 until July 1969 when it was closed. It was not long before other divisions within the PDPA began to occur.

The 1969 parliamentary elections (in which voter turnout was not much greater than that of 1965) produced a parliament that was more or less consistent with the real distribution of power and population in the Afghan hinterland; conservative landowners and businessmen predominated, and many more non-Pashtuns were elected than in the previous legislature. Most of the urban liberals and all female delegates lost their seats. There were few leftists in the new parliament, although Karmal and Hafizullah Amin (a mathematics teacher educated in the United States) had been elected from districts in and near Kabul. Former prime minister Maiwandwal, a democratic socialist, lost his seat because of government interference.

The years between 1969 and 1973 saw a critical downturn in Afghan politics. The parliament-on which hopes for democracy in Afghanistan had depended-was lethargic and deadlocked; Griffiths reports that it passed only one minor bill in the 1969-70 session. Public dissatisfaction over the lack of stable government reflected the fact that there were five prime ministers in the decade starting in 1963. There was a growing polarization of politics as the left and the right began to attract more and more members. The king, although still personally popular, came under increasing criticism for not supporting his own prime ministers and for withholding support from legislation passed by the parliament (such as the political parties bill). Some critics of the government blamed not the king but his cousin (and son-in-law) General Abdul Wali, a key military commander, or other members of the royal family. Abdul Wali, commander of the Kabul region and of the palace guard, was especially hated by leftists for having ordered troops to fire on demonstrators in October 1965. Other disruptive elements were two successive years of drought followed by a tragic famine in 1972 in which as many as 100,000 Afghans may have perished. Relief efforts and foreign donations were mishandled, and there were accusations of speculation and hoarding that eroded public confidence in government administration. Finally, the Indo-Pakistani War and the secession of Bangladesh from Pakistan in 1971 was closely watched in Afghanistan, where interest in Pakistani politics was great and where the Pashtunistan issue always lurked near the surface of politics.

It was in this atmosphere of external instability and internal dissatisfaction and polarization that Daoud executed a coup d'etat that he had been planning for more than a year in response to the "anarchy and the anti-national attitude of the regime." While the king was out of the country for medical treatment, Daoud and a small military group took power with strong resistance only from the regent, Abdul Wali. The stability Zahir Shah had sought through limited democracy under a constitution had not been achieved, and there was a generally favorable popular response to the reemergence of Daoud, even though it meant the demise of the monarchy established by Ahmad Shah Durrani in 1747.