afghanistanwhere they had hidden their wealth. The region’s major export commod-
ities were nationalized and merchants ordered, on pain of death, not to
trade with Russia but send all their goods to India. This was yet one more
blow to the local economy, for the region’s famous perishable exports,
in particular grapes and melons, were too fragile to be transported over
such large distances. Yet not everything went ‘Abd al-Rahman Khan’s way.
While reviewing his troops a soldier fired at the Amir from close range,
but the bullet missed his head and wounded a pageboy standing nearby.
The would-be assassin was instantly cut down by one of the regiment’s
officers. ‘Abd al-Rahman Khan attributed his narrow escape to a charm
he wore around his right arm.
The Kabul wakil, who accompanied the Amir to Mazar-i Sharif, sent
regular reports to India about the situation, but officials thought he was
exaggerating. When his reports continued to flood in, Colonel Warburton,
the Political Agent in Peshawar, and Carl Griesbach, a geologist who
was conducting a survey of mineral resources in Turkistan, were asked
to investigate. Both men confirmed the wakil’s reports, while Griesbach
gave a gruesome eyewitness account of the torture and execution of men
and women.
The ‘Turkistan Atrocities’, as Griesbach called them, put British offi-
cials in a difficult position. By 1888 there was already much concern about
the unsatisfactory nature of the Anglo-Afghan relationship, with some
high officials contemplating the annexation of southern Afghanistan or
its complete dismemberment. One of the chief advocates of this view was
General, now Lord Roberts. In 1885 he wrote a memorandum in which
he argued the policy of maintaining a united Afghanistan as a bastion
against a Russian invasion of India was ‘full of illusions’. Britain, he asserted,
was ‘living in a fool’s paradise’ and an expensive one at that, for the state
of Afghanistan was only held together by virtue of British financial and
military aid. The longer Britain propped up ‘Abd al-Rahman Khan, he
argued, the more difficult it would be to disengage without loss of ‘dignity
and prestige’. ‘Abd al-Rahman Khan, he went on, ruled ‘by fear alone in a
kingdom divided against itself ’; as for the Amir’s style of government, it
was ‘at best, a reign of terror’. 29
Reports of the Turkistan Atrocities eventually appeared in the Indian
and British press, which led to a public outcry. Even Queen Victoria wrote
to Salisbury expressing her revulsion at the Amir’s conduct. In Parliament
the Liberal Opposition demanded Salisbury release the correspondence
related to the atrocities, but he refused on the grounds it was ‘not in the
public interest’. In fact, it was not in his interests, for had Warburton and