US Needs to Address Regeneration Cause of Taliban
Copyright © Dr Ehsan Azari
In his two-day meeting with President George W. Bush in Camp David, President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan tried to make mixed impressions: In a news conference in Mr Bush’s presence, in an upbeat mood, he declared that the Taliban had been defeated and that they no longer posed a threat to his government. While on the eve of the meeting, he set a downbeat mood in an interview with the CNN, saying the security situation in his country was deteriorating and the war on terrorism was nowhere close to Osama bin Laden’s hideout.
Mr Karzai’s mixed metaphors signal an unsavoury progress in the current Western strategy in the war on terrorism in Afghanistan. It also shows that the political conditions for peace in Afghanistan that the US was seeking after the overthrow of the Taliban hasn’t been reached. At the heart of the current roadblock lies a perceptual astigmatism about local realities that has traditionally shaped politics in Afghanistan.
Right from day one of the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Bush administration hasn’t taken a blind bit of notice to the local political and power culture. Such a misapprehension has been an outcome of negligence towards local political dynamics, especially bypassing the Afghan tribal system with its driving force within the Pashtun majority in the country. This has been the apotheosis of governance in Afghanistan, at least for the past three centuries.
Moreover, it seems that the present course of war in this country is fostering causes for the rise of insurgency. Despite being himself a Pashtun, Karzai’s government ostracised the Pashtun majority and instead offered a tantalising prospect for the Afghan ethnic minorities who now bite off more than they can chew. The growing resentment among the Pashtun tribes elicits popular sympathy for the Taliban in the restive and proverbially religious and conservative Pashtun tribes straddled on both sides of the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, known as the Durand line.
The optimism over the Taliban’s lightning demise soon diminished when the Taliban reconstructed themselves, since 2002, into a well positioned insurgency, and al-Qaida shifted its sanctuary from Afghanistan to Pakistan. It became an exchange of short term pleasure for long term pain. With the fall of the Taliban, neoconservatives came up with a new theory that the only way to crush the Taliban insurgency was to write off the traditional Pashtun-centred tribal power structure in Afghanistan. This self-destructive oversight of the local ground realities was reminiscent of the mistake the US made in Iraq—the disbanding and exclusion of the former Iraqi army and entire state-bureaucracy.
The US-led coalition leapfrogged its march on Afghanistan by hiring and enriching warlords and local militia, many of them private and remnants of the former communist militia who gradually turned into a major headache for NATO, in Afghanistan and a major triggering element in the rise of the Taliban insurgency. The fall of the Taliban left behind a power vacuum, which has never been filled by the militia leaders and warlords who controlled barely 5 percent of the Afghan territory in the run-up to the US-led invasion of the country. The parasitic new elite has drawn on the Western military presence as the fixative for its privileged position in the country. The warlords use the Western support as immunity against the International Criminal Court for which Afghanistan still remains practically a no-go zone.
Such a haunting sectarian divide has set off a perilous chain reaction. Feeling oppressed and humiliated from losing their traditional status as the rulers of Afghanistan, the Pashtuns had no option other than uniting under the umbrella of the medieval Taliban. The unemployment among the Pashtun educated young people is staggering. Within the pro-Western elite the Pashtun share is a nominal and symbolic one. Recently, in the Afghan parliament a debate was raised on the ethnic imbalance in Mr. Karzai’s government. One example was the lucrative foreign ministry. A survey indicated that in the Foreign Ministry fifty percent of positions were taken by ethnic Tajiks, 30 percent by Pashtuns, and the rest by other ethnic groups. Another disturbing example is the state-run Afghan National Television in Kabul where only 100 employees out of 1800 employees belong to the Pashtun ethnic group.
Ramification of this ethnic imbalance have reached to Afghanistan’s neighbouring countries. The first beneficiary appears to have been Pakistani generals and their mullah supporters. By using a vast manoeuvring space, Pakistan is shedding crocodile tears over the predicament of the Pashtuns. Every time Pakistani top officials are having a temper tantrum on the Pashtun’s political and social marginalisation in Afghanistan, they, in fact, try to appease the Taliban. Al-Qaida is playing off the Pashtun rage and frustration to its own benefit. It continues to radicalise the Taliban in line with Wahabi fanaticism that justifies suicide bombings and mass murder of the non-Muslim people.
Upbeat over the fall of the Taliban, another beneficiary is Iran. By manipulating its old proxy the warlords of the Northern Alliance, and anti-Pashtun sentiment within some of the coalition forces, Iran is successfully trying to transform the Afghan cultural institution, media, and educational establishment into a pro-Iranian network. Religion is another aspect of Iranian influence. By sending weapon, despite Karzai’s denial, Iran is also a destabilising source for his country.
During the British colonial days, against all the odds, the Afghan tribal system remained intact. Russians too left untouched the Pashtun base power-structure in Afghanistan in the 1980s. There were 120,000 Russian combat troops and tens of thousands of communist party members, local mercenary militia, defence force and police in the country, but the Russians never showed a willingness to upset the Afghan traditional power structure. Afghanistan’s sensitive power ministries were never given to the Afghan ethnic minorities, despite the fact that most Russian casualties were inflicted by the Pashtuns in southern and eastern Afghanistan.
The Pashtun political exclusion in Afghanistan is rapidly becoming a stumbling block, and Mr Karzai is failing to pull the Pashtun weight behind him. A Pashtun share of power in the Afghan political game on fair basis could help turn the current situation in the benefit of the war on al-Qaida terrorism and offer the best hope of reversing the rise of the Taliban.
http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au
Stumble it! |
Tags: Afghanistan, US.
Posted by Ehsan Azari on August 15th, 2007
Permalink | Trackback | Comments: 9
Comments
Time: 8/21/2007, 5:48 pm
Indeed. I would agree with the marginalisation of pashtuns in afghanistan. though statistically they are the majority. Western governments put the population contribution of pashtuns to 40%, which pashtuns do not agree to and exacerbates the current resentment of pashtuns to foreign forces. yet through research, if we check data, there has never been CREDIBLE scientific population consensus. Regarding the pashtun position in Afghanistan, as i recently visited kabul, you will notice far fewer pashtuns being represented in the civil services. Most media outlets represent the language of dari instead pashtu. It brings into attention the frustration of pashtuns such as like myself and i strongly publicise the marginalisation of pashtuns in every gathering as mostly evident in almost every gathering. So, to conclude, i do not want to under-represent tajik and other minorities, but the marginalisation of pashtuns and pashtu everywhere only creates hostility and defeat of the international forces no matter how much they try. as the proverb goes, “Revenge, Hospitality and protection” known as pushtunwali are almost genetic triats in pashtuns and work with us under the umbrella of hospitality and protection rather than revenge.
Time: 8/21/2007, 7:25 pm
Mr Afghan!
Kabul is with large tajik majority, and in other hand pashtu is a poor language you cant compare it with “Farsi Dari”. in pashtu we dont have a single book in social sience or in Philosophy or other sientefic majors, when a students want to research about this issues they looking in Farsi dari Books, Farsi dari is not iranian, actualy its comfrom “Khurasan”, Old Afghanistan, now you call it iranian Language, which is not true and you denying your histry and culture, when there is nothing in media in Pashtu, its not becouse they dont like Pashtu,its becouse the Pashtu is not a reach language, and its not theire promlem. you shoul improve your language and edjucate your people and tech them to respect the others not just thier tribe, then we would have a better future and better country, but with a facistic view and prospective you cant improve anything, im sure you cant read or write in pashtu Mr Ehsan Azari, i havent read any article from you in your own language, then dont blame others!
Time: 8/22/2007, 4:58 am
Mr. Azari, I hope that you have read carefully the Persian note above by Mr. Afghanistani. He is absolutely right in saying that your journalistic writings have nothing to do with the “reality” in the ground and they only promote the “fascistic” ideology of Pashtun supremacy and the old mythology of Pashtuns being the “majority” in Afghanistan. Thus only they, the Pashtuns, have the right to rule the country at the expense of the rest of its ethnicities who actually are “the majority” in Afghanistan. The aim of these arguments is legitimating the rule of the Pashtuns in Afghanistan by “internalizing it in the psyche” of its populace and also creating an international consensus around this issue. Particularly Mr. Azari your aim probably is rallying international awareness and consensus for this “fake” and unrealistic ideology.
This cannot help at all the problems of the people of Afghanistan and indeed that of the Pashtuns. You have to address the real problem, which situates deep down in the Pashtun tribal structure of thought and way of living. This tribal or primitive way of thinking and living makes them the natural supporters of the Taliban, because Taliban and Talibanism is the product of this way of living. Thus the Taliban are the product of the tribal way of living and the other way about.
If the Taliban were brought to the centre of the politics and ruled Afghanistan, like they did in the past, without any representation from other ethnic minorities, still the problem will be there: as we witnessed in the passed. I mean their mentality will not change. But, instead, they would want to make the “others” like them. They would try to universalize this primitive and tribal way of thinking and living; as the only way of living.
A person who “represents” and defends (consciously or unconsciously) this primitive (tribal mentality) way of living cannot but be a Taliban himself. He himself may or may not know that he is entangled to this “ideology” for eternity. As a Persian poet once said “the eye can see everything, but itself.”
Time: 8/24/2007, 10:10 am
It seems Mr. Azari is deeply under the false impression of the old mytholigy in Afghanistan, which was based on Pashtuns’s majority and pahtuniziation of national identity of Afghanistan. Today, however, the power balance between south and north has drastically changed, pashtun tribal sturctures are severly damaged, which Ghiljais (represented by Taliban) can not accept supremacy of Duranis (represented by Karzai). In a merely tribal point of view, Taliban insurgency is a violent defiance by Ghljais against Duranis, whose two and hald centure rule in Afghanistan came to an end in 1979. During USSR invasion, the ruling pashtuns in Afghanistan were from Ghilja tribal confederation. Karzai wanted to restore Duranis supremacy after three decade interruption, which Taliban did defy him. So, Mr. Azari, the current war in Afghanistan in an internal power struggle amongst different Pashtun tribal confederations.
Time: 8/24/2007, 6:19 pm
This is against the logic and modern society notion! Pashton has the big threat to the domocratization process.
Afghanistan-UK
Time: 11/12/2007, 10:57 am
Thanks you mr Azari for a great analyze of Afghanistan’s problem. As long as pashtons whom make majority in Afghanistan remain under represented, the instability in Afghanistan will continue. Afghanistan. The only way to bring peace to Afghanistan is to give pashtons their due share in Afghanistan’s power structure.
Time: 11/12/2007, 10:57 am
Thanks you mr Azari for a great analyze of Afghanistan’s problem. As long as pashtons whom make majority in Afghanistan remain under represented, the instability in Afghanistan will continue. Afghanistan. The only way to bring peace to Afghanistan is to give pashtons their due share in Afghanistan’s power structure.
Time: 11/12/2007, 10:57 am
Thanks you mr Azari for a great analyze of Afghanistan’s problem. As long as pashtons whom make majority in Afghanistan remain under represented, the instability in Afghanistan will continue. Afghanistan. The only way to bring peace to Afghanistan is to give pashtons their due share in Afghanistan’s power structure.
Time: 8/21/2007, 12:38 pm
Mr Ehsan Azari!
I dont undrestand your argument about the Lack of Pashtun’s representetive in power in Afghanistan politics. In your point of viewo there is no space to the other ethnics in Afghanistan, I have a messege in farsi for you.
در افغانستان مشکل اصلی عدم حضور پشتونها در قدرت نیست. چه اینکه پشتونها حضور بسیار گسترده ای در قدرت و در نهادهای حکومتی دارند و استدلالهای شما در این مقاله بیشتر به شیادی شبیه است تا منطق علمی. البته این روند زیاد ادامه نخواهد یافت، با این نوشته های به ظاهر علمی و در باطن فاشیستی نمی شود برای زیاده خواهی قومی به بهانهء نا رضایتی پشتونها و حمایت آنها از طالبان پشتوانهء نظری و توجه بین المللی جلب نمود. مشکل حمایت پشتونها از طالبان بیشتر در خواستگاه تفکر قبیله ای و بدویت فکری و عدم وجود مفکورهء تجدد و ترقی در نظام فکری قبیلگی و بدوی نهادینه شده در میان عدهء بسیاری از آنهاست. برای تقویت این نظریه می توانید به مقالهء زیر که فرضیه ای در این باب است مراجعه نمایید:http://www.mazary.net/a/215.html?Itemid=1
من از دوستان عزیز افغان خواهش می کنم این مقالهء زیبا را به انگلیسی ترجمه کنند تا عوامل پس ماندگی افغانستان در سایهء حضور سنتی قدرت یک قوم بدوی از لحاظ جامعه شناسی و انسان شناسی در اختیار همه قرار بگیرد.
نظریهء شما در مورد حضور دیگر اقوام غیر واقع بینانه و نژاد پرستانه است. به اطلاع شما دوست ارجمند افغانستان ندیده و به دور از فرهنگ افغانستان و بی نهایت کم اطلاع از اوضاع افغانستان باید رسانیده شود که زمان القاء دروغین سلطهء مشروع یک قوم، و افسانهء اکثریت پشتونی گذشته است. به هر میزان که شما این نظریهء فاشیستی و غیر انسانی را که حقوق دیگر انسانها را نا دیده می گیرد و برای بدویت تبلیغ بین المللی می نماید بیشتر تبلیغ نمایید همینقدر کشور را به قهقرای بیشتر سوق می دهید و دیگران را ترغیب به باز کردن حیلهء شما می نماید. لذا بهتر است که این اراجیف را در اینجا و آنجا تبلیغ نکنیند.