Tweet
An Attack on the Defense of Pashtun Nationalism
The Pashtun ethnocentric khabaryal wrote a sorry piece in response to me.
Here is my detailed reply to him. Enjoy! And share with other fellow Nationalists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by janassakzai200@gamil.com
In defence of Pakhtun nationalism in Pakistan & Afghanistan: By Jan Assakzai
First of all, I am quite honored that a short piece I wrote has caused such a big concern that such a desperately written article was needed to be produced to “defend” Nationalism. It's quite interesting that I am refereed to as “some pro Taliban writers”. I did not know that I was a writer. Neither did I know that there are more of me. I always assumed that I am a single person. There aren't others of “me” to my knowledge. It's just me. Sangar. And usually, referring to me by my name suffices.
Before I tear you apart, I advice you to control your emotions in future when you want to engage in polemics. Because would you have been more patient, you would have been able to write something decent that wouldn't embarrass you so much.
Some pro- Taliban writers have said on the Internet media that Pakhtun nationalism as a political movement is against Islam that nationalist leadership both in Pakistan and Afghanistan do not enjoy the backing of the people and that they are a small clique who are western stooges whereas Pakhtuns are following political Islamists.
First of all, that is not what I said. If you want to write a defense, I suggest you should study and examine the piece you are trying to counter. That of course if you are honest. Which is a rare habit among those who impose Western political theories such as Nationalism and Socialism on us.
I did not say that Pashtuns are following political Islamists. I just said that Pashtuns are by nature quite religious and conservative in general. Here is what I did say:
In contrast to the general Pashtun society that tends to be very religious. They tend to be very strict in practicing their religion. Individual and congregational prayers are a major part of the daily routines. Both men and women are generally dressed in traditional garments that cover their entire body. And it is very common to see men letting their beards grow.
As anyone can read clearly, I did not suggest that Pashtuns are Political Islamists or adherants to any particular sect of my own personal preference. Yet, in the latter part of your sorry attempt at a rebuttal, you do imply that I have made such gross generalization.
But this discourse refutes that Pakhtun nationalism is anti-Islam and argue that Pakhtun nationalism is not only alive in Pakistan but also thriving in Afghanistan and is the only guarantee in the long run that can help prevent mayhem in both countries and the repeat of Sept 11.
That's a very bold statement, buddy. First of all, you do not refute anything. And I am going to show you why. Secondly, I did not say that Pashtun Nationalism is anti-Islam. So how can you try to refute something I did not say? What I did say about Pashtun Nationalism's relationship with Islam is the following:
Islam as a religion has only a cultural function in their lives.
But in the latter part of my piece, I discussed the Pashtun diaspora. There I specifically targeted the behavior of youngsters who denounce Islam and are inspired by Persian Nationalism. If your reply is to the latter part of my piece, where I target the youngsters growing up in the West, then have the decency and the courage to say so. Don't make bold statements saying that your sorry attempt at a defense is a “discourse”. Which it is not. Nor does it refute something bigger.
Pakthun nationalism as political ideology has always been there on both side of the Durand Line. However, there might be some differences in emphasis and scope. Another distinction is that one may be a political Islamist, not a nationalist or communist but may take nationalist stance on some issues. So the definition may not be as absolute as one may understand by the word nationalist.
Pakhtun nationalism as a political phenomenon has its roots in Pakhtun history. The various uprising of Pakhtuns/Afghans against different invaders had nationalist connotations: be that the struggle of Khushal Khan Khattak against the Moguls, the three Anglo- Afghan wars in the nineteenth century, the uprising of Faqir of Ipi in North Waziristan, Bacha Khan and Abdul Samad Khan Achakzai’s non violent movements against British Raj so on and so forth.
Claiming that Pashtun Nationalism has always been there on both sides of the Durrand Line is not stating facts. But wishful thinking. Nationalism did not exist in Central and South Asia before it emerged as a political theory in Western Europe. If you are going to use fancy words, have the decency to study the historic development of the words you like to discuss.
If we are going to use the political definition of a Nation, then Pashtuns have never been a Nation in the past. Only after the emergence of Durrani empire did Pashtuns emerge as an ethnic group distinctly recognized as a large ethnic community involved as such in politics. Prior to the Durrani era, Pashtun rulers, conquerors and leaders never profiled themselves as representatives of Pashtuns in general. Claiming otherwise must be supported by historic accounts. Never Have I come across anything that Suggested that the Pashtun rulers of India where Nationalists. If they were, how is it possible that Pashto language never managed to become a language of scripture and formality? The answer is very simple. Pashtuns were never aware of their own identity as a community. Neither did they ever in the past unite under the banner of same language or similar culture to form a political entity.
Contrary to the claims of Pashtun Nationalists in most parts of our history, we fought one another more often than we fought non-Pashtuns. And this is a fact supported by all historic accounts.
One exception in this regard, is the case of Khushal Khan Khattak who used Pashtun identity as a rallying slogan to stir resistance against Mongolian tyranny. But just like Nationalists elsewhere around the world have magnified some historic incidents, so do the modern day Pashtun Nationalists try to create an image of Pashtun history as a history of ethnic collective identity and political engagement as such. Which is not only entirely false, but it also contradicts the claims of Nationalists who argue that they are not ethnocentric. Because this very claim suggests exactly the same false concepts that Hitler, Mussolini and other famous champions of Nationalism have claimed. But again, honesty is not a virtue among those who shove Western theories down peoples throats.
Furthermore, the concept of Nationality and Nation-states in the parlance of political science is a relatively new concept that emerged in Western Europe. It was virtually non-existent in other parts of the world. Never did we have a national anthem nor did we have a distinct flag. All of this are inventions of the Europeans imported during the colonial eras.
Pashtuns as an ethnic group defined in anthropological terms is yet again quite in contrast to the claims of Pashtun Nationalists and their wishful thinking. Contrary to the oral tradition among Pashtuns tracing their orgins back to Israelites, modern science falsifies such claims. Pashtuns comprise of a mixture of various communities. The physical distinction among Pashtuns, their skin complexion, difference in height, hair color, eye color and facial features reveal a rich history of intermixing with other races. If any genetic examination of various Pashtun tribes is ever going to be held, it sure will not come up with a conclusion categorizing all Pashtuns as one distinct community like the inhabitants of remote archipelagos in the Pacific Ocean.
Majority of Pakhtuns: around 40 million, live in Pakistan and roughly 15 o 17 millions constitute Afghanistan’s Pakhtun population out of 30 million if the current census estimates are to be believed. Political nationalist currents and their underlying dynamics amongst the Pakhtuns on both side of the Durand Line have both similarities and dissimilarities. (For me Pakhtun, Afghan and Pathan are interchangeable that define the same ethnic group, so just for clarity I will often use the word Pakthun).
It is irrelevant what your personal preference is of what Afghan, Pashtun or Pathan mean and whether they are all the same. If you are going to defend Nationalism, do so based on unbiased and impartially observable facts. Yet, the latter part of your magnificent and so internally and externally consistent arguments you admit that Afghan means more than just Pashtun for obvious reasons.
Nationalism is sometimes reactionary, calling for a return to a national past, and sometimes for the expulsion of foreigners. Other forms of nationalism are revolutionary, calling for the establishment of an independent state as a homeland for an ethnic underclass.
If you are going to make such a sorry and pathetic attempt defining what Nationalism is, then have the decency to mention the name of the vagabond from Geneva who intellectually fornicated with political theory of Hobbes and Machiavelli in order to conceive an ideology called “romanticism”. The emergence of Nationalism as product of romanticism and Pashtun Nationalism will be elaborated further ahead. But first, a short introduction of who this vagabond was.
Jean Jaques Rousseau, who is the grandfather of Nationalism and all Nationalist movements around the world was a highly irrational man who neglected his duty as a father and a husband by never marrying the mother of his five children but keeping her as a servant with him. Yet, he would recite poetry romanticizing rich and wealthy women of nobility by praising their femininity and honoring them as independent entities in order to charm them to support him financially and have sex with him. Because Rousseau never had a job, neither did he ever earn any money to support his family and children. The children he would dump at orphanages after birth to let the society pay for his irresponsibility. Yet, this very same man would later author a book on how to raise children, called Emile. Rousseau and his ideology of Romanticism that was highly inconsistent, paradoxical and irrational was not only the foundation of Nationalism, but also another ideology the Pashtun Nationalists are so fond of. Namely Marxism.
The character and personality of Rousseau had such a big impact on his readers ( he authored many books, such as On inequality, a few other treatises and his most famous work, Social Contract) that even today, if we carefully observe the behavior of Nationalist Pashtuns and Pashtun Commies, we observe the same irresponsible, irrational and immoral behavior. The obsession of Pashtun Nationalists with poetry praising alcohol, fornication, promiscuity and appreciation for blasphemous literature are a few of the most distinct characteristics of romanticists.
Al though, Utopian-ism existed long before Rousseau was born, after the success of Rousseau's books mainly in France, an upsurge in irrational socialist and communist ideologies emerged due to Rousseau's legacy. These ideologies were nothing more than utopian visions of people who tried to emulate their icon. Figures as Fourier, Theodor Herzl and Marx founded their utopian visions primarily on the groundwork laid down by Rousseau.
For those who have not studied much and are ignorant of what Nationalism is and are unaware of the historical development of Nationalism it is interesting to note that that the first ever known Nationalists were the ideological predecessors of Adolph Hitler and Mossolini. In fact, Theodor Herzl, the founder of the Jewish Zionist ideology was likewise influenced by Rousseau's romanticism.
Rousseau's romanticism was based on several assumptions. Of which the most notable is the assumption that human beings are by nature good. Which is contrary to the Christian theology that describes human beings as born with a defect which is defined as “original sin”. In a society where for centuries, the church indoctrinated people to consider themselves and their natural desires and longings as evil and sinful, the emergence of a new concept where human beings were described as intrinsically good was so revolutionary, that it eventually grew to praise and worship of the self and ones whims and desires. This could be described as the source of Nationalism and the love for the self.
As mentioned before, Rousseau was highly irrational, his works were extremely paradoxical, and he was very inconsistent in his argumentation. He wrote books slamming fundamentals of Christian credo, be it Roman Catholic or Protestant. But he always tried to profile himself as a pious and religious person. Yet, born in Geneva into a Protestant community, he converted to Catholicism only to revert back to protestantism later-on. This odd relationship with religion was inherited by those who were inspired by him. Among them there were some radical atheists in France and even religiously motivated splinter groups.
But interestingly, the same paradoxical relationship is observed in Pashtun Nationalist movement. For example, Abdul Ghaffar Khan called his movement, God's servants. But was a secular Nationalist with Marxist affiliations. Abdul Ghani Khan would write poems about alcohol consumption, fornication, and in some passages even clear cut blasphemy. Yet, he emulated Sufi poetry. Weekh Zalmian, who were the first ever Pashtun political movement displayed similar patterns of inconsistency and paradoxical relationship with religion. Some of them grew to become Communists who fought and prosecuted Muslims in Afghanistan. But, at a later stage, obviously for political reasons, the most prominent leader of the communists, Dr. Najibullah Ahmedzai was pushed the forefront as a pious Sufi who caught a piece of cloth that came of a wooden poll at the famous Shi'ite shrine in Mazar Sharif.
Another branch of Weekh Zalmian became the illustrious Afghan Millatis who promoted superiority of Pashtuns over other ethnic groups in Afghanistan. Both groups reconciled after the invasion of Afghanistan by the crusaders in 2001 and reunited to fight Shariah law and committed themselves to preventing Shariah from being implemented in Afghanistan again. But yet, again, the same people grew short beards and started wearing big turbans at annual religious and cultural events. Obviously for political reasons.
Just like their icon, Rousseau, the Pashtun Nationalists are not shy to display their passion for immorality. During Communist era, women appeared on television without proper Islamic attire, dancing in music video's of Khan Qarabaghai and Ustad Fazal Ghani. The Pashtun Nationalists in Peshawar exploited cinema's where semi-erotic Pashto language movies are shown where overweight women dressed in tight candy colored Punjabis bounce and shake their breasts and hips to the rhythm of Pashto folk music. One of the most iconic figure of Pashtun Nationalist art and music is Madame Naghma. A woman with a terrible singing voice that sounds more like a weeping pig known for being employed as a prostitute to entertain communist generals in Afghanistan. And shamelessly, the same figures who argue that they are representatives of the Pashtun cause and have a total disregard for Pashtun and Islamic morality have the audacity to comment accuse others of whatever they can come up with.
For now, a brief dive in the origins of Nationalist ideology is sufficient considering the limited scope of this response to the magnificently awesome defense of Nationalism by Jan Atsakzai. Of course, in future, I might even dig deeper back in history all the way back to Hellenic era to trace back the fascist and discriminating nature of classic texts that have inspired Rousseau and other authors. But I will save that for now in order not to overburden the Nationalist dimwits with information overload. Which is quite possible knowing that the Nationalists are not too shy of wasting a few braincells on Vodka.
But after the end of British Empire and emergence of Pakistan as a nation state, Pakhtun nationalism has been progressive and within the confines of Pakistan’s boundaries and has also by and large not sought pan Pakhtun nationalism despite the stereotyped views of many non-Pakhtun and oriental writers.
Again, more dishonesty. Pashtun Nationalist in Pashtunkhwa and Afghanistan have always drawn varieties of maps dividing Pakistan into two separate parts, where the upper part including Baluchistan being united with the lower parts of Afghanistan as one greater Pashtunkhwa.
It has also not been based on ethno- nationalism: a belief in the superiority of one ethnicity over others, and never supported ethnocentric protectionism or ethnocentric supremacy of Pakhtuns over other ethnic groups.
Again, more falsehood. As you can see in the map here above, the desire for Pashtun Nationalists to divide Pakistan and Afghanistan along ethnic fault lines is not invented by non-Pashtuns. This desire does exist among Pashtun Nationalists. And it is not wrongly attributed to this particular political ideology.
Aside from the fact that Pashtun Nationalists want to divide Afghanistan along ethnic lines, they also prefer to annex Baluch territory and claim it as theirs in order to benefit from access to sea. Likewise of other minorities who live among Pashtuns such as the Pasha'is, Hindko's, Kalashwal, Nuristanis, Tajiks and Hazara's.
Likewise, Pashtun Nationalists promote Pashto as the sole official language of the region. Voices are heard in lar & bar Pashtunkhwa where people claim that Pashto should and must become the sole lingua franca in the region.
Discussions and polemics between Tajik Fascists and Pashtun Nationalists bickering about the status and value of their respective native languages are the order of the day in books & magazines, Kabul University academic circuit and student bodies, Facebook and prominent open source websites. To deny that a fascist tendency exists within Pashtun Nationalist community is another shameless lie. It is even quite common to hear Nationalist singers such as Gulzar Alam, Naim Turi, Khyal Muhammad and others singing songs with lines that are insulting Punjabis referring to them as inferior beings for wearing lungs instead of turbans.
Whereas Islam as religion is concerned, I think almost ninety nine percent Pakhtuns would believe in some sort of interpretation of Islam at philosophical/metaphysical , societal or functional levels. Yes, if one has more divisive or sectarian interpretation of religion, may term fellow muslims as non muslims, Shias, Kafirs, Murtads etc. But vast majority of Pakhtuns do not subscribe to these divisions except a fringe group that may have got influence from Wahhabism or Pakistan's mainstream sectarian extremist outfits.
More lies and falsehood. Pashtuns are accustomed to a derogatory terminology describing Shi'ites as inferior beings personified by Hazara and Iranian stereo-types. Pogroms against shi'ite Hazara's and the uprising against Iranians drive to convert Kandahar to Shi'ism have left their mark on Pashtun relationship with Shi'ites. It is absolutely false to claim Pashtuns do not have any hostility towards Shi'ites. These hostilities existed long before Ibn Abdul Wahhab was born.
As there is no religious authority/body in the Islamic world who for example could issue certificates for who being a bona fied Muslim.
Having said that, you would be honest if you would have mentioned the fact that Pashtuns are pre-dominantly Sunnis of Hanafi school of jurisprudence and abide by Hanafi interpretation fervently. And Hanafi scholars rulings in such matters do carry allot of weight in the Pashtun community. In fact, recenly, a person was declared a Kaafir in Helmand's Musa Qala district, by if I am not mistaken, Mullah Abdul Salaam who works for the American psy-ops organization for saying that the word “khudai” is not mentioned in Quran but Allah. The concept of excommunication does exist in Pashtun society and it is very heavily politicized.
However, there had been a tiny number of Pakhtuns who happened to be adherents of left political ideology of communism and did also adopt different metaphysical beliefs about God, and views on religion propagated by the founders of the ideology. But with the collapse of communism as political system, and the collapse of its philosophic/metaphorical leftist political liberalism all over the world, their numbers have come to a negligible figures.
As I mentioned before, leftists and nationalists are two sides of the same coin extracting their political ideology from the same source. However, as I shall discuss later on, neither of them really sticks to the dogma of their respective ideology as they are driven by self interest and greed for money, power and status.
Majority of Pakhtuns including nationalists practise Islam as religion and have a Islamic religious outlook for all metaphysical question, some how. But Historically, Pakhtun traditions have been so strong that they have always kept religion subservient to traditions. In other words, Pakhtun traditions and religion is blended, to the consternation of Wahabbis.
I know that you are suffered a dent in your ego after reading my short piece regarding the relationship of Nationalists and Islam. But this weak jab at my creed reveals nothing more than your pathetic attempt to get even with me. Which I think will be quickly forgotten after you are done reading this lengthy reply to your post.
Some may disagree as to what constitute Muslim, depends on his/her degree of observance of religious rituals in its totality. But it is again a matter of interpretation and one can not deprive one of his/ her use of religion to fill in one’s spiritual, philosophical voids.
It is delightful to see you speaking of filling philosophical voids. I invite you to a debate on philosophy if you like, so we can explore one another philosophical cavities. I am willing to replenish yours with a few basic concepts I think you are lacking.
There is another political current among Pakhtuns who use religion for political purposes I call them as political Islamists, some dub them as extremists. Political Islamists’s beliefs and actions may not necessarily be in line with the tenets of Islam as a religion.
I suggest you should educate yourself about your own political ideology before lecturing others what political Islamism is. And who are you to speak of what basic tenets of Islam entails? Are you qualified to speak on this subject? Since you have failed miserably to defend your own holy ideology of Nationalism, I suggest you zip it and not utter more rubbish and make generalizations on what other people believe and adhere to and whether it is consistent with basic tenets of Islam. I don't see anything of Nationalism being in line with basic tenets of Islam. As it appeared in your pathetic attempt to define Nationalism, you lack basic information about what Nationalism is. Yet you post your silly articles promoting Nationalism in forums regularly. Maybe, my small contribution to educate you on Nationalism might brighten you up a little bit.
Their second type is the Jihadists who not only believe in political Islam but also believe that in order to impose their interpretation of political Islam, they should use violence and intimidation not only in their own territories but if possible through out the world - a view which runs against the spirit of Islam (and is not the scope of this discourse for further exploration).
I have a question for you. Do you consider an ideology driven by global conquest and reliance on violence as morally deplorable? If so, explain why Nationalists and Marxists, elsewhere around the world and particularly among Pashtuns have not hesitated in applying brute force to exterminate their political rivals. Your communist comrades who splintered of Weekh Zalmian massacred over one and half million Muslims in Afghanistan in the 80's. And during the same era, the Pashtun Nationalists in Pashtunkhwa received explosives and served as terror cells bombing Afghan refugee camps, market places killing many people to further the communists agenda to cause mayhem and prevent Afghan resistance fighters from regrouping and recapturing their homeland from Communist invaders.
Political Islam has largely been represented by the erstwhile Islamist Mujaheddin and the Taliban among Pakhtuns particularly in Afghanistan and to a lesser degree in Pakistan. Back in 1979 when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Pakistan’s then generals worried that Moscow would expand its footprint in the Pashtun heartland and pose a direct threat to the unity of Pakistan, they began a covert program of funding, training, and equipping Afghans willing to take on the Soviet Army
Like most of what you stated, yet this is again more falsehood. Pashtuns have developed a Jihadi ideology of their own over the course of history. You have wrongly argued elsewhere in your pathetic “defense of nationalism” that Islam is used by Pashtuns for political goals. Pashtuns like other Muslims of the region were driven by Islamic doctrine engraved in Quran to resist non-Muslim and Muslim unjust rule and aggression. This is the concept of Jihad ud Daf. Which existed all along. The concept of offensive Jihad which is called Jihad ud Talab, is likewise and intrinsic aspect of Islam. And Pashtuns among many other Muslims have participated in conquest of other regions and justified their actions based on this concept.
You can argue that Pashtuns were not driven by Islamic jurisprudencial definition of self defence but rather Pashtunwali. But this is something you could say of any other Muslim community who have resisted aggressors. Whether you like it or not, Pashtuns did participate in Jihad, both in Daf and Talab over the course of history prior to 20th century's political upheavals.
Infact, the lie often told by you Nationalists is that Faqir of Ipi was driven by Nationalism. Which is absolutely not true. He declared Jihad on the British opressors because of the Bibi Islam incident. A Hindu girl converted to Islam and married her Muslim instructor. The British chose the side of Hindus in the conflict that emerged afterwards. And Faqir of Ipi, as a proud and brave Muslim as he was, had the guts to rise up against an empire just like Mullah Pawinda did back in the 19 century. Yet, the true Nationalist, Abdul Ghaffar Khan chose the Hindu approach and did not fight the oppressors.
There was a huge difference between the Pashtuns who have contributed to the fall of British Empire, and the sorry case of the pacifists who did nothing significant but the mere publicity. British Empire was already crumbling. A few starving Hindus and Khan khel from Charsada didn't mean anything.
It is now open secrete that how political Islam was cultivated on both side of the border over past three and half decades and how proxy Mujaheddin were sponsored and imposed on Pakhtuns/Afghans by the CIA’s trainings, Pakistan’s logistical help , and Saudi petrol money, latter how their political successor, the new proxy, the Taliban were introduced to the scene.
U.S. policymakers relied on intelligence agents, diplomats, and experts who in the past had worked closely with the Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. These individuals bought into Islamabad's line that Pakhtun/Afghan nationalists needed to be sidelined and the focus needed to be on the political Islamists who were being trained in their thousands in Pakistan.
I guess you assume we don't know anything about the relationship of Abdul Ghaffar Khan with Babrak Karmal and other communist proxies when he was in exile in Jalal abad? Neither do we know anything about him lecturing the young students who were covert members of then newly established commuist party in University of Kabul & Nangarhar? You probably assume that I am ignorant of the financial and intellectual support and guidance the communist splinters of Weekh Zalmian received from Soviet Union in the 50's, 60's and 70's? You probably assume I am ignorant of the fact that figures such as Afrasyab Khattak were contact persons who served as liaison and coordinated terrorist activities of the Nationalists sponsored by KGB in Pakistan? You probably assume that I am ignorant of the fact that Afghan Millatis who ended up in Pol-i-Charkhi prison during Khalqi's era were later released and received funding from Najibullah Ahmedzai? You probably assume that I am ignorant of the fact that Anwarul haq Ahadi not only served as a professor at an American University, but also was a ring leader of a CIA-led cell?
Indeed, these nationalis ts who were patriotic people, soon found themselves unwelcome in Pakistan, and nearly 1.5 million migrated to Gulf, Europe, North America and India.While the sponsors of the political Islam defeated Afghan nationalism and thought in Pakhtun areas but failed to wipe out in Pakistan.
How patriotic to leave the field and seek refugee in Islamist Gulf and Capitalist West while fellow Nationalist & Communist comrades funded by Soviets were running the show? You assume I don't know anything about the luxurious mansions of Afghans who have fled after the communist revolution being granted to Nationalists from Pashtunkhwa? The same mansions that were used as gathering places for wild parties where women danced and plenty of alcohol was served at the expenses of Moskow and where plans were made how to conduct terrorist activities in refugee camps in Peshawar?
But what is precisely Pakhtun/Afghan nationalism? Afghan nationalism is slightly different from Pakhtun’s ethnic nationalism in Pakistan. I call Afghan nationalism as “civic nationalism”. “Civic” nationalism compared to “ethnic” nationalism emphasises on loyalty to a kind of “cosmopolitan” state rather than ethnicity. “Civic” nationalism defines the nation as an association of people with equal and shared political rights, and allegiance to similar political procedures.
You are philosophizing now about non existent concepts. You have failed miserably to define basic understanding and origin of Nationalism as an ideology. But you jump on to define what civil nationalism is. As I explained previously, Afghanistan and Pashtuns in particular are quite alien to concepts of nation-state and nationalism in general.
But what is precisely Pakhtun/Afghan nationalism? Afghan nationalism is slightly different from Pakhtun’s ethnic nationalism in Pakistan. I call Afghan nationalism as “civic nationalism”. “Civic” nationalism compared to “ethnic” nationalism emphasises on loyalty to a kind of “cosmopolitan” state rather than ethnicity. “Civic” nationalism defines the nation as an association of people with equal and shared political rights, and allegiance to similar political procedures.
Why it is different in emphasis is because In Afghanistan, Pakhtun/Afghan situation is sharply different from their counter parts in Pakistan . Pakhtuns in Afghanistan form the largest ethnic group and for many they are the majority ethnic group as well. Pakhtuns have substantive political representation in the state institutions, they are the major stake holders and hence their pragmatic needs are different form those of their Pakhtun cousins in Pakistan.
Thus Pakhtun is a kind of big brother in Afghanistan, not a small minority. From Pakhtun perspective, there are other minorities who have to be part of its view of nationalism which implies that the allegiance have to be to state more than to individual ethnic groups.
Please don't make me laugh. Pashtuns wish to think like they are the majority. Due to economic circumstances and the nomadic lifestyle of many Pashtuns in the core areas like loy Paktia, Pashtuns have never been the largest ethnic group at any point of our recent history. Most Pashtuns reside in Pashtunkhwa and occasionly frequent back and forth.
Non-Pashtuns are a constant majority. Primarily the Persian-speaking groups such as the Persianized Pashtuns, Tajiks, Aymaqs and Hazara's.
It is Pashtun arrogance to assume they are somehow superior to others and they consider themselves as the big brother. But other ethnic groups do not have such feelings towards Pashtuns. At most, they consider Pashtuns as their equal brothers.
It's funny. You claim that Pashtun Nationalism is not ethnocentric. Yet you go on and say that Pashtuns are a majority and thus are considered as superior (older brother) to non-Pashtuns.
There might be issues of neglect of language or culture at the hand of Persian speaking Pakhtun and non- Pakhtun elite in the past or now. However, there has been no second class status reserved for Pakhtuns except at marginal levels.
Pashto was not even recognized as a language up until 20th century. Pashtun court never spoke Pashto. All state officials have always spoken in Farsi. Most prominent and elite figures of Afghan politics were Persianized Pashtuns or non-Pashtuns. Pashtuns have been often discriminated against in Kabul. Pashtun nomads have often been abused and mistreated by the Persianized Pashtuns in power or the non-Pashtuns.
In fact, only after the Communist revolution did Pashto manage to appear in public life as a dominant language. In politics and the media. This resulted in a backlash of non-Pashtuns who considered this as a cultural colonization of Pashtun Nationalists in the ranks of Khalq & Parcham.
Thus Pakhtun is a kind of big brother in Afghanistan, not a small minority. From Pakhtun perspective, there are other minorities who have to be part of its view of nationalism which implies that the allegiance have to be to state more than to individual ethnic groups.
Thats just racism.
In other words, according to the principles of “civic” nationalism, the nation is not based on common ethnicity or ethnicites , but is a political entity, whose core is not ethnicity.
Give it a rest, buddy. The concept is non-existent in Afghanistan. Don't project your basic understanding of political science on Afghanistan. You are embarrassing yourself.
As a result of “civic” nationalism, Afghan identity though being historically interchangeable with “Pakhtun” and “Pathan” has also evolved to include other ethnic groups who are quite happy to call themselves as Afghans. The integration of Pakhtuns/Afghans with other ethnic groups has been far
greater compared to Pakhtuns in Pakistan.
You know you have a very highl entertainment value. You should become a political stand up comedian to non-Pashtuns in Afghanistan. You can become famous with your jokes.
Other ethnic groups detest the Afghan labeling. Especially in the current political discourse in Afghanistan.
As far as “ethnic” nationalism among Pakhtuns in Afghanistan is concerned, there were/are some elements who have been highlighting the “excesses” of non Pakhtuns towards Pakhtuns for exmaple, “Afghan Milatian”. But they did not find much following among the Pakhtuns. Pkhtuns either Islamists or civic nationalists could not afford to be ethnic nationalists due to political cost, yet they remained civic nationalists in their political outlook.
Think very deeply and take a good look at the mirror and re-read what you have said here about Afghan Millatian.
Thus political (civic) nationalism has always been there in Pakhtuns/Afghans through out history whether they were communists, Islamist Mujaheddin or political hard line the Taliban
I don't know where you draw that conclusion from. But you have me confused now. You achieved something after all. I give you that.
Meanwhile another dynamic related to political Islam is a legitimacy
question that hang over them not only in Afghanistan but world over. They have always been wary of elections and in seeking votes from people in order to get their support. This is why most of the countries in the Islamic world who practice political Islam as political ideology abhor free elections and getting mandate of the people to rule them. This has also been the case with Mujaheddin in Afghanistan and the Afghan Taliban of today as well.
You should abstain from speaking about subjects you obviously have absolutely no knowledge of.
The reason why religiously contience Muslims abhor democracy and election is because in democracy, people legislate. Not just minor issues, but stuff that contradict Islam. In democracies, usury, homosexuality, female political leadership, freedom of un-Islamic arts and expressions are tolerated and protected by man made laws designed based on European philosophers of the Enlightenment era.
While in Islam, legislation is for allah only and revealed through his messenger, and interpreted by various scholars of Islamic jusrisprudence, in democracies Emanuel Kant, Rousseau, Jock Locke and John Stuart Mill are the designers of constitutions.
This is the true motive for Muslims to oppose Western style democracy. Not because they are afraid of loosing the elections to secular Nationalist proxies of invaders.
Thus assuming that they automatically enjoy the support of Pakhtuns/ Afghans for having fought against the Soviets now fighting the US and NATO forces is simply not true as there is not statistical basis in terms of ascertaining the people’s opinion regarding their past/present role or regarding the question whether they should rule Afghanistan.
You are the one making assumptions without any evidence. The people who have resisted the Communists and are now resisting the Crusaders are the majority of Afghan men. Would the resistence be a small community and would the general population abstain from participating in Jihad, the Mujahideen would have been extinct long time ago. But in contrary, Mujahideen are conducting successful rebellion against over 45 different contingents from all across the world with the most advanced weapons. Yet the invaders and their secularist proxies are left desperate and crippled.
Even the non-Muslim media and research organizations report the widespread support for Mujahideen in Afghanistan. And according to American security assements and ICOS report regarding recent major military operations in Pashtuns core areas in south and east Afghanistan, the Mujahideen are very popular and enjoy wide support from the population who are hostile to invaders and the secularist proxies and puppets. You should take your lies elsewhere where totally ignorant people are willing to buy your crap.
In other words, there has never been vote to prove that Pakhtuns want political Islam of either Mujaheddin or the Taliban in Afghanistan. Out of 12 million registered votes, overwhelming majority supported moderate civil Pakhtun/Afghan (civic) nationalist leadership of Hamid Karzai in the past three successive presidential elections.
What a shameless and pathetic lie! The whole world knows that the Kharzai puppet regime rigged the elections. In most areas of Afghanistan no election was held. According to White House observers less than 5 % of the population participated in the elections. Of whom the absolute majority was from the northern regions. In predominantly Pashtun areas practically nobody voted. In fact, those Pashtuns who did wanted to vote, for example, in Zazi Maidan area of Khost, the election bureau never opened. And people started a riot because they were frustrated.
This while in Kabul's north Western areas, in predominantly Tajik areas 11 year olds have been reported to have participated in voting.
They have also promoted Urdu language which is the language of 6 percent of the population, at the cost of neglecting other languages including Pakhtu which is being spoken by between 35 to 40 percent of Pakistan population if fair census of Pakhtuns is held. And Pakhtuns consider their language and culture as heritage.
If no fair census is ever held, how do you know what the real figures are? Did you count them yourself?
Why the type of nationalism in Pakistan has been more of “ethnic” nature is because they are five distinct ethnic groups with different languages, different geographically, linguistically based provinces and areas, with minor exceptions though.
In this respect, Afghanistan is much more diverse than Pakistan.
So those who do not agree with state’s policy are nationalists by design or default. What ever term you may coin, their opposition can only be categorised as political nationalism. Thus Pakhtun nationalist forces in Pakistan have been demanding an end to exclusion of other minority population including Pakhtuns, Baloch, Sindhis and Siraiks in the state institutions.
How noble of Pashtun Nationalists to raise their concerns about other minorities. Tell me, how come they still prefer to have a separate Political party based on Pashtun identity and Pashto language?
As far as the masses are concerned, if we were to know the level of their support, one has to count the votes as it is the only relatively fairer method to gauge one’s popularity among the people. But in Pakistan out of 62 years there have been direct army rule and all elections were rigged.
While due to mullah-military historical alliance, Islamist parties won the elections of Khyber Pakhtunhwa 1991 which were accepted as rigged elections even by Gen Perves Musharaf’s own admission. In the last elections of 2008, Pakhtun nationalists got move that 50 percent of the vote polled.
Why the sudden change? Could it be that Americans have pressurized Pakistan and have supported Nationalists to curb Islamism?
In Balochistan Pakhtun areas, though Pakhtuns nationalists boycotted, historically they have garnered majority share of the votes polled despite rigged elections. They have also made electoral gains in Karachi showing Pakhtun nationalists have the mandate of the majority Pakhtun people.
How do you know what the actual results are?
As far as religion (per se) is concerned, it has never been a hurdle in the political evolution of Pakhtun nationalism. However, political Islam’s role has been controversial. During the foreign invasions of Pakhtun territories through out history, it has been often used as supporting tool by Pakhtun nationalists to fight against the invaders.
I have addressed this bull crap elsewhere.
But in twentieth century it has been promoted by foreign sponsors as part of their geo-political rivalry played out on Pakhtun territories in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The West including the US, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and China used political Islam as a tool to defeat Soviet Union and contain “ethnic” nationalism in Pakistan and “civic” nationalism and progressive thoughts in Afghanistan.
Wow. Thats what happens to people to talk way more than they should. You have just admitted that Nationalists and communists are brothers. And that they have same interests and foreign sponsors and allies. While you accuse Muslims of being foreign proxies, you reveal the fact you and your ideology is in fact a foreign tool imposed on Pashtuns as a political ideology further a political agenda which is not of our on interest. Previously, the same Nationalists and communists have been subservient to Communist Soviet Union. And now you guys have changed bed-fellows and are now in relationship with your former foes, the capitalists whom you despised so much. But I guess since you receive fundings from the now, they are all cool, right?
Following the abandonment of the US from the Afghan scene regional actors particularly Pakistan again cultivated a new prox- the Taliban while using political Islam as ideological underpinning. Yes, in the process political Islam also got some adherence in Afghanistan.
If Taliban are Pakistans proxies, then who are you? You are slaves of any invader. Be it Communist Ruskies or Capitalist crusaders.
Even today particularly Pakhtuns in Afghanistan were not offered alternative socio-economic and socio-political alternative by the West thus they are being forced to accept the proxy Islamist Taliban as the only alternative. Though it is not yet proved how many Afghans support political Islam which is only possible to know if the practitioners of political Islam participate in elections, until then all claims of Pakhtuns supporting the Islamist Taliban have no creditably.
Neither is there any statistical evidence to prove that Pashtuns support Secularist traitors and bed-fellows of invaders. However, the invaders have offered you, secularsts, nationalists and communists combined with the warlords as an alternative. But guess what, nobody accepted you. In fact people are supporting Taliban. Even your crusader masters and their researchers have revealed this in their reports in the past 2 years.
But to say that Pakhtun “ethnic” nationalism in Pakistan or Pakhtun/Afghan “civic” nationalism in Afghanistan have no followings among the Pakhtuns is far from reality. Pakhtun nationalism is alive and kicking despite being on the wrong side of the establishment of Pakistan, and of the west during the cold war era.
Embodied in Karzai and Asfandyar Wali Khan? LOL.
However, the West particularly the US plaid heavy price for its mistake of backing Islamabad to cultivate political Islam at the cost of Pakhtun nationalism on either side of the Durand Line: the most vicious expression of the price was September 11, 2001 and as of today, the resolve of the West in Afghanistan is faltering, only a fool will be satisfied that there will be no repeat of Sept. 11 attacks.
But for the world and the people of both countries, the only insurance policy in the log term will be the passing over of carefully nurtured political Islam in favour of Pashtun nationalism in Afghanistan and Pakistan with iron clad guarantees for the territorial integrity of both the nation states.
janassakzai200@gmail.com
So basically, after your lenghty and highly disparate and inconsistent “discourse” you conclude that America should pay you and sponsor you so no other 9/11 occurs again? Your whole bull crap about nationalism is reduced to this? You just want money to be channeled to your pocket instead of Punjabis elites, so you can drive in fancy cars, wear fancy suites and attend Naghma's concert sitting in the front row next to Karzai & Asfandyar Wali Khan.
You have written this whole nonsense to impress Americans and other Western policy makers. Just like Katya Sher said in another thread, Western policy makers tend to invite any clown to participate in policymaking. Your whole rhetoric and use of your email address as your id on forums is to attract attention so you get an email from Americans. You just seek payment just like the other clown, Abdul Hadi Hairan.
I know your kind all too well. This whole show is just for you to enter the circuits where money is showered on traitors and sell outs who are willing to do anything to sell out their religion, country and people for personal gains and interests.
Here is my detailed reply to him. Enjoy! And share with other fellow Nationalists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by janassakzai200@gamil.com
In defence of Pakhtun nationalism in Pakistan & Afghanistan: By Jan Assakzai
First of all, I am quite honored that a short piece I wrote has caused such a big concern that such a desperately written article was needed to be produced to “defend” Nationalism. It's quite interesting that I am refereed to as “some pro Taliban writers”. I did not know that I was a writer. Neither did I know that there are more of me. I always assumed that I am a single person. There aren't others of “me” to my knowledge. It's just me. Sangar. And usually, referring to me by my name suffices.
Before I tear you apart, I advice you to control your emotions in future when you want to engage in polemics. Because would you have been more patient, you would have been able to write something decent that wouldn't embarrass you so much.
Some pro- Taliban writers have said on the Internet media that Pakhtun nationalism as a political movement is against Islam that nationalist leadership both in Pakistan and Afghanistan do not enjoy the backing of the people and that they are a small clique who are western stooges whereas Pakhtuns are following political Islamists.
First of all, that is not what I said. If you want to write a defense, I suggest you should study and examine the piece you are trying to counter. That of course if you are honest. Which is a rare habit among those who impose Western political theories such as Nationalism and Socialism on us.
I did not say that Pashtuns are following political Islamists. I just said that Pashtuns are by nature quite religious and conservative in general. Here is what I did say:
In contrast to the general Pashtun society that tends to be very religious. They tend to be very strict in practicing their religion. Individual and congregational prayers are a major part of the daily routines. Both men and women are generally dressed in traditional garments that cover their entire body. And it is very common to see men letting their beards grow.
As anyone can read clearly, I did not suggest that Pashtuns are Political Islamists or adherants to any particular sect of my own personal preference. Yet, in the latter part of your sorry attempt at a rebuttal, you do imply that I have made such gross generalization.
But this discourse refutes that Pakhtun nationalism is anti-Islam and argue that Pakhtun nationalism is not only alive in Pakistan but also thriving in Afghanistan and is the only guarantee in the long run that can help prevent mayhem in both countries and the repeat of Sept 11.
That's a very bold statement, buddy. First of all, you do not refute anything. And I am going to show you why. Secondly, I did not say that Pashtun Nationalism is anti-Islam. So how can you try to refute something I did not say? What I did say about Pashtun Nationalism's relationship with Islam is the following:
Islam as a religion has only a cultural function in their lives.
But in the latter part of my piece, I discussed the Pashtun diaspora. There I specifically targeted the behavior of youngsters who denounce Islam and are inspired by Persian Nationalism. If your reply is to the latter part of my piece, where I target the youngsters growing up in the West, then have the decency and the courage to say so. Don't make bold statements saying that your sorry attempt at a defense is a “discourse”. Which it is not. Nor does it refute something bigger.
Pakthun nationalism as political ideology has always been there on both side of the Durand Line. However, there might be some differences in emphasis and scope. Another distinction is that one may be a political Islamist, not a nationalist or communist but may take nationalist stance on some issues. So the definition may not be as absolute as one may understand by the word nationalist.
Pakhtun nationalism as a political phenomenon has its roots in Pakhtun history. The various uprising of Pakhtuns/Afghans against different invaders had nationalist connotations: be that the struggle of Khushal Khan Khattak against the Moguls, the three Anglo- Afghan wars in the nineteenth century, the uprising of Faqir of Ipi in North Waziristan, Bacha Khan and Abdul Samad Khan Achakzai’s non violent movements against British Raj so on and so forth.
Claiming that Pashtun Nationalism has always been there on both sides of the Durrand Line is not stating facts. But wishful thinking. Nationalism did not exist in Central and South Asia before it emerged as a political theory in Western Europe. If you are going to use fancy words, have the decency to study the historic development of the words you like to discuss.
If we are going to use the political definition of a Nation, then Pashtuns have never been a Nation in the past. Only after the emergence of Durrani empire did Pashtuns emerge as an ethnic group distinctly recognized as a large ethnic community involved as such in politics. Prior to the Durrani era, Pashtun rulers, conquerors and leaders never profiled themselves as representatives of Pashtuns in general. Claiming otherwise must be supported by historic accounts. Never Have I come across anything that Suggested that the Pashtun rulers of India where Nationalists. If they were, how is it possible that Pashto language never managed to become a language of scripture and formality? The answer is very simple. Pashtuns were never aware of their own identity as a community. Neither did they ever in the past unite under the banner of same language or similar culture to form a political entity.
Contrary to the claims of Pashtun Nationalists in most parts of our history, we fought one another more often than we fought non-Pashtuns. And this is a fact supported by all historic accounts.
One exception in this regard, is the case of Khushal Khan Khattak who used Pashtun identity as a rallying slogan to stir resistance against Mongolian tyranny. But just like Nationalists elsewhere around the world have magnified some historic incidents, so do the modern day Pashtun Nationalists try to create an image of Pashtun history as a history of ethnic collective identity and political engagement as such. Which is not only entirely false, but it also contradicts the claims of Nationalists who argue that they are not ethnocentric. Because this very claim suggests exactly the same false concepts that Hitler, Mussolini and other famous champions of Nationalism have claimed. But again, honesty is not a virtue among those who shove Western theories down peoples throats.
Furthermore, the concept of Nationality and Nation-states in the parlance of political science is a relatively new concept that emerged in Western Europe. It was virtually non-existent in other parts of the world. Never did we have a national anthem nor did we have a distinct flag. All of this are inventions of the Europeans imported during the colonial eras.
Pashtuns as an ethnic group defined in anthropological terms is yet again quite in contrast to the claims of Pashtun Nationalists and their wishful thinking. Contrary to the oral tradition among Pashtuns tracing their orgins back to Israelites, modern science falsifies such claims. Pashtuns comprise of a mixture of various communities. The physical distinction among Pashtuns, their skin complexion, difference in height, hair color, eye color and facial features reveal a rich history of intermixing with other races. If any genetic examination of various Pashtun tribes is ever going to be held, it sure will not come up with a conclusion categorizing all Pashtuns as one distinct community like the inhabitants of remote archipelagos in the Pacific Ocean.
Majority of Pakhtuns: around 40 million, live in Pakistan and roughly 15 o 17 millions constitute Afghanistan’s Pakhtun population out of 30 million if the current census estimates are to be believed. Political nationalist currents and their underlying dynamics amongst the Pakhtuns on both side of the Durand Line have both similarities and dissimilarities. (For me Pakhtun, Afghan and Pathan are interchangeable that define the same ethnic group, so just for clarity I will often use the word Pakthun).
It is irrelevant what your personal preference is of what Afghan, Pashtun or Pathan mean and whether they are all the same. If you are going to defend Nationalism, do so based on unbiased and impartially observable facts. Yet, the latter part of your magnificent and so internally and externally consistent arguments you admit that Afghan means more than just Pashtun for obvious reasons.
Nationalism is sometimes reactionary, calling for a return to a national past, and sometimes for the expulsion of foreigners. Other forms of nationalism are revolutionary, calling for the establishment of an independent state as a homeland for an ethnic underclass.
If you are going to make such a sorry and pathetic attempt defining what Nationalism is, then have the decency to mention the name of the vagabond from Geneva who intellectually fornicated with political theory of Hobbes and Machiavelli in order to conceive an ideology called “romanticism”. The emergence of Nationalism as product of romanticism and Pashtun Nationalism will be elaborated further ahead. But first, a short introduction of who this vagabond was.
Jean Jaques Rousseau, who is the grandfather of Nationalism and all Nationalist movements around the world was a highly irrational man who neglected his duty as a father and a husband by never marrying the mother of his five children but keeping her as a servant with him. Yet, he would recite poetry romanticizing rich and wealthy women of nobility by praising their femininity and honoring them as independent entities in order to charm them to support him financially and have sex with him. Because Rousseau never had a job, neither did he ever earn any money to support his family and children. The children he would dump at orphanages after birth to let the society pay for his irresponsibility. Yet, this very same man would later author a book on how to raise children, called Emile. Rousseau and his ideology of Romanticism that was highly inconsistent, paradoxical and irrational was not only the foundation of Nationalism, but also another ideology the Pashtun Nationalists are so fond of. Namely Marxism.
The character and personality of Rousseau had such a big impact on his readers ( he authored many books, such as On inequality, a few other treatises and his most famous work, Social Contract) that even today, if we carefully observe the behavior of Nationalist Pashtuns and Pashtun Commies, we observe the same irresponsible, irrational and immoral behavior. The obsession of Pashtun Nationalists with poetry praising alcohol, fornication, promiscuity and appreciation for blasphemous literature are a few of the most distinct characteristics of romanticists.
Al though, Utopian-ism existed long before Rousseau was born, after the success of Rousseau's books mainly in France, an upsurge in irrational socialist and communist ideologies emerged due to Rousseau's legacy. These ideologies were nothing more than utopian visions of people who tried to emulate their icon. Figures as Fourier, Theodor Herzl and Marx founded their utopian visions primarily on the groundwork laid down by Rousseau.
For those who have not studied much and are ignorant of what Nationalism is and are unaware of the historical development of Nationalism it is interesting to note that that the first ever known Nationalists were the ideological predecessors of Adolph Hitler and Mossolini. In fact, Theodor Herzl, the founder of the Jewish Zionist ideology was likewise influenced by Rousseau's romanticism.
Rousseau's romanticism was based on several assumptions. Of which the most notable is the assumption that human beings are by nature good. Which is contrary to the Christian theology that describes human beings as born with a defect which is defined as “original sin”. In a society where for centuries, the church indoctrinated people to consider themselves and their natural desires and longings as evil and sinful, the emergence of a new concept where human beings were described as intrinsically good was so revolutionary, that it eventually grew to praise and worship of the self and ones whims and desires. This could be described as the source of Nationalism and the love for the self.
As mentioned before, Rousseau was highly irrational, his works were extremely paradoxical, and he was very inconsistent in his argumentation. He wrote books slamming fundamentals of Christian credo, be it Roman Catholic or Protestant. But he always tried to profile himself as a pious and religious person. Yet, born in Geneva into a Protestant community, he converted to Catholicism only to revert back to protestantism later-on. This odd relationship with religion was inherited by those who were inspired by him. Among them there were some radical atheists in France and even religiously motivated splinter groups.
But interestingly, the same paradoxical relationship is observed in Pashtun Nationalist movement. For example, Abdul Ghaffar Khan called his movement, God's servants. But was a secular Nationalist with Marxist affiliations. Abdul Ghani Khan would write poems about alcohol consumption, fornication, and in some passages even clear cut blasphemy. Yet, he emulated Sufi poetry. Weekh Zalmian, who were the first ever Pashtun political movement displayed similar patterns of inconsistency and paradoxical relationship with religion. Some of them grew to become Communists who fought and prosecuted Muslims in Afghanistan. But, at a later stage, obviously for political reasons, the most prominent leader of the communists, Dr. Najibullah Ahmedzai was pushed the forefront as a pious Sufi who caught a piece of cloth that came of a wooden poll at the famous Shi'ite shrine in Mazar Sharif.
Another branch of Weekh Zalmian became the illustrious Afghan Millatis who promoted superiority of Pashtuns over other ethnic groups in Afghanistan. Both groups reconciled after the invasion of Afghanistan by the crusaders in 2001 and reunited to fight Shariah law and committed themselves to preventing Shariah from being implemented in Afghanistan again. But yet, again, the same people grew short beards and started wearing big turbans at annual religious and cultural events. Obviously for political reasons.
Just like their icon, Rousseau, the Pashtun Nationalists are not shy to display their passion for immorality. During Communist era, women appeared on television without proper Islamic attire, dancing in music video's of Khan Qarabaghai and Ustad Fazal Ghani. The Pashtun Nationalists in Peshawar exploited cinema's where semi-erotic Pashto language movies are shown where overweight women dressed in tight candy colored Punjabis bounce and shake their breasts and hips to the rhythm of Pashto folk music. One of the most iconic figure of Pashtun Nationalist art and music is Madame Naghma. A woman with a terrible singing voice that sounds more like a weeping pig known for being employed as a prostitute to entertain communist generals in Afghanistan. And shamelessly, the same figures who argue that they are representatives of the Pashtun cause and have a total disregard for Pashtun and Islamic morality have the audacity to comment accuse others of whatever they can come up with.
For now, a brief dive in the origins of Nationalist ideology is sufficient considering the limited scope of this response to the magnificently awesome defense of Nationalism by Jan Atsakzai. Of course, in future, I might even dig deeper back in history all the way back to Hellenic era to trace back the fascist and discriminating nature of classic texts that have inspired Rousseau and other authors. But I will save that for now in order not to overburden the Nationalist dimwits with information overload. Which is quite possible knowing that the Nationalists are not too shy of wasting a few braincells on Vodka.
But after the end of British Empire and emergence of Pakistan as a nation state, Pakhtun nationalism has been progressive and within the confines of Pakistan’s boundaries and has also by and large not sought pan Pakhtun nationalism despite the stereotyped views of many non-Pakhtun and oriental writers.
Again, more dishonesty. Pashtun Nationalist in Pashtunkhwa and Afghanistan have always drawn varieties of maps dividing Pakistan into two separate parts, where the upper part including Baluchistan being united with the lower parts of Afghanistan as one greater Pashtunkhwa.
It has also not been based on ethno- nationalism: a belief in the superiority of one ethnicity over others, and never supported ethnocentric protectionism or ethnocentric supremacy of Pakhtuns over other ethnic groups.
Again, more falsehood. As you can see in the map here above, the desire for Pashtun Nationalists to divide Pakistan and Afghanistan along ethnic fault lines is not invented by non-Pashtuns. This desire does exist among Pashtun Nationalists. And it is not wrongly attributed to this particular political ideology.
Aside from the fact that Pashtun Nationalists want to divide Afghanistan along ethnic lines, they also prefer to annex Baluch territory and claim it as theirs in order to benefit from access to sea. Likewise of other minorities who live among Pashtuns such as the Pasha'is, Hindko's, Kalashwal, Nuristanis, Tajiks and Hazara's.
Likewise, Pashtun Nationalists promote Pashto as the sole official language of the region. Voices are heard in lar & bar Pashtunkhwa where people claim that Pashto should and must become the sole lingua franca in the region.
Discussions and polemics between Tajik Fascists and Pashtun Nationalists bickering about the status and value of their respective native languages are the order of the day in books & magazines, Kabul University academic circuit and student bodies, Facebook and prominent open source websites. To deny that a fascist tendency exists within Pashtun Nationalist community is another shameless lie. It is even quite common to hear Nationalist singers such as Gulzar Alam, Naim Turi, Khyal Muhammad and others singing songs with lines that are insulting Punjabis referring to them as inferior beings for wearing lungs instead of turbans.
Whereas Islam as religion is concerned, I think almost ninety nine percent Pakhtuns would believe in some sort of interpretation of Islam at philosophical/metaphysical , societal or functional levels. Yes, if one has more divisive or sectarian interpretation of religion, may term fellow muslims as non muslims, Shias, Kafirs, Murtads etc. But vast majority of Pakhtuns do not subscribe to these divisions except a fringe group that may have got influence from Wahhabism or Pakistan's mainstream sectarian extremist outfits.
More lies and falsehood. Pashtuns are accustomed to a derogatory terminology describing Shi'ites as inferior beings personified by Hazara and Iranian stereo-types. Pogroms against shi'ite Hazara's and the uprising against Iranians drive to convert Kandahar to Shi'ism have left their mark on Pashtun relationship with Shi'ites. It is absolutely false to claim Pashtuns do not have any hostility towards Shi'ites. These hostilities existed long before Ibn Abdul Wahhab was born.
As there is no religious authority/body in the Islamic world who for example could issue certificates for who being a bona fied Muslim.
Having said that, you would be honest if you would have mentioned the fact that Pashtuns are pre-dominantly Sunnis of Hanafi school of jurisprudence and abide by Hanafi interpretation fervently. And Hanafi scholars rulings in such matters do carry allot of weight in the Pashtun community. In fact, recenly, a person was declared a Kaafir in Helmand's Musa Qala district, by if I am not mistaken, Mullah Abdul Salaam who works for the American psy-ops organization for saying that the word “khudai” is not mentioned in Quran but Allah. The concept of excommunication does exist in Pashtun society and it is very heavily politicized.
However, there had been a tiny number of Pakhtuns who happened to be adherents of left political ideology of communism and did also adopt different metaphysical beliefs about God, and views on religion propagated by the founders of the ideology. But with the collapse of communism as political system, and the collapse of its philosophic/metaphorical leftist political liberalism all over the world, their numbers have come to a negligible figures.
As I mentioned before, leftists and nationalists are two sides of the same coin extracting their political ideology from the same source. However, as I shall discuss later on, neither of them really sticks to the dogma of their respective ideology as they are driven by self interest and greed for money, power and status.
Majority of Pakhtuns including nationalists practise Islam as religion and have a Islamic religious outlook for all metaphysical question, some how. But Historically, Pakhtun traditions have been so strong that they have always kept religion subservient to traditions. In other words, Pakhtun traditions and religion is blended, to the consternation of Wahabbis.
I know that you are suffered a dent in your ego after reading my short piece regarding the relationship of Nationalists and Islam. But this weak jab at my creed reveals nothing more than your pathetic attempt to get even with me. Which I think will be quickly forgotten after you are done reading this lengthy reply to your post.
Some may disagree as to what constitute Muslim, depends on his/her degree of observance of religious rituals in its totality. But it is again a matter of interpretation and one can not deprive one of his/ her use of religion to fill in one’s spiritual, philosophical voids.
It is delightful to see you speaking of filling philosophical voids. I invite you to a debate on philosophy if you like, so we can explore one another philosophical cavities. I am willing to replenish yours with a few basic concepts I think you are lacking.
There is another political current among Pakhtuns who use religion for political purposes I call them as political Islamists, some dub them as extremists. Political Islamists’s beliefs and actions may not necessarily be in line with the tenets of Islam as a religion.
I suggest you should educate yourself about your own political ideology before lecturing others what political Islamism is. And who are you to speak of what basic tenets of Islam entails? Are you qualified to speak on this subject? Since you have failed miserably to defend your own holy ideology of Nationalism, I suggest you zip it and not utter more rubbish and make generalizations on what other people believe and adhere to and whether it is consistent with basic tenets of Islam. I don't see anything of Nationalism being in line with basic tenets of Islam. As it appeared in your pathetic attempt to define Nationalism, you lack basic information about what Nationalism is. Yet you post your silly articles promoting Nationalism in forums regularly. Maybe, my small contribution to educate you on Nationalism might brighten you up a little bit.
Their second type is the Jihadists who not only believe in political Islam but also believe that in order to impose their interpretation of political Islam, they should use violence and intimidation not only in their own territories but if possible through out the world - a view which runs against the spirit of Islam (and is not the scope of this discourse for further exploration).
I have a question for you. Do you consider an ideology driven by global conquest and reliance on violence as morally deplorable? If so, explain why Nationalists and Marxists, elsewhere around the world and particularly among Pashtuns have not hesitated in applying brute force to exterminate their political rivals. Your communist comrades who splintered of Weekh Zalmian massacred over one and half million Muslims in Afghanistan in the 80's. And during the same era, the Pashtun Nationalists in Pashtunkhwa received explosives and served as terror cells bombing Afghan refugee camps, market places killing many people to further the communists agenda to cause mayhem and prevent Afghan resistance fighters from regrouping and recapturing their homeland from Communist invaders.
Political Islam has largely been represented by the erstwhile Islamist Mujaheddin and the Taliban among Pakhtuns particularly in Afghanistan and to a lesser degree in Pakistan. Back in 1979 when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Pakistan’s then generals worried that Moscow would expand its footprint in the Pashtun heartland and pose a direct threat to the unity of Pakistan, they began a covert program of funding, training, and equipping Afghans willing to take on the Soviet Army
Like most of what you stated, yet this is again more falsehood. Pashtuns have developed a Jihadi ideology of their own over the course of history. You have wrongly argued elsewhere in your pathetic “defense of nationalism” that Islam is used by Pashtuns for political goals. Pashtuns like other Muslims of the region were driven by Islamic doctrine engraved in Quran to resist non-Muslim and Muslim unjust rule and aggression. This is the concept of Jihad ud Daf. Which existed all along. The concept of offensive Jihad which is called Jihad ud Talab, is likewise and intrinsic aspect of Islam. And Pashtuns among many other Muslims have participated in conquest of other regions and justified their actions based on this concept.
You can argue that Pashtuns were not driven by Islamic jurisprudencial definition of self defence but rather Pashtunwali. But this is something you could say of any other Muslim community who have resisted aggressors. Whether you like it or not, Pashtuns did participate in Jihad, both in Daf and Talab over the course of history prior to 20th century's political upheavals.
Infact, the lie often told by you Nationalists is that Faqir of Ipi was driven by Nationalism. Which is absolutely not true. He declared Jihad on the British opressors because of the Bibi Islam incident. A Hindu girl converted to Islam and married her Muslim instructor. The British chose the side of Hindus in the conflict that emerged afterwards. And Faqir of Ipi, as a proud and brave Muslim as he was, had the guts to rise up against an empire just like Mullah Pawinda did back in the 19 century. Yet, the true Nationalist, Abdul Ghaffar Khan chose the Hindu approach and did not fight the oppressors.
There was a huge difference between the Pashtuns who have contributed to the fall of British Empire, and the sorry case of the pacifists who did nothing significant but the mere publicity. British Empire was already crumbling. A few starving Hindus and Khan khel from Charsada didn't mean anything.
It is now open secrete that how political Islam was cultivated on both side of the border over past three and half decades and how proxy Mujaheddin were sponsored and imposed on Pakhtuns/Afghans by the CIA’s trainings, Pakistan’s logistical help , and Saudi petrol money, latter how their political successor, the new proxy, the Taliban were introduced to the scene.
U.S. policymakers relied on intelligence agents, diplomats, and experts who in the past had worked closely with the Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. These individuals bought into Islamabad's line that Pakhtun/Afghan nationalists needed to be sidelined and the focus needed to be on the political Islamists who were being trained in their thousands in Pakistan.
I guess you assume we don't know anything about the relationship of Abdul Ghaffar Khan with Babrak Karmal and other communist proxies when he was in exile in Jalal abad? Neither do we know anything about him lecturing the young students who were covert members of then newly established commuist party in University of Kabul & Nangarhar? You probably assume that I am ignorant of the financial and intellectual support and guidance the communist splinters of Weekh Zalmian received from Soviet Union in the 50's, 60's and 70's? You probably assume I am ignorant of the fact that figures such as Afrasyab Khattak were contact persons who served as liaison and coordinated terrorist activities of the Nationalists sponsored by KGB in Pakistan? You probably assume that I am ignorant of the fact that Afghan Millatis who ended up in Pol-i-Charkhi prison during Khalqi's era were later released and received funding from Najibullah Ahmedzai? You probably assume that I am ignorant of the fact that Anwarul haq Ahadi not only served as a professor at an American University, but also was a ring leader of a CIA-led cell?
Indeed, these nationalis ts who were patriotic people, soon found themselves unwelcome in Pakistan, and nearly 1.5 million migrated to Gulf, Europe, North America and India.While the sponsors of the political Islam defeated Afghan nationalism and thought in Pakhtun areas but failed to wipe out in Pakistan.
How patriotic to leave the field and seek refugee in Islamist Gulf and Capitalist West while fellow Nationalist & Communist comrades funded by Soviets were running the show? You assume I don't know anything about the luxurious mansions of Afghans who have fled after the communist revolution being granted to Nationalists from Pashtunkhwa? The same mansions that were used as gathering places for wild parties where women danced and plenty of alcohol was served at the expenses of Moskow and where plans were made how to conduct terrorist activities in refugee camps in Peshawar?
But what is precisely Pakhtun/Afghan nationalism? Afghan nationalism is slightly different from Pakhtun’s ethnic nationalism in Pakistan. I call Afghan nationalism as “civic nationalism”. “Civic” nationalism compared to “ethnic” nationalism emphasises on loyalty to a kind of “cosmopolitan” state rather than ethnicity. “Civic” nationalism defines the nation as an association of people with equal and shared political rights, and allegiance to similar political procedures.
You are philosophizing now about non existent concepts. You have failed miserably to define basic understanding and origin of Nationalism as an ideology. But you jump on to define what civil nationalism is. As I explained previously, Afghanistan and Pashtuns in particular are quite alien to concepts of nation-state and nationalism in general.
But what is precisely Pakhtun/Afghan nationalism? Afghan nationalism is slightly different from Pakhtun’s ethnic nationalism in Pakistan. I call Afghan nationalism as “civic nationalism”. “Civic” nationalism compared to “ethnic” nationalism emphasises on loyalty to a kind of “cosmopolitan” state rather than ethnicity. “Civic” nationalism defines the nation as an association of people with equal and shared political rights, and allegiance to similar political procedures.
Why it is different in emphasis is because In Afghanistan, Pakhtun/Afghan situation is sharply different from their counter parts in Pakistan . Pakhtuns in Afghanistan form the largest ethnic group and for many they are the majority ethnic group as well. Pakhtuns have substantive political representation in the state institutions, they are the major stake holders and hence their pragmatic needs are different form those of their Pakhtun cousins in Pakistan.
Thus Pakhtun is a kind of big brother in Afghanistan, not a small minority. From Pakhtun perspective, there are other minorities who have to be part of its view of nationalism which implies that the allegiance have to be to state more than to individual ethnic groups.
Please don't make me laugh. Pashtuns wish to think like they are the majority. Due to economic circumstances and the nomadic lifestyle of many Pashtuns in the core areas like loy Paktia, Pashtuns have never been the largest ethnic group at any point of our recent history. Most Pashtuns reside in Pashtunkhwa and occasionly frequent back and forth.
Non-Pashtuns are a constant majority. Primarily the Persian-speaking groups such as the Persianized Pashtuns, Tajiks, Aymaqs and Hazara's.
It is Pashtun arrogance to assume they are somehow superior to others and they consider themselves as the big brother. But other ethnic groups do not have such feelings towards Pashtuns. At most, they consider Pashtuns as their equal brothers.
It's funny. You claim that Pashtun Nationalism is not ethnocentric. Yet you go on and say that Pashtuns are a majority and thus are considered as superior (older brother) to non-Pashtuns.
There might be issues of neglect of language or culture at the hand of Persian speaking Pakhtun and non- Pakhtun elite in the past or now. However, there has been no second class status reserved for Pakhtuns except at marginal levels.
Pashto was not even recognized as a language up until 20th century. Pashtun court never spoke Pashto. All state officials have always spoken in Farsi. Most prominent and elite figures of Afghan politics were Persianized Pashtuns or non-Pashtuns. Pashtuns have been often discriminated against in Kabul. Pashtun nomads have often been abused and mistreated by the Persianized Pashtuns in power or the non-Pashtuns.
In fact, only after the Communist revolution did Pashto manage to appear in public life as a dominant language. In politics and the media. This resulted in a backlash of non-Pashtuns who considered this as a cultural colonization of Pashtun Nationalists in the ranks of Khalq & Parcham.
Thus Pakhtun is a kind of big brother in Afghanistan, not a small minority. From Pakhtun perspective, there are other minorities who have to be part of its view of nationalism which implies that the allegiance have to be to state more than to individual ethnic groups.
Thats just racism.
In other words, according to the principles of “civic” nationalism, the nation is not based on common ethnicity or ethnicites , but is a political entity, whose core is not ethnicity.
Give it a rest, buddy. The concept is non-existent in Afghanistan. Don't project your basic understanding of political science on Afghanistan. You are embarrassing yourself.
As a result of “civic” nationalism, Afghan identity though being historically interchangeable with “Pakhtun” and “Pathan” has also evolved to include other ethnic groups who are quite happy to call themselves as Afghans. The integration of Pakhtuns/Afghans with other ethnic groups has been far
greater compared to Pakhtuns in Pakistan.
You know you have a very highl entertainment value. You should become a political stand up comedian to non-Pashtuns in Afghanistan. You can become famous with your jokes.
Other ethnic groups detest the Afghan labeling. Especially in the current political discourse in Afghanistan.
As far as “ethnic” nationalism among Pakhtuns in Afghanistan is concerned, there were/are some elements who have been highlighting the “excesses” of non Pakhtuns towards Pakhtuns for exmaple, “Afghan Milatian”. But they did not find much following among the Pakhtuns. Pkhtuns either Islamists or civic nationalists could not afford to be ethnic nationalists due to political cost, yet they remained civic nationalists in their political outlook.
Think very deeply and take a good look at the mirror and re-read what you have said here about Afghan Millatian.
Thus political (civic) nationalism has always been there in Pakhtuns/Afghans through out history whether they were communists, Islamist Mujaheddin or political hard line the Taliban
I don't know where you draw that conclusion from. But you have me confused now. You achieved something after all. I give you that.
Meanwhile another dynamic related to political Islam is a legitimacy
question that hang over them not only in Afghanistan but world over. They have always been wary of elections and in seeking votes from people in order to get their support. This is why most of the countries in the Islamic world who practice political Islam as political ideology abhor free elections and getting mandate of the people to rule them. This has also been the case with Mujaheddin in Afghanistan and the Afghan Taliban of today as well.
You should abstain from speaking about subjects you obviously have absolutely no knowledge of.
The reason why religiously contience Muslims abhor democracy and election is because in democracy, people legislate. Not just minor issues, but stuff that contradict Islam. In democracies, usury, homosexuality, female political leadership, freedom of un-Islamic arts and expressions are tolerated and protected by man made laws designed based on European philosophers of the Enlightenment era.
While in Islam, legislation is for allah only and revealed through his messenger, and interpreted by various scholars of Islamic jusrisprudence, in democracies Emanuel Kant, Rousseau, Jock Locke and John Stuart Mill are the designers of constitutions.
This is the true motive for Muslims to oppose Western style democracy. Not because they are afraid of loosing the elections to secular Nationalist proxies of invaders.
Thus assuming that they automatically enjoy the support of Pakhtuns/ Afghans for having fought against the Soviets now fighting the US and NATO forces is simply not true as there is not statistical basis in terms of ascertaining the people’s opinion regarding their past/present role or regarding the question whether they should rule Afghanistan.
You are the one making assumptions without any evidence. The people who have resisted the Communists and are now resisting the Crusaders are the majority of Afghan men. Would the resistence be a small community and would the general population abstain from participating in Jihad, the Mujahideen would have been extinct long time ago. But in contrary, Mujahideen are conducting successful rebellion against over 45 different contingents from all across the world with the most advanced weapons. Yet the invaders and their secularist proxies are left desperate and crippled.
Even the non-Muslim media and research organizations report the widespread support for Mujahideen in Afghanistan. And according to American security assements and ICOS report regarding recent major military operations in Pashtuns core areas in south and east Afghanistan, the Mujahideen are very popular and enjoy wide support from the population who are hostile to invaders and the secularist proxies and puppets. You should take your lies elsewhere where totally ignorant people are willing to buy your crap.
In other words, there has never been vote to prove that Pakhtuns want political Islam of either Mujaheddin or the Taliban in Afghanistan. Out of 12 million registered votes, overwhelming majority supported moderate civil Pakhtun/Afghan (civic) nationalist leadership of Hamid Karzai in the past three successive presidential elections.
What a shameless and pathetic lie! The whole world knows that the Kharzai puppet regime rigged the elections. In most areas of Afghanistan no election was held. According to White House observers less than 5 % of the population participated in the elections. Of whom the absolute majority was from the northern regions. In predominantly Pashtun areas practically nobody voted. In fact, those Pashtuns who did wanted to vote, for example, in Zazi Maidan area of Khost, the election bureau never opened. And people started a riot because they were frustrated.
This while in Kabul's north Western areas, in predominantly Tajik areas 11 year olds have been reported to have participated in voting.
They have also promoted Urdu language which is the language of 6 percent of the population, at the cost of neglecting other languages including Pakhtu which is being spoken by between 35 to 40 percent of Pakistan population if fair census of Pakhtuns is held. And Pakhtuns consider their language and culture as heritage.
If no fair census is ever held, how do you know what the real figures are? Did you count them yourself?
Why the type of nationalism in Pakistan has been more of “ethnic” nature is because they are five distinct ethnic groups with different languages, different geographically, linguistically based provinces and areas, with minor exceptions though.
In this respect, Afghanistan is much more diverse than Pakistan.
So those who do not agree with state’s policy are nationalists by design or default. What ever term you may coin, their opposition can only be categorised as political nationalism. Thus Pakhtun nationalist forces in Pakistan have been demanding an end to exclusion of other minority population including Pakhtuns, Baloch, Sindhis and Siraiks in the state institutions.
How noble of Pashtun Nationalists to raise their concerns about other minorities. Tell me, how come they still prefer to have a separate Political party based on Pashtun identity and Pashto language?
As far as the masses are concerned, if we were to know the level of their support, one has to count the votes as it is the only relatively fairer method to gauge one’s popularity among the people. But in Pakistan out of 62 years there have been direct army rule and all elections were rigged.
While due to mullah-military historical alliance, Islamist parties won the elections of Khyber Pakhtunhwa 1991 which were accepted as rigged elections even by Gen Perves Musharaf’s own admission. In the last elections of 2008, Pakhtun nationalists got move that 50 percent of the vote polled.
Why the sudden change? Could it be that Americans have pressurized Pakistan and have supported Nationalists to curb Islamism?
In Balochistan Pakhtun areas, though Pakhtuns nationalists boycotted, historically they have garnered majority share of the votes polled despite rigged elections. They have also made electoral gains in Karachi showing Pakhtun nationalists have the mandate of the majority Pakhtun people.
How do you know what the actual results are?
As far as religion (per se) is concerned, it has never been a hurdle in the political evolution of Pakhtun nationalism. However, political Islam’s role has been controversial. During the foreign invasions of Pakhtun territories through out history, it has been often used as supporting tool by Pakhtun nationalists to fight against the invaders.
I have addressed this bull crap elsewhere.
But in twentieth century it has been promoted by foreign sponsors as part of their geo-political rivalry played out on Pakhtun territories in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The West including the US, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and China used political Islam as a tool to defeat Soviet Union and contain “ethnic” nationalism in Pakistan and “civic” nationalism and progressive thoughts in Afghanistan.
Wow. Thats what happens to people to talk way more than they should. You have just admitted that Nationalists and communists are brothers. And that they have same interests and foreign sponsors and allies. While you accuse Muslims of being foreign proxies, you reveal the fact you and your ideology is in fact a foreign tool imposed on Pashtuns as a political ideology further a political agenda which is not of our on interest. Previously, the same Nationalists and communists have been subservient to Communist Soviet Union. And now you guys have changed bed-fellows and are now in relationship with your former foes, the capitalists whom you despised so much. But I guess since you receive fundings from the now, they are all cool, right?
Following the abandonment of the US from the Afghan scene regional actors particularly Pakistan again cultivated a new prox- the Taliban while using political Islam as ideological underpinning. Yes, in the process political Islam also got some adherence in Afghanistan.
If Taliban are Pakistans proxies, then who are you? You are slaves of any invader. Be it Communist Ruskies or Capitalist crusaders.
Even today particularly Pakhtuns in Afghanistan were not offered alternative socio-economic and socio-political alternative by the West thus they are being forced to accept the proxy Islamist Taliban as the only alternative. Though it is not yet proved how many Afghans support political Islam which is only possible to know if the practitioners of political Islam participate in elections, until then all claims of Pakhtuns supporting the Islamist Taliban have no creditably.
Neither is there any statistical evidence to prove that Pashtuns support Secularist traitors and bed-fellows of invaders. However, the invaders have offered you, secularsts, nationalists and communists combined with the warlords as an alternative. But guess what, nobody accepted you. In fact people are supporting Taliban. Even your crusader masters and their researchers have revealed this in their reports in the past 2 years.
But to say that Pakhtun “ethnic” nationalism in Pakistan or Pakhtun/Afghan “civic” nationalism in Afghanistan have no followings among the Pakhtuns is far from reality. Pakhtun nationalism is alive and kicking despite being on the wrong side of the establishment of Pakistan, and of the west during the cold war era.
Embodied in Karzai and Asfandyar Wali Khan? LOL.
However, the West particularly the US plaid heavy price for its mistake of backing Islamabad to cultivate political Islam at the cost of Pakhtun nationalism on either side of the Durand Line: the most vicious expression of the price was September 11, 2001 and as of today, the resolve of the West in Afghanistan is faltering, only a fool will be satisfied that there will be no repeat of Sept. 11 attacks.
But for the world and the people of both countries, the only insurance policy in the log term will be the passing over of carefully nurtured political Islam in favour of Pashtun nationalism in Afghanistan and Pakistan with iron clad guarantees for the territorial integrity of both the nation states.
janassakzai200@gmail.com
So basically, after your lenghty and highly disparate and inconsistent “discourse” you conclude that America should pay you and sponsor you so no other 9/11 occurs again? Your whole bull crap about nationalism is reduced to this? You just want money to be channeled to your pocket instead of Punjabis elites, so you can drive in fancy cars, wear fancy suites and attend Naghma's concert sitting in the front row next to Karzai & Asfandyar Wali Khan.
You have written this whole nonsense to impress Americans and other Western policy makers. Just like Katya Sher said in another thread, Western policy makers tend to invite any clown to participate in policymaking. Your whole rhetoric and use of your email address as your id on forums is to attract attention so you get an email from Americans. You just seek payment just like the other clown, Abdul Hadi Hairan.
I know your kind all too well. This whole show is just for you to enter the circuits where money is showered on traitors and sell outs who are willing to do anything to sell out their religion, country and people for personal gains and interests.
Comment