Division of Afghanistan?

[Al-Afghani]

yeah yeah... and what do you have to say about Abdullah abduallah?? .. see for winning an election in Afghanistan.. you have to claim Pashtun identity.. which is yet another indication of who is the ethnic majority in that country..

Making statements about the size Afghanistani ethnic groups is pretty much reading tea leaves.

The "independent" election commission works in Ghani's interest. The proof for this are the audio tapes released not long ago. I think it's funny you deny that massive fraud took place.

It doesn't matter who wins, anyway. All Pashtuns want the Taliban and reject the democratic system, TajiksUzbeksHazaras don't. Civil war is guaranteed.

[HalloIsBack]

Making statements about the size Afghanistani ethnic groups is pretty much reading tea leaves.

The "independent" election commission works in Ghani's interest. The proof for this are the audio tapes released not long ago. I think it's funny you deny that massive fraud took place.

It doesn't matter who wins, anyway. All Pashtuns want the Taliban and reject the democratic system, TajiksUzbeksHazaras don't. Civil war is guaranteed.

wrong assumption!
most pashtuns living in afghanistan are against taliban

i agree that there will be probably a civil war but because of the ethnic issues which are instrumentalised by others

[ComradePashtun]

Making statements about the size Afghanistani ethnic groups is pretty much reading tea leaves.

The "independent" election commission works in Ghani's interest. The proof for this are the audio tapes released not long ago. I think it's funny you deny that massive fraud took place.

It doesn't matter who wins, anyway. All Pashtuns want the Taliban and reject the democratic system, TajiksUzbeksHazaras don't. Civil war is guaranteed.

Al-Tajikistan

When up to something malevolent two things attribute to the special and characteristic peculiarity of a Tajikistani: being hypocritical and persistent liar. No matter how you try it the issue of Pashtun vs non-Pashtun (in your words TajikUzbekHazara against Pashtuns) is a dead horse and the election has proved it. This divide in my opinion has never existed which I would be willing to debate with you at length if you wish, even if it did in some form then this election has proved that the idea is not holding together and is defeated for ever and the threat of a civil war could not be the remotest than it is now.

To the opposite has happened. Those who tried to muster the anti-Pashtun panache under whatever guise throughout the recent history of Afghanistan be it the Shura e Nezar and fascists like Saikals, the likes of Mujiburrahman Rahimi Abdullah x 2's current spokesman, even Abdullah x 2 himself at different points, you and the likes of you we see in this forum with the aim to advance Tajik chauvinism at the expense of others have now been decisively been dealt a defeating blow.

Ghani fairly and squarely won. Since Pashtuns are about half of the entire population lets say even if the turn out was that of half of that in the Tajik regions Ghani would still win because 90% of Uzbeks and a sizeable number of Hazaras and Tajiks also voted for him which would tip him easily above the 50% threshold. Easy peasy, Mr. Tajikstani. For the first time ethnic minority like the Uzbeks and Hazaras have been provided with an opportunity to play key role at the national level, something which Abdullah x 2 failed to do. What else could they ask for? What is in the offing contrary to civil war is bad days for you and your ilk and you will be outcast from the national fold. Reformist individuals like Ahmad Zia Massoud who is a Tajik would reject you and your pleas. Good luck.

[ComradePashtun]

Al-Tajkistani, I know the pain in your koon. ;-) Excuse the language.

[Loy Afghanistan]

Al-Tajikistan

When up to something malevolent two things attribute to the special and characteristic peculiarity of a Tajikistani: being hypocritical and persistent liar. No matter how you try it the issue of Pashtun vs non-Pashtun (in your words TajikUzbekHazara against Pashtuns) is a dead horse and the election has proved it. This divide in my opinion has never existed which I would be willing to debate with you at length if you wish, even if it did in some form then this election has proved that the idea is not holding together and is defeated for ever and the threat of a civil war could not be the remotest than it is now.

To the opposite has happened. Those who tried to muster the anti-Pashtun panache under whatever guise throughout the recent history of Afghanistan be it the Shura e Nezar and fascists like Saikals, the likes of Mujiburrahman Rahimi Abdullah x 2's current spokesman, even Abdullah x 2 himself at different points, you and the likes of you we see in this forum with the aim to advance Tajik chauvinism at the expense of others have now been decisively been dealt a defeating blow.

Ghani fairly and squarely won. Since Pashtuns are about half of the entire population lets say even if the turn out was that of half of that in the Tajik regions Ghani would still win because 90% of Uzbeks and a sizeable number of Hazaras and Tajiks also voted for him which would tip him easily above the 50% threshold. Easy peasy, Mr. Tajikstani. For the first time ethnic minority like the Uzbeks and Hazaras have been provided with an opportunity to play key role at the national level, something which Abdullah x 2 failed to do. What else could they ask for? What is in the offing contrary to civil war is bad days for you and your ilk and you will be outcast from the national fold. Reformist individuals like Ahmad Zia Massoud who is a Tajik would reject you and your pleas. Good luck.

And wroora, you know I piss on arabdullah x2 frog eyed warlord. But Ghani won the "election" Because USA/NATO SAYS SO!! That is the harsh truth!!

[ComradePashtun]

Afghanistan: the myth of the ethnic divide

For unknown reasons, many analysts perpetually paint Afghanistan as a fragile space – a china shop of sorts. Just a little military or political aggravation in Afghanistan is enough for them to predict a very possible division of the state. It is further unfortunate that producers and buyers of this nightmare ‘situation’ are found in the two countries where Afghanistan is most frequently debated – Pakistan and the United States.

Surprisingly, within Afghanistan hardly any analyst is of the view that any such probability – of a division – exists. In Pakistan and the west, though, this is a common and earnest debate. Such is the case with the present controversy over the Afghan presidential elections. The western media has been looking into the possible division of the state along ethnic lines, while the Pakistani media has also been following their lead.

The reason for that is evident: Pakistani analysts also look at Afghanistan through a specific lens. There are other reasons as well, including our policymakers following years-old policy guidelines, and refraining from an independent individual approach based on personal observation and analysis. The fact is that as far as the ethnic and linguistic divide in Afghanistan is concerned, there is very little or almost no such threat, especially if we compare it with the other states in the region.

Now through the diplomatic intervention of US Secretary of State John Kerry, both presidential candidates are agreed on the method of verification of polled votes in the second phase of the elections. Even had they not agreed and this controversy had resulted in a political standstill, by no means would it have taken the shape of a linguistic or ethnic divide. Some elements would have indeed tried to fan the flames of controversy, leading it towards an ethnic division of Afghanistan. But for all practical purposes that is impossible due to certain political realities.

The western and Pakistani media are presenting the latest situation as a clash of various ethnicities. They seem to think that since Ashraf Ghani is Pakhtun and Abdullah Abdullah is Panjsheri these two represent the classic divide between Pakhtuns and non-Pakhtuns in Afghanistan. The fact is that although Abdullah Abdullah belongs to Panjsher his father was a Pakhtun and he himself speaks Pashto very fluently. In his panel the first vice president is Engineer Ahmad Khan, Pakhtun by ethnicity and a former affiliate of engineer Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. This Pakhtun also has the same reservations over election results as Abdullah Abdullah.

In the first round of elections Zalmai Rassoul was considered to be Hamid Karzai’s nominee, but in this second phase he is with Abdullah Abdullah and protesting the rigging. Gul Agha Sherzai, presidential candidate in the first phase of the elections and from Kandahar – Pakhtun stronghold – will fully support Abdullah Abdullah in case of a popular agitation against Ghani’s victory. Likewise, Ustad Mohaqiq ethnically a Hazara is in the panel of Abdullah Abdullah as vice president. Thus all ethnicities including Turkmen, Uzbek and a number of Pakhtun leaders are supporting Abdullah Abdullah.

The opposing camp is also as ethnically diverse. The established leader of Tajiks and Panjsheris, Ahmad Zia Masood – Ahmad Shah Masood’s brother – is candidate for first vice president in Ghani’s panel. Abdul Rasheed Dostam, the most influential leader of the Uzbeks, is candidate for vice president. Qutbuddin Hilal, who represented Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s Hizb-e-Islami in the first phase of the elections, is now in favour of Ashraf Ghani. He is also supported by a number of Hazara leaders.

In this scenario – where a Pakhtun candidate (Ghani) is being supported by a Tajik (Ahmad Zia Masood) and an Uzbek (Abdul Rasheed Dostam) while Abdullah Abdullah is being supported by Panjsheris, Pakhtun engineer Ahmad Khan, another Pakhtun Mirwais Yasini (deputy speaker of the lower house), another Pakhtun Gul Agha Sherzai, and yet another Pakhtun Ustad Sayyaf – there seem to be no apparent reasons for this to end in an ethnic divide.

In Pakistan analysts and commentators also confuse the actual position of Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani by looking at them as leaders of political parties – the way it is done in Pakistan. The political culture of Pakistan cannot be applied to Afghanistan. Here in Pakistan political parties are dominated by central personalities. Nawaz Sharif’s opinion prevails over others in the PML-N and the wishes of Zardari are respected in the PPP. Some random thought by Imran Khan becomes party policy for the PTI.

But this is not the way it is in Afghanistan. There are no strong and representative political parties that can aggregate opinions, nor any central established figures who can dictate policies. Ashraf and Abdullah both yield their power from alliances that have different leaders belonging to different ethnicities. If Ashraf goes the ethnic way there is no chance for him to enjoy support from Ahmad Zia Masood or Rasheed Dostam. Likewise if Abdullah tilts towards the Tajiks, he will lose the active support of Ahmad Khan, Gul Agha Sherzai, and Mirwais Yasini and others.

Our analysts in fact ignore the reality that the Afghans are very divided over leadership and manifestoes but they have no differences over the issue of territorial integrity and Afghan nationalism. Perhaps the Afghans are the most sensitive nation when it comes to respecting the flag and the state. (Poetry and music in Afghanistan have largely nationalistic themes).

Besides, the geographic setting of different ethnicities in Afghanistan is also a guarantee for its territorial integrity. Herat is situated in the southern belt of Afghanistan and is at the border with the Iran – but has a Tajik majority. On the other hand, on the far northern side, right at the border with Tajikistan is situated Kunduz, which is a Pakhtun majority area. The largest political party of the Pakhtuns, the Hizb-e-Islami, and its leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar come from this area. The province of Daykundi is situated in south-east Afghanistan, right in the middle of Pakhtun majority areas, yet the province is inhibited by Dari-speaking Afghans.

So geographically Afghanistan’s different ethnicities are not living in separate blocks or units, rather they are largely mixed and spread in different locations. The capital Kabul is truly metropolitan in nature and is flanked on three sides by Pakhtun areas and on one side by Tajik dominated area.

Taking all these facts one can only be surprised over the baseless and illogical theories expounded by ‘experts’ over the imminent division of Afghanistan.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-263352-Afghanistan-the-myth-of-the-ethnic-divide

[ComradePashtun]

And wroora, you know I piss on arabdullah x2 frog eyed warlord. But Ghani won the "election" Because USA/NATO SAYS SO!! That is the harsh truth!!

I don't know wrora do you? lol The idea of Abdullah winning and ruling Afghanistan is a joke.

[ComradePashtun]

Interesting commentary by a Pakistani "... The fact is that as far as the ethnic and linguistic divide in Afghanistan is concerned, there is very little or almost no such threat, especially if we compare it with the other states in the region."

[pashtanajan]

lol, this cow dung again. Ethnicity is just a card politicians like to play to gain more power and control over the region.

Furthermore, the vast majority of Pashtun rulers were culturally and linguistically Persian. In reality, Pashtuns were being ruled by individuals who most likely felt more Persian culturally for hundreds of years. Did these so-called Pashtun rulers help Pashtuns in anyway? No. If so, most Pashtuns would be more educated and their living standards would be better. On the other hand, Tajiks on average are usually wealthier and more educated than common Pashtuns (yet some cry about being oppressed and not having the same opportunities that are supposedly available to Pashtuns lol). It's all just hogwash. Every ethnic group in Afghanistan is full of hypocrisy. All people from Afghanistan need to wake up and realize that their leaders are just using and manipulating them. Right now, I see politicians using their ethnicity to gain support from their ethnic kins. It's ridiculous. The people of Afghanistan need to realize that they're all just cannon fodder and none of their politicians really care for them.

[pashtanajan]

Maybe you can show me a few maps that you made with Paint, to convince me that Pashtuns are a majority.

The Pashtun settlers in the north and west have been Persianized. The real Pashtuns don't accept them, and call them "Kabuli".

I'm a northern Pashtun, and I assure you that neither I nor the vast majority of my family is "Persianized". The Pashtuns in the north live in Pashtun pockets with mostly Pashtuns all around them. Many people in my village can't speak Farsi. Naturally, you seem to be forgetting about the "Pashtunized" Tajiks in the east, (laghman etc.), which shows your bias. Individuals from all ethnic groups in Afghanistan have adopted another language at one point or another, because the people in this region have been intermingling for hundreds of years (which is why Afghan Pashtuns always show some East Asian DNA, even though they hate Hazaras or Uzbeks, apparently). But the likes of you would like to just point at Pashtuns for all the problems in Afghanistan, as they're easy targets, and it's much easier to blame others. And naturally, you of course know everything about "real" Pashtuns (whatever that means). Do tell me how you seem to their voice?

[Tiger Khan]

Making statements about the size Afghanistani ethnic groups is pretty much reading tea leaves.

The "independent" election commission works in Ghani's interest. The proof for this are the audio tapes released not long ago. I think it's funny you deny that massive fraud took place.

It doesn't matter who wins, anyway. All Pashtuns want the Taliban and reject the democratic system, TajiksUzbeksHazaras don't. Civil war is guaranteed.

again you are assuming too much... how old are !!!

[Loy Afghanistan]

I don't know wrora do you? lol The idea of Abdullah winning and ruling Afghanistan is a joke.

Of course wroora! Did you not see how Kerry came when the dogs was fighting?

Arabdullah and Ghani was in check after their master told them to be quite, and behave or else.

To all my true Pashtuns brothers and sisters. Akhtar de mubarak.

[Herat]

West unable to bring Afghanistan back to normal again - Politics Prof.


The elections are not over yet, as they are still contested, but the thing is that regardless of what the outcome of the elections is going to be, Afghanistan is heading towards a civil war, or rather has already entered the stage, says Abdulkader Sinno, Associate Professor of Political Science and Middle Eastern Studies at Indiana University in his interview with radio VR.



"If Abdullah Abdullah wins the election, the Pashtun are probably going to increase the support of the Taliban because they never did accept a non-Pashtun ruler of Afghanistan in the past and it is unlikely that they will accept one now."
And if Ashraf Ghani takes the lead, then "the minorities are already rearming and getting ready for civil war". The expert cites the fact that they have no stake in the state and apparently would want to separate or enter civil war to control their own areas.
However, the other of VR’s experts on the subject, David Gibbs, Professor of History and Government at the University of Arizona, is sure that whatever the outcome of the election, Afghanistan stands all the chances of repeating Iraq’s fate in that it has also demonstrated "peroculism and poor leadership":
"Afghanistan has a tradition of ethnic and religious separation and differences and being able to manage these multicultures together would require extremely delicate political maneuvering, which in all probability won’t be shown by whichever government wins in the election."
There’s no good answer, or good solution either to the current Afghan instability, Mr. Gibbs goes on to say. He notes that geographically it’s a very difficult country to govern, while historically the central government hasn’t had much power even before the wars began. And no less significant is the fact that the thirty plus years of warfare have set up a tradition of warlordism.
"That’s going to make it a bit of a question whether the country is governable at all."
Both experts agree the Taliban have always been an utterly repugnant force and they remain so. The Afghans haven’t, though, showcased any affection for the US troops in the area either, adds Mr. Gibbs.
The US has reasons to leave Afghanistan, other than feeling its inability to do something in the area, he makes a point. For the US it’s an important assumption that it’s a big power and it doesn’t want to be in a position of losing war, like it lost the war in Vietnam, Mr. Gibbs says. "And the idea is to withdraw from Afghanistan." But making believe they are not defeated, turning over the Afghans. "If the Afghans are defeated, it’s their defeat." Importantly enough, the 30-year war in Afghanistan is the longest in the US history, which, for one thing, has left the public exhausted, and, for another one, cost the United States a pretty lot of money. So, the US has had to wake up to reality and take the decision to leave the area. "The US can’t continue," Mr. Gibbs says.

Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/2014_07_05/...al-again-1510/


A somewhat outdated article but Prof David Gibbs seems to understand the country well; the only difference the "unity" government will make is a prolonging of the inevitable a la Iraq post withdrawal.

[Herat]

Comrade,
Im afraid the political games of politicians and the ethnic interests of entire populations are two very different things, the exact same structure of argumentation could have been used (and Im sure somewhere out there analysts were doing so) to argue against civil war along sectarian and ethnic lines in Iraq (take a look at the ethnicity and religious sect memberships of Malikis deputy list) -that did not prevent human nature (conflict of group interests and its consequences) from taking its inexorable form when it did. Nor does the unfortunate existence of anomalous minorities scattered throughout the country change the historical and statistical fact that the south is predominantly Pashtun and the north, overwhelmingly non-Pashtun.


Pashtanajan,
Excellent, that will make population exchanges, a surprisingly not so uncommon phenomena throughout history, a fantastic and feasible solution to our ethnic problem then: in fact, during the Balkan wars (the folk of that region too had "intermingled" for hundreds of years, tough Im not sure if that term is apt for that piece of cow-crap Abdul Rahman Khans colonization of non-Pashtun lands), the league of nations intervened with population exchange in an attempt to alleviate the ethnic conflict. Let us hope that the west at least does this one actually helpful thing and that will be to intervene in the inevitable upcoming ethnic civil war to ensure a peaceful partition -which could very well include a population exchange of the Norths Pashtuns with the non-Pashtuns of the South.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_transfer

[pashtanajan]

Lol, I don't come often on these forums because most of the users here are internet warriors. My family did not go to Kunduz due to Abdul Rahman Khan's forced migrations. They were there for hundreds of years and bought their land with hard work, and are well-respected & have good relations with all the ethnic groups in their area. They have inter-married and many members in my family know several languages, but they speak Pashto at home (and you seem to have been offended at that, hence your sarcastic comment on population transfers). Nevertheless, ethno-fascists like you wouldn't believe that, as according to you Pashtuns did not exist at all in those regions until Abdul Rahman Khan's decision to move all of them to the north. Kunduz is my home, and the people there, whether Tajik, Pashtun or Uzbek, are my neighbours and close friends. It's unfortunate that you and other members here (whether Tajik or Pashtun) can't see that every region in Afghanistan has people of various ethnic groups living alongside each other for hundreds of years, and forced population transfers are impossible in a country like Afghanistan where people of various ethnic groups live in all areas. I'm not sure if my Tajik friends from Laghman will so willingly give up the lands their ancestors have bought and built upon, and neither am I so sure that my family will do so as well. You're mistaken if you believe allegiances in Afghanistan are along ethnic lines; allegiances have always been flighty and fickle in the region. Thus, you'll essentially be making smaller pockets of Afghanistan if you were to separate it into several pieces. Anyway, khuda negahdar, Herat. I understand that what you believe seems to be—in your opinion—the best solution in Afghanistan. However, you seem to have forgotten history. Do you remember the Pan-Slavic movement of the 19th century? The notion that every successful state must be built on shared ethnicity is becoming archaic.

P.S— By the way, enforced population transfers are a human rights violation in the year 2014.