The Prospects of Pakhtun Nationalism in Afghanistan's Politics

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Reunification under a "Pashtun" state is very illogical and not healthy. Just as it is illogical and unhealthy to have one Islamic state.

What is the logical state, a one world human based state?

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

What do you mean, dear brother? Care to elaborate?

[BLS_1919v2.0]

What do you mean, dear brother? Care to elaborate?

Well if it is illogical to have a state based on one's nation, or religion...then it would be logical to ask if a state based on humanity is rational? Or no state for that matter/

[Zarawar]

Fighting for rights has nothing to do with nationalism, if Pakistan/West is holding our Afghan territory (Pashtunkhwa). That doesn't mean we start hating everyone but Pashtuns, I can assure you we can solve this without involving nationalism and ethnocentrism. The nationalism suggestion is more like a western preference. I don't understand what is up with people and this nationalism? why cant we clearly fight for our rights and not even go into nationalism? I don't think one has to be a nationalist or ethnocentric to earn his rights or win his land. We need to get this nationalism mentality out of our brains, it's not going to take us anywhere. The more nationalist we are and the more defensive we are going to approach other races and ethnic groups that live side by side with us. Why cant we be patriotic Afghan Muslims? why do we have to be nationalists to ask for our rights? That's suicidal...

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Well if it is illogical to have a state based on one's nation, or religion...then it would be logical to ask if a state based on humanity is rational? Or no state for that matter/

Well, no. We are born in tribes and sub-tribes. In other words, different races. Our race is not carved up geographically. Hence, borders and such are a later phenomenon not part of the natural design of nature. As such, with progress in human evolution of the mind and a development of a civilized thinking, borders were later sketched to keep people organized under a system in order to keep social order.

Borders were never carved with race in mind. When tension arose due to suppression that is when race was used to get freedom. Therefore, as it stands in today's modern world, to be fighting for a Pashtun ONLY State is very stupid and backward thinking. It is only going to cause more bloodshed and it will continue to keep the Pashtun frozen in time.

The Pashtun of Afghanistan have to progress with their lives in Afghanistan, and the Pashtun of Pakistan have to progress with their lives in Pakistan. They each have to be loyal to their respective countries. If the Pashtun of one side of the border cause harm to the other side, then they might have to end up fighting each other in order to keep social order on both sides.

This is beautifully exemplified by the Quranic teaching that you should bear witness even if it means against your own father.

To think that ALL Pashtun think alike is very naive and gullible.

The same is true with the idea of a ONE Islamic State.

The diversity in society is what nature has naturally carved up. Leaders just have to be more just and things will progress in a forward direction.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Well, no. We are born in tribes and sub-tribes. In other words, different races. Our race is not carved up geographically. Hence, borders and such are a later phenomenon not part of the natural design of nature. As such, with progress in human evolution of the mind and a development of a civilized thinking, borders were later sketched to keep people organized under a system in order to keep social order.

Borders were never carved with race in mind. When tension arose due to suppression that is when race was used to get freedom. Therefore, as it stands in today's modern world, to be fighting for a Pashtun ONLY State is very stupid and backward thinking. It is only going to cause more bloodshed and it will continue to keep the Pashtun frozen in time.

The Pashtun of Afghanistan have to progress with their lives in Afghanistan, and the Pashtun of Pakistan have to progress with their lives in Pakistan. They each have to be loyal to their respective countries. If the Pashtun of one side of the border cause harm to the other side, then they might have to end up fighting each other in order to keep social order on both sides.

This is beautifully exemplified by the Quranic teaching that you should bear witness even if it means against your own father.

To think that ALL Pashtun think alike is very naive and gullible.

The same is true with the idea of a ONE Islamic State.

The diversity in society is what nature has naturally carved up. Leaders just have to be more just and things will progress in a forward direction.

You do understand that borders that make Pakistani Pashtuns/Afghans or Afghanistan Pashtuns/Afghans are arbitrary and imposed by Britain. Ok so say Pashtuns/Afghans are oppressed, so they shouldn't side and fight for one another?

No one said that they think alike...states aren't made on that assumption. I think you are confusing one to many terms and trying to justify the status quo.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

It was agreed upon!

No war was fought over it. The Afghan King readily agreed to it.

It that is the case then we should all be also fighting for the Arabs to go back to pre-1900 borders. It would only be fair.

Borders don't mean anything. It is the progress that you make within them

The West is a perfect example of diversity.

[Zarawar]

lol ^^ so if karzai contracts Kunar province off to the British controlled Pakistan, would you still consider the agreement to be valid?
Because Abdul Rahman Khan was the karzai and Shah Shoja of the times, he didn't represent us in first place. The agreement was between a puppet and a super power, and we happen to be the victims.
The agreement was not based on some kind of love relationship, but rather, the main purpose was to divide muslims (common of british, divide and rule) and then rule them. And, that ended up happening also, and you're over here telling us about agreements and what not.
It was not an agreement, it was a conspiracy...

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Fair enough!

When did the Pashtun come within their borders? Whose borders were they before that? If you want to go along these lines then we will never know who were the rightful owners of the borders in the first place.

Worry about what you have. Pashtun are frozen in 10000BC and can't even handle what they have (on either side of the border) and yet they are worried about uniting just to cause more suffering.

Who is going to be the central government if a Pashtunistan is created? I guess you will allow the rest of the ethnicities to also ask for independence, correct?

[khyaal]

Reunification under a "Pashtun" state is very illogical and not healthy. Just as it is illogical and unhealthy to have one Islamic state.

Do you know that once we were living in one state before the British occupation of our land?

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Fair enough!

When did the Pashtun come within their borders? Whose borders were they before that? If you want to go along these lines then we will never know who were the rightful owners of the borders in the first place.

Worry about what you have. Pashtun are frozen in 10000BC and can't even handle what they have (on either side of the border) and yet they are worried about uniting just to cause more suffering.

Who is going to be the central government if a Pashtunistan is created? I guess you will allow the rest of the ethnicities to also ask for independence, correct?

Meemwawmeemnoon, you trapped yourself in our logic and now are ranting. Where did you get the idea that no wars were fought over it? Shall I remind you of the first and second anglo-Afghan wars? Do you think Britain came up with the Gandamak and durand treaty as mere business transactions? Come on, please be a little fair when you make such claims.

As Zarawar wror rightfully stated, we were at a disadvantage after the second anglo-Afghan war, so it isn't as if we did Attanr after it. It came at a cost towards lar au bar.

Now Pashtunistan issue does not come at the expense of others, as Pashtunkhwa and Afghanistan are both Afghan territories. Everyone who lives under these lands have the right of citizens. Right as muslims, right as inhabitants, rights as people in the land. No one is saying we are going to impose on others. And if there was a seperate secessionist movement by the other groups, they would have done by now. Quite frankly there is none.

[khyaal]

Well, no. We are born in tribes and sub-tribes. In other words, different races. Our race is not carved up geographically. Hence, borders and such are a later phenomenon not part of the natural design of nature. As such, with progress in human evolution of the mind and a development of a civilized thinking, borders were later sketched to keep people organized under a system in order to keep social order.

Borders were never carved with race in mind. When tension arose due to suppression that is when race was used to get freedom. Therefore, as it stands in today's modern world, to be fighting for a Pashtun ONLY State is very stupid and backward thinking. It is only going to cause more bloodshed and it will continue to keep the Pashtun frozen in time.

The Pashtun of Afghanistan have to progress with their lives in Afghanistan, and the Pashtun of Pakistan have to progress with their lives in Pakistan. They each have to be loyal to their respective countries. If the Pashtun of one side of the border cause harm to the other side, then they might have to end up fighting each other in order to keep social order on both sides.

This is beautifully exemplified by the Quranic teaching that you should bear witness even if it means against your own father.

To think that ALL Pashtun think alike is very naive and gullible.

The same is true with the idea of a ONE Islamic State.

The diversity in society is what nature has naturally carved up. Leaders just have to be more just and things will progress in a forward direction.

Look MWMN wrora! These generalizations won't work, be specific and tell us what justification is there for a country which has already been divided by the majority Bengali nation due to the blatant Punjab's hegemony over the rest of nations inside Pakistan. Pakistan is just an abstraction, it is a cover name for Punjab. Your stories of human evolution can't make a case or justification for this British brainchild, the roots of which lay in the divide and rule policy of the British colonialists. British not only divided India but also gifted a large part of occupied Afghan land to their loyal Punjabi servants.

Btw, have you ever read the 1940 Pakistan Resolution?

[khyaal]

@MWMN! Do you know that before the British, Kashmir belonged to Afghanistan and it abandoned Kashmir in 1992 one year before the forced Durand line treaty? Thus Kashmir either belongs to India or Afghanistan but what Pakistan has to do with Kashmir, why it asserts its right over Kashmir? Has Kashmir ever remained a part of Pakistan or its population is Punjabi or Sindhi?

[BLS_1919v2.0]

@MWMN! Do you know that before the British, Kashmir belonged to Afghanistan and it abandoned Kashmir in 1992 one year before the forced Durand line treaty? Thus Kashmir either belongs to India or Afghanistan but what Pakistan has to do with Kashmir, why it asserts its right over Kashmir? Has Kashmir ever remained a part of Pakistan or its population is Punjabi or Sindhi?

Mung tha waee che zamung pa yaw walee haq neeshta ao bya 3 jungoona ae Hindustan saraa pa Kashmir pa zor okrrll. Ajjb khalk...kho siyasath siyasath shu dyuu pa da sindhoona faida da Kashmir kae.

[Zarawar]

Fair enough!

When did the Pashtun come within their borders? Whose borders were they before that? If you want to go along these lines then we will never know who were the rightful owners of the borders in the first place.

Is that why you have a Momin painted in Afghan flag? because you don't believe in nations and boundaries? We are not talking about tracking genes and pre-historic human migration. We are not talking about going back 100`000 years. We are talking about what our grandfathers went through juts recently. British empire was defeated in Afghanistan and to prevent further loses from Afghans, they divided them into two parts. One remained independent and waved the colors you posses in your name, until today. While the remaining half become the victims of a British-raj and Pakistan. We want to liberate our immediate brothers that doesn't want to live under a a system that was forced on them. A system created by British, a system that has always tried to disable Pashtunwali and root out the idea of Pashtuns becoming educated and independent. A system that has publicly announced their support for the drone attacks that are killing the very Pashtuns I'm talking about. A system that has always tried to enslave Afghans by tricking them in to this Ghairat and Tora, while we don't have a single factory to make a sword, let alone our own model of a modern weapon. A system that is killing Pashtuns through Pashtuns, on one had they are getting funded in billions by the west to root out the so called terror. While on the other hand they are using parts of those funds to bomb Pashtuns and then motivate the remaining to come forward as Taliban so they could be handed over or killed again. They want to intimidate Pashtuns, they want to spread fear amongst the social system. They don't even let them speak in their own language, try it yourself, go to Islamabad, Rawalpindi or one of the Pakistani cities, and try to speak Pashtu in a federal office. Then you'll know what i'm talking about..

Worry about what you have. Pashtun are frozen in 10000BC and can't even handle what they have (on either side of the border) and yet they are worried about uniting just to cause more suffering.
lol that was a childish comment. So your saying we are better off not united? And yet you preach Islam? Do you know what Islam is about? Do you know where unity stands in Islam? something is wrong here, correct me if i'm wrong, either you don't follow the unity part of Islam or you are on a special mission to disrupt the unity process.
Who is going to be the central government if a Pashtunistan is created? I guess you will allow the rest of the ethnicities to also ask for independence, correct?

lol I never proposed a Pashtunistan, I'm for the formation of a loy Afghanistan, and that's not because I'm some political freak that likes things to be done my way. Everything is clear, Afghanistan was broken into two parts, by the BRITISH/KAFFIR/WEST. Loy Afghanistan is not a myth, it's a fact, there once existed a Loy Afghanistan where the armies were made up of Pashtuns, Tajiks, Hazaras, Turkomens, Nooristanis and Balochies. It's not a "free Kurdistan" type deal, where people have less optimism in the cause, because "free Kurdistan" never existed before.
Loy Afghanistan mentality is not something a small part of Afghans or Pashtuns believe in, it's being supported on national level.
One of the reasons why Pakistan wouldn't let go off our disaster remote after the 70s is because they saw the Durrand Line expiration/deadline coming. People don't bring this up, but a big part of the wars since the 70s has a lot to do with the Durrand Line/ Pakistan vs Afghan policy. Pakistan is going to try their best to keep Afghanistan weak, crippled, and dependent on international aid. They have proved it many times, where Pakistani preachers would send letters to the puppet Afghan proxies, giving them peghor that education is for kaffirs and Afghanistan is a brave nation. Women should always remain illiterate, ignorant and helpless. While the same Mawalana's have their daughters going to western schools and some even have boyfriends.
What do you make out of this? MOMIN!
da noom ta de gora, aw da khabaro ta de gora