Pashtun Unity

[Dust]

The only thing that would call for Pashtun unity is the fact that all are Pashtun by decent. However, if that is the only entity required to call for a Pashtun unity then, by definition, we should all be happy and live happily ever after.

However, a closer look into the this unification dream shows that there is more to it than meets the eyes.

For example, we are now divided among Afghan Pashtuns and Pakistani Pashtuns. Each love their side of the border. Of course we have those who bash Pakistan, however, without question, we have those who love Pakistan. So, if we simply take this as an example, how would you propose a Pashtun unity? Obviously, many detest Pakistan. So, what does this mean, exclude those Pashtun who love Pakistan? Then would it be Pashtun unity or Afghan unity?

Moreover, we have Atheist Pashtuns who hate Muslim Pashtun and mock them, and the vice versa. Then we have Pashtun Muslims who hate each other and don't trust each other. They blame each other for being funded by either Saudi Arabia, Britain, Iran, etc. Also, we have Sikh or Hindu Pashtun who are looked down upon by some Pashtuns. The chain of dislike and distrust goes on and on. So, in these cases do we call for a Muslim Pashtun unity or an Atheist Pashtun unity, or a Sunni Pashtun unity, or a Shia Pashtun unity, or etc.?

So, what do we mean by Pashtun unity? What exactly is Pashtun unity? Are some using "Pashtun unity" as a step stoning to move forward their own political agendas at the expense of their destitute fellow Pashtun in the name of hope? If not, then how do we reconcile the natural divisions among Pashtun who are divided simply because they have been either brought up in Pakistan or are Muslim or who simply don't want a Pashtun unity?

[Darweshkhel]

nice post and a lotta questions^^

first of all theres no way we can achieve unity as a nation as long as we are divided by tribes. its a nice thing I dont say we should forget our culture and throw our identity out the window. but tribal identity has always been abused by our enemies since it was a great tool which allowed them to interfere in our politics. tahmasp quli khan aka nadir shar afshar used military power of sadozyan to drive hotakyan out kandahar. many tribes were used by royal family members striving for the throne through personal association. tribes refuse central power and reject almost every governmental regulation since they regard themselves sovereign. peoples ideology is easily controlled by foreign intelligence services etc
independent tribes occupy the main trade routes and strive often in different directions. development and political achievements are blocked by rivalry and tribal independence.
however first abolish tribal identity or at least create large confederations then we can think about unity..

[Dust]

nice post and a lotta questions^^

first of all theres no way we can achieve unity as a nation as long as we are divided by tribes. its a nice thing I dont say we should forget our culture and throw our identity out the window. but tribal identity has always been abused by our enemies since it was a great tool which allowed them to interfere in our politics. tahmasp quli khan aka nadir shar afshar used military power of sadozyan to drive hotakyan out kandahar. many tribes were used by royal family members striving for the throne through personal association. tribes refuse central power and reject almost every governmental regulation since they regard themselves sovereign. peoples ideology is easily controlled by foreign intelligence services etc
independent tribes occupy the main trade routes and strive often in different directions. development and political achievements are blocked by rivalry and tribal independence.
however first abolish tribal identity or at least create large confederations then we can think about unity..

You bring up a point, tribalism, which is even more early than any of the points I mentioned.

Let me think about this a bit more deeper and I will post my thoughts.

Right off the bat, I don't see getting rid of our tribal tendencies as a means to unifying us. There must be an ideology that can bring us together, despite being divided into tribes.

[Dust]

Pashtuns in Pakistan just need awearness.

I was a Pro Pakistani unless I learnt how Pakistani identity is contradicting my Pashtun

Identity. Tribalism is not the real issue. I dont notice it that much in Pakhtunkhwa,

People consider themselves Pashtun first , but we lack good leaders.

We are 50 million , Imagine an army of 10 million thats more than Pak army.

A solely Pashtun state is necessary. Which is secular and allow its citizens to practice

whatever they want or could be hanafi as the majority of Pashtuns are Hanafis.

To me the idealoglical Pakhtunistan is this.

This is very important. We need someone who can understand the tribal system and also understand how secularism can help the Pashtun. Don't forget we have a lot of Atheist and not all of the Muslims are united, within the Pashtun.

Our leader has to be adaptable and flexible.

[khyaal]

For example, we are now divided among Afghan Pashtuns and Pakistani Pashtuns.

For your information there is no such thing as Afghan Pashtun. Afghan and Pashtun are synonymous words. Pakistan of course is a state and not a nation and you can say that some Pashtun are living in Pakistani federation(though we all know that it was/is a forced alliance).

Each love their side of the border. Of course we have those who bash Pakistan, however, without question, we have those who love Pakistan.

We even had people who loved the British colonial masters, so nothing much strange about it. Just Recall those Khan Sahebs and Khan Bahadurs and their pets, how loyal they were to their white masters.

[Wrayun]

Dust, you deserve a thorough reply, but here are my two cents:

First, Pukhtoon unity is not possible by decent, because you can be a Pukhtoon by decent yet your political and national interests can be at odds with that of the Pukhtoon qawmi interests as a whole. There are Pukhtoons by decent that are more inclined towards Persians, Desi's, Arabs, Westerners, Capitalists, Communists etc. than Pukhtoon qawmi interests. You have Parsiban descendants of Pukhtoons and you have Pathans descendants of Pukhtoons, both who work against Pukhto/Pukhtoon interests. Decent by blood is an overrated component that is no longer effective or applicable when it comes to the interest of a nation in modern times.

We Pukhtoons are a nation...and so what are our interests?

I will divide them into two:

The first part of our interests, the preservation and promotion of our language, culture, heritage, and our history = our identity.

The second part of our interest, the enhancement and development of our people with complete independence and sovereignty.

The first part should be acceptable to everyone, and is by far the most important one I think. On the second part Pukhtoons would be divided since many don't see themselves as citizens of a Pukhtoon qawm, rather people of inherited nationalities i.e. Afghanistani and Pakistani. Though I believe if we are successful in unifying Pukhtoons from all corners on the first (something very possible), the second part will naturally follow through.

The unity of Pukhtoons should be based on these factors, which I think Pukhtoons (at least those who consider themselves Pukhtoons) from all walks of life can relate to.

[Dust]

khyaal, Here I am using the word Afghan to mean those who live in Afghanistan. A Tajik is an Afghan, even though he might not be Pashtun.

That said, you have not address my concern for what type of Pashtun unity are we calling for.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Dust political unity initially in the form of a putting forward our joint interests and eventually the reunification of the two lands. Obviously you will have naysayers people of different political ideaologies and opinions that doesn't mean unity can't happen...it is just a natural thing that every society contends with. We are not after uniformity but rather political unity.

[Dust]

Dust, you deserve a thorough reply, but here are my two cents:

First, Pukhtoon unity is not possible by decent, because you can be a Pukhtoon by decent yet your political and national interests can be at odds with that of the Pukhtoon qawmi interests as a whole. There are Pukhtoons by decent that are more inclined towards Persians, Desi's, Arabs, Westerners, Capitalists, Communists etc. than Pukhtoon qawmi interests. You have Parsiban descendants of Pukhtoons and you have Pathans descendants of Pukhtoons, both who work against Pukhto/Pukhtoon interests. Decent by blood is an overrated component that is no longer effective or applicable when it comes to the interest of a nation in modern times.

We Pukhtoons are a nation...and so what are our interests?

I will divide them into two:

The first part of our interests, the preservation and promotion of our language, culture, heritage, and our history = our identity.

The second part of our interest, the enhancement and development of our people with complete independence and sovereignty.

The first part should be acceptable to everyone, and is by far the most important one I think. On the second part Pukhtoons would be divided since many don't see themselves as citizens of a Pukhtoon qawm, rather people of inherited nationalities i.e. Afghanistani and Pakistani. Though I believe if we are successful in unifying Pukhtoons from all corners on the first (something very possible), the second part will naturally follow through.

The unity of Pukhtoons should be based on these factors, which I think Pukhtoons (at least those who consider themselves Pukhtoons) from all walks of life can relate to.

Thank you for taking the time to post a thoughtful response.

With respect to the first point: Many who are strict followers of puritanical Islam will disagree for there are there many elements which contradict the essence of Islamic teachings. This will impede a unification because they would not want to be part of an Afghanistan that has unIslamic elements to it.

On the second point: you have beautifully stated the chained of events, the cause and effect of its possibility.

So, how do we reconcile this religious aspect that has now infiltrated itself within our Pashtun Muslims due to the war with the Russians?

[Dust]

Dust political unity initially in the form of a putting forward our joint interests and eventually the reunification of the two lands. Obviously you will have naysayers people of different political ideaologies and opinions that doesn't mean unity can't happen...it is just a natural thing that every society contends with. We are not after uniformity but rather political unity.

Manana wror!

How would you address the Islamic aspect? Also, many Pashtun within Pakistan are happy where they are. What concessions should be offered to them?

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Manana wror!

How would you address the Islamic aspect? Also, many Pashtun within Pakistan are happy where they are. What concessions should be offered to them?

Uhmm a few things. First of all, I would not go as far as say many are happy..the situation in Pashtunkhwa is not what is was say 1990s, it has long reversed and gone from bad to worse. Obviously if we look back at the war in Afghanistan that did stunt unification, but then again even Pashtuns from Afghanistan moved to Pashtunkhwa as then Afghanistan was going through a terrible time. In those situations, people generally look at short term gains than long term. Pashtunkhwa has a lot of political gains from uniting, they can exercise more power in being a majority, wield more authority on their resources (which is not the case in a country where we are 15 % of the population and do not get the share granted from our resources), and of course cultural - we are part of the Pashtun nation and only through working jointly can we retain our language, culture, etc. Also economic gains from basic trade, Peshawar kabul jalalabad and for that matter Quetta and kandahar are strategically placed in regional trade. If we can harness that and gain some semblance of autonomy and stability there is a lot of money to be made. These are the material gains, and the intangible one is our own identity. Pashtunkhwa Pashtuns political subdivisions have weakened us internally and have created gaps from one Pashtun area to another (i.e. Pashtuns in malakand division are in PATA, waziristan FATA and just south in areas like Quetta and loralai or Zhob they fall under Balochsitan). This has identity implications as it can widen political gaps between us.

About religion, well you have to split Pashtun contemporary situation and the one prior to the 1970s. Pashtuns are 99.9% muslim, and even with our hindu or sikh neighbours there was no friction. Pashtuns (prior to the 70s) didn't see any contradiction in their pashtun/Afghan identity and in Islam, we see it as a joint thing. However, after the Soviet-Afghan war regional forces made it an issue of contention and some people have based certain political positions on the misunderstanding that you can't to be a well-wisher of your nation and a good muslim. This is very visible in Pakistan where nationalists, political leaders were generally called communists, agents of India, Mossad, etc. It is more politically motivated rhetoric that has been ingrained into the debate than any fundamental issues with our society. In fact if you look at the major Pashtun figures they defended their land, identity and were practicing muslims.

The best way to see through it is politically educated your own, and trying to reframe the debate. In many areas of Pashtunkhwa, due to the army operations it has made things more visible to them and they no longer black and white such issues...however there is a long way to go as right wing populists are all over many media circles in Pakistan. Again this doesn't mean that we are fundamentally two different people, we are one nation, however we have political divided. So to fix this wrong it will take a lot of time to shift the nation's focus inwards. Manana

[Wrayun]

Thank you for taking the time to post a thoughtful response.

With respect to the first point: Many who are strict followers of puritanical Islam will disagree for there are there many elements which contradict the essence of Islamic teachings. This will impede a unification because they would not want to be part of an Afghanistan that has unIslamic elements to it.

On the second point: you have beautifully stated the chained of events, the cause and effect of its possibility.

So, how do we reconcile this religious aspect that has now infiltrated itself within our Pashtun Muslims due to the war with the Russians?

I don't thing there is any meaningful contradiction between Pukhtoon values and Islam, in fact Pukhtoon values enforces Islam if anything. Considering that Taajiks, Punjaabis, and others are as much Muslims as any other however it seems that it is the Pukhtoon who have a neck for standing their ground. If it wasn't for Pukhtoon values Osama's and his buddies fate would be completely different. This doesn't mean that Pukhtoons understand Islam better than others but Pukhtoon core fundamental values correspond with Islamic principles. This also doesn't mean that Pukhtoons are "terrorist" supporters or agree with extremists geo-political ambitions, rather that Pukhtoon values were taken advantage of.

The proof is in the pudding, and by that I mean that religion in this case Islam can play a vital role in unifying Pukhtoons. If the foes can use religion against Pukhtoons to their advantage, why can't Pukhtoon pioneers? If Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan was successful in using Islam to pacify the war like Pukhtoons, why can't Islam be used to promote importance of Pukhtoon identity and unity?

It is the failure of our best and brightest (some what contradictory to call them that) who couldn't harness this power. They learned something new, something completely alien, became it's proselytizers and made it a fashion to flaunt it with no second thought towards any ramifications.

We can learn from our past mistakes and do it right.

[Wrayun]

Dust Pashtun unity can only come if Pashtuns of Pakistan refrain from being subservient to Punjab. As of now, Pashtuns are brainwashed and taught by Sir Syed Ahmad or Jinnah and they are not taught about Pir Rokhan,Ahmad Shah Baba, Benawa and many other of our great leaders. We can unify if we come together on common terms. The only thing that is stopping us from unifying is Pakistaniyat, Pakistan is a direct contradiction with the thousand year old Afghan identity of the Pashtuns of Pakistan.

Actually in Pakistan they do teach Afghan history, though even then it is used to promote Pakistanyat where Afghan history is considered part of their national history of the state. For example they have named their missiles after Afghan leaders Ghouri/Abdali/Ghaznavi etc. Their language Urdu (a mixture of Farsi/Hindi/Arabic) is credited to Afghans as well. Founding fathers like Alama Iqbal poetry is full of praises for Afghans.

You must realize that the state of Pukhtoons of Pakistan is the direct result of the Afghan state policy during the British era when Afghan amir signed the Durand line treaty into effect. So to single out Pukhtoons of Pakistan as the sole culprit here is incorrect. You have to take everything in consideration, and without any bias. If you don't then no unity is possible because hypocrisy can't be tolerated by anyone.

To call Pukhtoons of Pakistan subservient is an insult. Where in Afghanistan the majority has become subservient to a minority of Persians. The army, the statehood, the leadership, the institutions, are hijacked by a minority including the national leaders who have to speak in the language of the minority because his own mother tongue is too offending.

[khyaal]

Actually in Pakistan they do teach Afghan history, though even then it is used to promote Pakistanyat where Afghan history is considered part of their national history of the state.

This is totally false. Just paste here a scanned copy of the text where you claim that afghan history is taught in educational institutions.

For example they have named their missiles after Afghan leaders Ghouri/Abdali/Ghaznavi etc. Their language Urdu (a mixture of Farsi/Hindi/Arabic) is credited to Afghans as well. Founding fathers like Alama Iqbal poetry is full of praises for Afghans.

So you think this to be equivalent to teaching afghan history?

You must realize that the state of Pukhtoons of Pakistan is the direct result of the Afghan state policy during the British era when Afghan amir signed the Durand line treaty into effect.

So why Pakistan willfully accepted to be the successor of that imperialistic policy whereas they celeberate their own creation (which they falsely call ) day as their indpendence day? Why no independence for Pashtuns who unlike Punjab (the British servants) fought against the British colonialists? Why did Pakistan, knowing well the status and history of Durand line, choose to continue control over Afghan land which is in fact a colonial legacy?

To call Pukhtoons of Pakistan subservient is an insult. Where in Afghanistan the majority has become subservient to a minority of Persians. The army, the statehood, the leadership, the institutions, are hijacked by a minority including the national leaders who have to speak in the language of the minority because his own mother tongue is too offending.

LOL. This is a great tactic for confusing wrong with the right. What, btw, is this persian minority? They are indigenous people of the land who have suffered as much as any other group. Besides, they have been living on this land for thousands of years.

Only Punjab is the colonizer, the status you yourself have accepted to be the successor of the British and their colonized land.

[khyaal]

To call Pukhtoons of Pakistan subservient is an insult.
Where in Afghanistan the majority has become subservient to a minority of Persians. The army, the statehood, the leadership, the institutions, are hijacked by a minority including the national leaders who have to speak in the language of the minority because his own mother tongue is too offending.

Lol. The most amusing part of the text. This is like consoling an injured and crying kid with fairytales and anecdotes.