A practical and realistic roadmap for Pashun unification

[Michin Khel]

What matters is politically minded people desiring it..masses are always on the sidelines. Even in highly educated and highly developed countries in Europe and N America, policy is created by the upper echelons.

80-90% of your discussions are political, why dont you plunge into practical politics?
My aim in life is to do the service of humanity through doctery, what is yours?

[BLS_1919v2.0]

My aim is to help my people. I never asked others to take the responsibility..what I said was the limited who are politically minded should come forward. I am willing to do it, once I have my studies finished and fully step in to the practical world. Don't worry we have set organizations here as well to help Pashtuns/Afghans..it isn't all talk (but it starts with that). Comrade Pashtun is another example who is helping on ground as well. However we need to cover our bases first.

[Azmal]

Perhaps Dr. Ejaz would like to substantiate his claims, too, if he would like us to swing his way. Someone drop him an email.

Furthermore, if he thinks the language issue is dead, he has no idea what the PMAP is all about. I do agree with him that Pashtuns, particularly from Peshawar, Mardan, Charsada and other urban centers of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, now want a settlement of their issues within the framework of Pakistan. They're patriotic Pakistanis; most of them anyway. Another take would be that no one would want to join a destroyed Afghanistan as opposed to a prosperous one.

Lastly, Dr. Ejaz fails to see that Pashtuns do realize what is actually going on. The army bombs Orakzai, Bajaur and South Waziristan to oblivion whilst nurturing its own terrorists in Parachinar and North Waziristan. Pakistan does not want to end terrorism, it only aims to strengthen it. Pashtuns realize this.

As far as a practical roadmap for reunification is concerned, I would say that it's not possible for at least five decades, if not more, realistically speaking. Many Pashtuns living on the east of the Durrand in their ignorance or indifference support the Pakistani ideology. This is an undeniable fact. All the old ideological thinkers are dead.

Five decades is a long time, the internal factor must and will be in place much earlier…quite honestly I think it all depends on the external factor in reshaping the future of region...the same outside powers that were in work during creation of Pakistan as barricade against soviet advance to warm waters have much different interest. Can west afford to have a terrorist sponsoring, nuclear proliferting Pakistan when islamist terrorist has emerged as number one enemy? Also the economical and social raise of India is very real and dynamic one….while Pakistan was busy with her old British Raj policies of divide and rule… keeping people backward and in check…India on other hand for last 3 decades were able to demolish the feudal system, create a democratic and functioning political system and have raise about 300 million people out of poverty into middle class. The US-India-Japan-Australia alliances against emerging China is very real….
The Russia—NATO tango in Afghanistan…and the US-Russia reset…I do not see any place for Pakistani generals and Pakistan in future world order.

[Toramana]

Hi Azmal, I think along the same line. It is not we that would shape things but external factors...Our region is now a real battle ground for a far more intense turf war than it was back in 19th Century, when there were mainly two powers vying for hold ... Now there are many big players and several small-timers. I fear in the end either Pashtuns on one side will be beaten by the adversaries with no option left but to look to the other side or vice versa. I fear we will be caught un-prepared.

[ComradePashtun]

As long as we know what we are doing we can shape up our future, it has to get through us. We already are caught, that is the dilemma. I think we need abit of activeness than be sitting on the fence, that is what many think is the best thing which is not.

[ComradePashtun]

The next two years will set the course and clear things up, I think.

[ComradePashtun]

Our problem is the subsistence of Pashtunkhwa Pashtuns on the Pakistani state and its structure. Only a stronger Afghanistan can loosen up that grip over us. Think deeper bros.

[khyaal]

Sorry for I've not read all the posts. My question from the original poster, Toramana, of the thread is: What do you mean when you propose a road map for the unification of Pashtuns(afghans)? Do you mean the re-merger of historic Pashtun(afghan) land back into Afghanistan or you mean something else?

I think you (Toramana) should have been more explicit before putting forward such a proposal since vagueness won't serve any purpose, though off and on you put the same thing in somewhat different words.

[pir_Rokhan]

Irrespective of whether one dreams to have a separate Pakhtun state carved out of Pakistan current's territory or a unification of Pakhtunkhwa with current Afghanistan, I would like to know whether Pakhtuns as a nation in ethno-linguistic or geo-political [territorial] terms can ever maintain a separate sovereign state of their own due to the self destructive trends prevalent in their political helm of affairs wherein they are not ready to accept national interest as the basic centripetal force to keep them united or to further unite them or to prevent them from further disintegration and occupation by other nations.

It is only the force of National interest of a nation which keeps a nation strong around the nucleus of its historic watan [motherland]. In the absence of such force, it is practically impossible for any nation, from strategic or political point of view, to safeguard its physical boundaries.



The following article puts light on the same subject.
************************************************** ************************************************** **

Scientific basis of a seperate sovereign state

by Pukhtoon Khan
Monday, 11 September 2006

There are quite some nations in the world who are striving for a separate sovereign state. Let us analyse the issue on scientific grounds to know the meaning and implications of this dream.

First Condition- Sincerity to the Cause

Though, State, once formed, has for pillars (Executive, Legislature, Judiciary and Media) to stand upon but before it is formed, needs only one pre requisite to come into existence and that is "Sincerity to the Cause" .Sincerity to the cause is the sole sanction for a separate sovereign state.

Second Condition – Ideology, Ethnicity and Technology:

The known philosophy of history reveals that Nature awards a nation with the gift of a separate sovereign state if they have two or more of the following features:

1) Common Ideology (Faith, Religion, Beliefs, Philosophy etc)

2) Common Ethnology (Land, Language and Love for the nation)

With the dawn of the 21st century mankind has learnt that there is a third features which is decisive not only in the formation of state but also its survival and stability and that is- Technology.

3) Technology (Tools, ways and means)

So in order to form a state the three important features are Ideology, Ethnology and Technology

Third Condition: Correct Input

The philosophies of history which have been discovered by social scientists like Ibne Khaldoon, Arnold Toynbee, Marx etc are infact the corollaries of a higher law of Nature which governs the individual and collective behaviors of mankind. That law is the Input-Output law which states that "There is No Output without Input".

Input-Output law is the general law which governs all the three major levels of universe that is:

1- Physical level: Deals with digits and dead matter. Examples of physical sciences are physics, chemistry, mathematics etc.

2- Biological level: Deals with life and living matter. Examples of Biological sciences are zoology, botany etc.

3) Psychological level: Deals with conscious matter that is human beings and human society. Examples of psychological and social sciences are politics, sociology, psychology, economics etc.

The formation of a state is of course an Output for human efforts which constitute Input for it. As Input-Output law tells us that there is no output without input so all those nations including Pukhtoons desiring of a separate state have to know those inputs which will result in a separate sovereign state for their nation.

Implications

The implications of the pre-conditions for the establishment of a separate sovereign state are as follows:

- Sincerity to the Cause:
Sincerity to the cause implies the following:

a) Unity in Diversity:
Variety is the spice of life and hence despite of different and diverse views and opinions the nation striving for a homeland of their own should be able to work jointly to achieve the goal (called scientific pluralism in the
modern terminology).

b) Collective Mentality:
Any collective effort needs sacrifice from the individuals of a nation. Interest of the community, group or nation should be given priority over personal interests. It is at the cost of personal and individual interest that a collective goal can be achieved. So "Who"" should be replaced by "What"," I" by "We" ,"Rights" by "Duties" and "Privilege" by "Sacrifice".

- Ideology, Ethnicity and Technology:
The following points are worth mentioning:

a) Ideology - the motivating force for all human actions, should always aim at abstract and altruistic values like liberty, freedom, sovereignty, justice, equality, self-respect etc.

b) Ethnicity should be strengthened by projecting and promoting, land and language, biological and geographical features, culture and civilization and ancestry and lineage.

c) Technology should be used to expedites the process of achieving the target e.g. use of print and electronic media for mass awareness, use of telecommunication technology for informing and organizing the masses, and
intelligent use of internet and web technology to project and promote the cause for getting global support .

3) Correct Input:
Though every group or nation desires to have a separate sovereign state but before it desires it has to deserve it.This is the dictation of the input-output law.

The two important implications which constitute inputs for realizing the dream of separate sovereign state are as follows:

a) Leadership that can deliver:

No leader in history has ever delivered if his word is not backed by his work and his work does not reflect his vision. Vision is the salient feature of any leadership as vision compels leadership to first plead and then lead
the nation to the desired goal. If a leader can impress the hearts of people whenever he tries to express his mind then the nation may expect that the leader has atleast the potential to deliver because touching the hearts of the people is the first deliverable of any leader.

b) Nation that can endeavor:

Input-Output law dictates that a nation has to go through various stages of social and psychological evolution before it gets mature enough to have a state of its own. Nature always offers biological, psychological, environmental and geographical in addition to socio-politico-economic challenges to a nation in order to test and train it for achieving a higher goal. If a group or nation is ready to follow its leadership in word and spirit in order to overcome the challenges and able to tolerate the hardships which come in the way then the nation is destined to achieve its goal.

Conclusion:

Never has it happened in history that a group desiring to come into power achieved their goal without deserving it. If a group or nation is desirous of having a separate state then it has to deserve it first by fulfilling its preconditions. Deserving not even to manage a street and desiring to manage a state is a wishful thinking and such a nation end up living in a fool's paradise instead of living in a state of their own.

[Azmal]

Our problem is the subsistence of Pashtunkhwa Pashtuns on the Pakistani state and its structure. Only a stronger Afghanistan can loosen up that grip over us. Think deeper bros.

I think by stronger Afghanistan you mean a nationalist Pashton dominated one...as things looks right now...that is in no external powers interests. Punjabis has already reached to Punjshiris, they started a teacher training school in Punjshirs and have given more then 50 millions of their reconstruction aid to them. They are even building a Ali Jenah hospital, the idea is to keep the nationalist Pashton in check from both end…Taliban+NA. West on other hand promoted a warlords control Afghanistan… a decartelized weak gov that would not object to NETO bases for few decades if not more.

[Azmal]

Guys here it is where the crux of the matter lies to which many close their eyes. Can Pashtunkhwa Pashtuns and in particular (full of it) Toramana, throw some light (than overall heating things up) on this. As some already mentioned to him that the call is on you.



Pashtun nationalism —Dr Manzur Ejaz

Most of the time, secular Pashtun nationalists have highlighted their economic deprivation. But if the Pashtuns’ share in the army, the bureaucracy and the economy in Pakistan is higher than the proportion of their population, such an argument becomes a very hard sell

In response to my last column (“Competing in Afghanistan”, Daily Times, August 12), a reader raised a very interesting question: what are prospects of secular Pashtun nationalism if the present turmoil across the Durand Line subsides? Although it is very difficult to make any forecasts in such a complicated and fluid situation, it appears that there are more chances that the existing state boundaries will continue to exist for a long time to come than otherwise.

Historically, secular Pashtun nationalism was much stronger in the first two decades of Pakistan’s existence. During that period, Pashtunistan was a real issue for Pakistani rulers, and hostility between Islamabad and Kabul were quite high. Afghanistan was probably the only country that voted against Pakistan’s entry into the United Nations. Both Afghanistan and Pakistan were involved in supporting low-level subversive activities against each other.

It has been reported by multiple sources that during the Bhutto period, the first religious subversive group led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar was organised, funded and trained by the PPP government. The rise of Socialist parties in Kabul and General Zia-ul Haq in Pakistan, the Soviet invasion and the heavy US involvement changed all the parameters. The secular forces in Afghanistan, nationalist or otherwise, were cleansed by rising religious groups. Therefore, secular Pakistani Pashtun nationalists had no counterparts in Afghanistan to link up with.

Nationalistic fervour among secular Pakistani Pashtuns had started showing weakness when the Awami National Party decided to join hands with Pakistan National Alliance or Qaumi Ittihad to oust Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s government. The late Dr Feroz Ahmed published a very insightful article in his Urdu magazine, Pakistan Forum, identifying the reasons for the fading of Pashtun nationalism, symbolised by Nasim Wali Khan joining hands with conservative centralist forces.

It was in the late 70s when Dr Ahmed had argued that integration of the economy of the NWFP had caused the erosion of Pashtun nationalism, as increasing economic interest within Pakistan had taken away its material basis. Dr Ahmed’s incisive analysis was based on the early phase of emerging Pashtun economic interests in Pakistan. Since then, his observation has been verified by the further intensification of Pashtun migration to Punjab and Karachi. Besides the mammoth movement of labour, Pashtun entrepreneurs started dominating certain sectors like transportation in most big cities of Pakistan.

The rise of the Taliban and other extremist religious forces and the ensuing destruction further accelerated the migration of secular-minded Pashtuns to other cities of Pakistan or abroad. It is true that despite this demographic shift, secular political parties like the ANP and the PPP won the last elections. However, a closer look reveals that successful secular parties in the NWFP hardly have any inclination towards Pashtun nationalism beyond renaming the province. However, a small section of intelligentsia still carries the nationalistic aspirations and sees an opening for redrawing the boundaries on the basis of ethnicity.

It is argued that even the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan is an expression of Pashtun nationalism in a certain way. This time around, Afghan Pashtuns have deployed religion to keep maintain their domination in Kabul against the non-Pashtun Northern Alliance, which has made significant gains. This argument is further supported by pointing out the absence of Talibanisation in the non-Pashtuns areas of Afghanistan.

The Pakistani Pashtun Taliban have acted quite differently from their Afghan brethren. While the Afghan Taliban adopted a policy of non-intervention in Pakistan or even in Northern Afghanistan, the Pakistani Pashtun Taliban manifested their aspiration to change the state and indeed the entire ideological make-up of Pakistan. In other words, the Pakistani Pashtun Taliban have acted as a centralist rather than a separatist ideological force, notwithstanding their temporary takeover of certain tribal areas. This shows how much Pashtun nationalism has weakened over the last thirty years.

Pashtun nationalism, religious or secular, has not shown typical characteristics of separatism. For example, the suppression of mother tongue is used by nationalists all around the world to highlight their exclusivity. Even secular Pashtuns have not shown this tendency. As a matter of fact, the NWFP and Balochistan led the way in adopting Urdu as their provincial language after the 1970 elections. During the entire political career of secular politicians from the NWFP and Balochistan, the language issue has never been highlighted.

Most of the time, secular Pashtun nationalists have highlighted their economic deprivation. But if the Pashtuns’ share in the army, the bureaucracy and the economy in Pakistan is higher than the proportion of their population, such an argument becomes a very hard sell. If the common Pashtun finds it more profitable to stay within Pakistan, the secular nationalist elite will remain an ineffective marginalised force. The future of secular Pashtun nationalism will also depend on the development of the state of Pakistan.

The writer can be reached at manzurejaz@yahoo.com

Interesting read..thanks for posting.

[ComradePashtun]

Azmala,

By a stronger Afghanistan I mean a stronger Afghanistan, nationalist or no nationalist is irrelevant as far as I am concerned and I am not too sure if the branding really mean anything. Afghanistna that is a statist power with strong institution and one that explores and manages it true economic potential as a regional hub..

I wouldn't too worry about Panjabi-Panjsheri alliace; as for the West I doubt they can longer afford the status-quo. I don't agree with the assesment that they are pro centrallty weak govt. and promote warlords, althought this to some degree probably has been the case but my impression is that it is out of tactical necessity. The thing is no degree and combination of modern intervention can remake the fabric of society or change its nature. And as far as Afghanistan's current political instability goes every one witht the right knowledge will concende that to you (Pashtun decline/disarray as unstable factor in many many ways). I contrary to your assesment would argue that many you named are simply interested in a viable political solution to the conflict; in West's case they simply don't want Talibums, Haqani, Hekmatyar to dominate Afghanistan. And I don't think they will achieve anything worthy without fully having Pashtuns on board. The sooner we all do away with Mullah Omar & co, the better for all of us.