A practical and realistic roadmap for Pashun unification

[Nokia_Apridy]

DA BA HAR WAKHT MUNG LA PA STARGU DASEY LASUNA KHAHUDAL SHI ?...

TAR KAMA PURAY .........BAS KA KHUDAY ta UMANAY ...

[Wrayun]

I didn’t criticize nationalism or secularism on their own, but secular atheist Pukhtoon nationalists. I made that clear in those threads. AND I didn't want Pukhtoon nationalism to be associated with irreligious atheism. Bad juju. Look @ history, refrain from repeating past mistakes.

Nationalism is crucial in uniting Pukhtoons, but not secularism. You can be a Muslim Pukhtoon nationalist, and implement many of the orthodox laws that Pukhtoons derive from their culture or religion in a Pukhtoon centric nation. To be a Pukhtoon nationalist, it is important to represent the sentiments of the majority, and respect their aspirations. I don’t see how majority of the Pukhtoons will oppose to that on both sides. If anything, I see religion playing a major uniting force, while secular ideals have always been rejected. In this point and time, secular state is out of the question. If you think Pukhtoons are going to tolerate open homosexuality, free love, apostates, smut and other “vices”, you are mistaken. Of course that’s not what secularism is about, but a secular state without such liberties can hardly be considered secular. Question, is Pukhto (Pukhtoonwali) secular?

Is nationalism possible with religion? Absolutely. Saudi Arabia is a Muslim nationalist state. While the Salafis school might condone Jihad else where in the Muslim world, there is no limitation or opposition towards the Saudi state dealing with the “great satan”. The war machinery of the “great satan” can’t move an inch without the oil that pumps out of the majority Salafi/Wahabi state. While the children and descendants of the bida following Sufis are fighting Jihaads, Salafi/Wahabi state is prospering from the OIL deals and buying multi-billion dollar worth of weaponry to protect the state. So you question why is that? NATIONALISM! Saudi nationalism to be exact. The Saudi state is much more important than the peasants of the “ummah”. The state, nor the Saudi people, could be risked. The interests of the Saudi comes before the interests of the Iraqi or Afghani. You would think that those on the “true” and “right” path would be at the forefront of the defense of the Muslims, yet they are dealing with the usurpers of fellow Muslims. I’m sure there are hundreds of FATWAS to justify all of it. Besides Osama is no scholar, he is an accountant. What does he know?

Another religious nationalist state is Pakistan. You know the story… Paki Taliban bad, Afghani Taliban good. Good to fight jihad in Afghanistan, haram to do so in Pakistan. Paki interests first = Pakistani nationalism = Hamid Gul and Zaid Hamid. Hindu killing Kashmiris, but Balochis and Pukhtoons killed by the Islam fortress is halal. Paki army zindabad while killing young Muslim Pukhtoon. Jevai Jevai Pakistan = Nationalism.

So, why not a Pukhtoon centric, religious Pukhtoon nationalist state…. Isn’t that what Afghanistan was before a few enlightened and illuminated royal idiots destroyed it? What is possible now and today…what is practical..that is the question. I mean be serious, no tirades or personal wet dreams. Take reality into consideration and push those things forward that are possible. Not Utopian concepts. Things that produce results, not things that will dig Pukhtoon nationalism grave.

At this point and stage, in the current situation, you can hardly separate Pukhtoon nationalism from religiously motivated insurgency. The religiously inclined are feeding on the Pukhtoon nationalism. That has always been the case. Any Pukhtoon nationalist denies this is a lair and a fool. Are Pukhtoons better Muslims than Punjaabis, Sindhis, Muhajirs, Taajiks, Uzbeks, and others? NO! So why is the war in Pukhtoon centric areas...?

[Baygham]

I didn’t criticize nationalism or secularism on their own, but secular atheist Pukhtoon nationalists. I made that clear in those threads. AND I didn't want Pukhtoon nationalism to be associated with irreligious atheism. Bad juju. Look @ history, refrain from repeating past mistakes.

Nationalism is crucial in uniting Pukhtoons, but not secularism. You can be a Muslim Pukhtoon nationalist, and implement many of the orthodox laws that Pukhtoons derive from their culture or religion in a Pukhtoon centric nation. To be a Pukhtoon nationalist, it is important to represent the sentiments of the majority, and respect their aspirations. I don’t see how majority of the Pukhtoons will oppose to that on both sides. If anything, I see religion playing a major uniting force, while secular ideals have always been rejected. In this point and time, secular state is out of the question. If you think Pukhtoons are going to tolerate open homosexuality, free love, apostates, smut and other “vices”, you are mistaken. Of course that’s not what secularism is about, but a secular state without such liberties can hardly be considered secular. Question, is Pukhto (Pukhtoonwali) secular?

Is nationalism possible with religion? Absolutely. Saudi Arabia is a Muslim nationalist state. While the Salafis school might condone Jihad else where in the Muslim world, there is no limitation or opposition towards the Saudi state dealing with the “great satan”. The war machinery of the “great satan” can’t move an inch without the oil that pumps out of the majority Salafi/Wahabi state. While the children and descendants of the bida following Sufis are fighting Jihaads, Salafi/Wahabi state is prospering from the OIL deals and buying multi-billion dollar worth of weaponry to protect the state. So you question why is that? NATIONALISM! Saudi nationalism to be exact. The Saudi state is much more important than the peasants of the “ummah”. The state, nor the Saudi people, could be risked. The interests of the Saudi comes before the interests of the Iraqi or Afghani. You would think that those on the “true” and “right” path would be at the forefront of the defense of the Muslims, yet they are dealing with the usurpers of fellow Muslims. I’m sure there are hundreds of FATWAS to justify all of it. Besides Osama is no scholar, he is an accountant. What does he know?

Another religious nationalist state is Pakistan. You know the story… Paki Taliban bad, Afghani Taliban good. Good to fight jihad in Afghanistan, haram to do so in Pakistan. Paki interests first = Pakistani nationalism = Hamid Gul and Zaid Hamid. Hindu killing Kashmiris, but Balochis and Pukhtoons killed by the Islam fortress is halal. Paki army zindabad while killing young Muslim Pukhtoon. Jevai Jevai Pakistan = Nationalism.

So, why not a Pukhtoon centric, religious Pukhtoon nationalist state…. Isn’t that what Afghanistan was before a few enlightened and illuminated royal idiots destroyed it? What is possible now and today…what is practical..that is the question. I mean be serious, no tirades or personal wet dreams. Take reality into consideration and push those things forward that are possible. Not Utopian concepts. Things that produce results, not things that will dig Pukhtoon nationalism grave.

At this point and stage, in the current situation, you can hardly separate Pukhtoon nationalism from religiously motivated insurgency. The religiously inclined are feeding on the Pukhtoon nationalism. That has always been the case. Any Pukhtoon nationalist denies this is a lair and a fool. Are Pukhtoons better Muslims than Punjaabis, Sindhis, Muhajirs, Taajiks, Uzbeks, and others? NO! So why is the war in Pukhtoon centric areas...?

Was it Kennedy who said, "We will go to the moon and do other things, NOT because they are easy but because they are HARD".

The notion that we should backtrack a thousand years because it is easy, or go to religion for the drunkards and *******s in the 1970's afghanistan who messed it up big time are the only representitives of alternate thought is ludicrous. Or even that my village illitrate brother does not understand modernity so we should go to a cave with him is equally bogus.

Lets assume for a second that we assume that it is in our best interest to achieve a nationalist pashtun state based on religion. Lets run the scenario so we understand what is being asked of us.

First and foremost, which religion. The salafi religion of saudia, the shia religion of Iran, the deobandi/ahli hadith of the pakistan ISI sponsored punjab, the ahli sunnah/ grave worshiper type or a yet mythical incarnation of a new world ISLAM, yet invented. Which one will it be. Or should we do what the muslims have done through out history, let the battle field decide which version to be adopted by which sultanate. So as the 23 years of mayhem from 1987 were not enough we are now to kill all others, and get the hegemony of one 'Islam' firqa and after all the killing adopt that as our working charter for a governement.
Then what, who will be the head of state. The head mullah, incharge of scripture or the one with the most killing in his name, or a saudi system of monarchy with a corrupt royal family and a mullah base, and which royal family, a yousafzai, popalzai, ghilzai, durrinay, shinwari, afridi, how are we going to pick a royal ameerulmomineen.

The only way tried and tested is to leave religion at home and form a goverment that allows all religions to survive in private space and disallows killing so we may prosper and modernize. Those not willing to come out of a cave, should stay in a cave.

[Wrayun]

Bayghum,

Was it Kennedy who said, "We will go to the moon and do other things, NOT because they are easy but because they are HARD".

Kennedy had the consensus of the whole of the American nation, it's not the case when it comes to secularism with Pukhtoons. Nor could the trip to the moon be used by external forces to exploit the American nation. Secularism can and will be. The cycle repeats.

And no one said it's easy, unity amongst Pukhtoons is not easy. It's about what is possible and practical, now and today.

The notion that we should backtrack a thousand years because it is easy, or go to religion for the drunkards and *******s in the 1970's afghanistan who messed it up big time are the only representitives of alternate thought is ludicrous. Or even that my village illitrate brother does not understand modernity so we should go to a cave with him is equally bogus.

Assumptions on your part equating religiosity to cave dwelling. I'd say, that's very arrogant.

Lets assume for a second that we assume that it is in our best interest to achieve a nationalist pashtun stage based on religion. Lets run the scenario so we understand what is being asked of us.

First and foremost, which religion. The salafi religion of saudia, the shia religion of Iran, the deobandi/ahli hadith of the pakistan ISI sponsored punjab, the ahli sunnah/ grave worshiper type or a yet mythical incarnation of a new world ISLAM, yet invented. Which one will it be. Or should we do what the muslims have done through out history, let the battle field decide which version to be adopted by which sultanate. So as the 23 years of mayhem from 1987 were not enough we are now to kill all others, and get the hegemony of one 'Islam' firqa and after all the killing adopt that as our working charter for a governement.
Then what, who will be the head of state. The head mullah, incharge of scripture or the one with the most killing in his name, or a saudi system of monarchy with a corrupt royal family and a mullah base, and which royal family, a yousafzai, popalzai, ghilzai, durrinay, shinwari, afridi, how are we going to pick a royal ameerulmomineen.

That's all one religion = Islam.

You mean sects? That's not difficult, the majority will rules the others like Saudi for example, and Iran for example. The rest will have to follow. In this case Pukhtoons are not Wahabis/Salafis or Shia or Qaidainis. The are Sunnis from the Hanafi madhab. They are not entirely Sufi either. The present day religious sects war is blown out of proportion and is only possible because they are funded by states like Pakistan to further it's interests.

As for which royal family or tribe, which ever gets there first. Simple.

The only way tried and tested is to leave religion at home and form a goverment that allows all religions to survive in private space and disallows killing so we may prosper and modernize. Those not willing to come out of a cave, should stay in a cave.

This is a serious discussion, I suggest we keep our sentimentalities in our mental caves, and discuss practical solutions not the usual tirades....for once, please.

[Toramana]

Hay Wrayun, this topic is far from being concluded...I will return to it in a couple of days...We have to see what are the realistic ways of achieving this national goal and whether unification is desirable in first place.

I thank you, Azmal, Jasmin, Aseer Jan, GogPashtunGo, etc. for the valuable contribution...

[Wrayun]

Hay Wrayun, this topic is far from being concluded...I will return to it in a couple of days...We have to see what are the realistic ways of achieving this national goal and whether unification is desirable in first place.

I thank you, Azmal, Jasmin, Aseer Jan, GogPashtunGo, etc. for the valuable contribution...

Well you have to hurry up, I have only 18 posts..well actually now 17 posts till the 500 mark before I call it quits.

[Baygham]

Nor could the trip to the moon be used by external forces to exploit the American nation. Secularism can and will be.

If we look closely at secular nationalist countries, we see that they are less slaves of outsiders than religious countries, with one exception. If the religion is uniquely yours. I have no problem with religion if it is a unique pashtoon religion (a unique sect of Islam), in that case we will have a democratic pashtoon state with our own religion. But if we choose a sect whose headquater is in another country under them than we are just subscribing to be slaves. Secularism does not have a headquater in USA, we can have our own version mixed with our pashtoon sect of islam. But it cannot mix with saudi or paki islam. That is giving your power to outsiders.

With that notion saudia is workable for they have their own sect, so does iran and Turkey. But that is not the case in Sudan, Yemen, Pakhtunkhwa, afghanistan. We need to evolve a unique pashtoon Islam different from outsiders so they stop manipulating in us, or separate religion from public discourse not to give power to USA but to limit the influence of those that can hold religion over our heads. If an arab idiot is going to pass a verdict in Eygpt and it will create law and order situation in jalaabad, than that is a problem. No Iranian mullah can create a law and order problem in Saudia (except in the minority shia regions which the government can control as the majority is immune). This is not the case with Us in our present state of belief.

I personally belive that it is much easier for pashtoons to keep their present sects and form a unity government without a dominent sect (taking that out of the equation = secularism) than for them to develop a new pashtoon sect without outside controls and have it given such authority to form a government, there is no mechanism for that to happen without a secular platform first (like in Turkey).

As for which royal family or tribe, which ever gets there first. Simple.

the last such race to kabul in the 90's was not pretty, that is an open invitation for more bloodshed.

[ComradePashtun]

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

[Michin Khel]

^A very good article by manzoor ijaz

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

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

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.

[ComradePashtun]

Levaney Zalmaya,

Thanks for the post but you do paint grim and disheartening picture wrora. Thats is on a serious note. On the funny side, 5 decades kshe ba 99% Pashtana aloo goosht chicken masala see. Wallah eating too mcuh curry and massala has already even had affect on their appearance. You know the saying that goes "you are what you eat". Khudai khair kee.

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

lol Comrade, I wish it were not so but that's what I have experienced. If things were in my hands, we'd have our Loy Afghanistan faster than you can say two-nation theory. People like myself, toramana, BLS, Nokia_Apridi, etc represent hardly 5-10% of Pashtuns here.

[ComradePashtun]

Bro, seriously we humans are capable of turning the unthinkable arround. Majority is always the ignorant herd. I know your type, Bls's, Khyaal lala, tor-khan, Toramana and for myself to speak of it keeps my many hopes and inspirations alife. We need a common vision that we should pledge loyalty to. Nokia is a different catagory, and there is somehting that troubles me about toramana, something he knows is deliberate.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

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.

[tor_khan]

^BLS Jaana. One of us, (just one of us?) needs perhaps to step forwards into the big ugly world of politics. The masses need to be led. Isn't the absence of a dynamic leadership also a core issue in our divisions.