Tweet
History proves that leaders in history have repeatedly acted without clear understanding and embarked on paths without realistically appreciating where they would lead them. Aggression that fatal human tendency has repeatedly led the human race into wars and conflicts rationalized in the name of race, religion and ideology.
The Afghan-Pakistan border question is merely another vindication of the above-mentioned premise. Dispute may be a stronger word since this is not the age of disputes but reconciliation.
Borders and boundaries have always been disputed and most of the major wars in history started with a border dispute or the violation of a border. Kandahar's mastery was the main reason why Mughal India and Saffavid Persia repeatedly fought wars. Balkh was the bone of contention between Mughal India and Uzbek Central Asia.Danzig the direct cause of the Second World War. Kashmir remains the cause of Indo Pak conflict. Violation of Ansbach enclave forced Prussia to declare war on Napoleon and consequently be overrun. Violation of Belgian neutrality by forces of Imperial Germany led to British declaration of war against Germany. In short border disputes have the potential to be fatal although this may not be the case in many scenarios.
Afghan-Pakistan relations remained tense for many years because of the Durand Line. The border issue brought the two neighbours close to war on at least three occasions between 1947 and 1976.Following the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in December 1979 the Durand Line became irrelevant. The once prized ally of the Afghan state was now ironically occupying Afghanistan . Afghans, a brave race, were forced to seek refuge in Pakistan by an unfortunate twist of historical fate. Pakistan became the base of the Afghan freedom fighters, as they were known! For some time it appeared that Afghanistan and Pakistan will finally be friends and allies once the USSR withdrew from Afghanistan.
What happened after the Soviet withdrawal however once again proved Plekhanov's saying that history does not move in straight lines. Instead of Afghan-Pakistan friendship another era of double-dealing and intrigues started. In this unfortunate period from 1989 till 2001 Pakistan lost much of the goodwill and respect that it had gained in the heart of the Afghans for its solidarity and support during the Soviet Afghan War. Unfortunately for most part of the Soviet Afghan War Pakistan was ruled by a military ruler who viewed the Afghan War as a golden opportunity to gain international legitimacy and economic aid that he badly wanted after having launched a military coup against Pakistan's first civilian prime minister elected by direct adult franchise. Resultantly the Afghans, although grateful to Pakistan for its solidarity ,did not forgive the pre 1989 Pakistani political leadership, for having divided Afghanistan, if not physically then at least ethnically, as well as tribally, merely to fulfil ,the short term and myopic agenda of a military regime.
Restoration of democracy in December 1988 and elevation of M/s Benazir Bhutto did not improve the scenario since Afghan policy was out of bound for the civilian prime minister and regarded as the sole preserve of the military-intelligence complex. Clemenceau's verdict that war is too serious affair to be conducted by general was met with yet another faux pas i.e. foreign policy or at least the Afghan policy being conducted by generals. The consequences were disastrous, Afghanistan plunged into a civil war which continued with unequal intervals from 1989 till 2001.Some armchair strategists who had never set a squadron in the field saw Afghanistan as Pakistan 's strategic depth came to grief once Afghanistan as it stood in conflict with itself proved to be Pakistan's strategic liability.
The return of USA to Afghanistan has once again re-activated the Durand Line question although in a low-key manner since Pakistan is a US ally or an auxiliary in the present so called war against terror.
The Durand Line question needs to be resolved so that Pakistan and Afghanistan can work as partners in progress and development rather than neighbours in uneasy peace.
This article is an attempt to study the question in the light of history, and to suggest some possible solutions, which may act as a catalyst in resolving the Durand Line question.
Historical Background
The Afghan-Pakistan boundary question is not as simple as it is made to be by many analysts or politicians. Afghanistan emerged as a state only in 1747, while the Durand Line was agreement was signed only in 1893. 1 Afghanistan was ruled by a large number of Pashtun and non Pashtun dynasties during the period 1000-1747 . 2 During this period Afghanistan was partititioned as part of three non Afghan empires from at least 1504 till 1709-47. 3
The origins of the modern Pashtun majority state of Afghanistan can be traced to Mirwais Ghilzai who raised the banner of Pashtun independence against the Safavid Persians expelling them from Kandahar in 1709. 4 The Ghilzais were finally overpowered by a Turkish adventurer Nadir Shah but the Pashtun war of liberation had begun and Nadir Shah interlude was merely one short chapter in the history of Afghanistan. 5
Finally in 1747 in the panic following Nadir Shah's assassination one of his divisional commanders Ahmad Shah Abdali (a Saddozai Pashtun) was declared as the first king of Afghanistan. Afghanistan in its modern form was thus born out of the decline of the Mughals, Saffavids and Nadir Shah.
Ahmad Shah Abdali established a large Afghan Empire albeit for a short period. 6 His successors,unfortunately for Afghanistan , were less competent and some highly incompetent. [7]They lost most of what they had inherited by 1823. [8] The last chapter of this era of Afghan misfortunes was marked by an almost 25 year's civil war. [9]
The Afghans made many efforts to recover their Trans Khyber possessions but the Sikh army of Ranjit Singh trained by ex Napoleonic French Army officers was too strong a foe to deal with. *
In the First( 1845-46) and Second (1848-49) Sikh Wars the Sikhs 10 were defeated by the Bengal and Bombay Armies of the English East India Company and in 1849 the English East India Company became the neighbour of Afghanistan with Peshawar,Kohat and Bannu designated as districts of Bengal Presidency of the company. The English East India Company followed an aggressive policy towards its new western frontier and extended its influence either by direct occupation or political control. 1854 was the high point of this policy. 11 Kalat 12 being transformed from a subsidiary ally 13 to a vassal. 14 Meanwhile Afghanistan and the English East India Company became close allies after the First Afghan War of 1839-42 and Afghanistan's Emir renounced his territorial ambitions on Peshawar vide the Treaty of 1855. 15
The immediate reason for this agreement was threatening attitude of Qajar Persia as well as Dost Mohammad's plans to reoccupy Kandahar till then ruled by a virtually independent chief. 16
Afghan historian Reshtia who rarely minces his words observed thus "the agreement in effect, suggested the surrender by the Amir of all his claims to the lost provinces of Afghanistan, but hinted also at the loss of political independence of the country." 17A deeper glance at history however proves that the Afghan Emir was a supreme realist 18 and had perceptively studied military history. 19
In 1856 the Persians occupied Herat and the city was saved for the Afghans only by English East India Company's action of landing a force on the Persian Gulf Coast of Persia in 1857.As a result of this attack vide Treaty of Paris the Persian Shah " agreed to evacuate Afghanistan and to recognize its independence". 20
In 1857 the English East India Company's further secured Afghanistan as a reliable subsidiary ally against any attack from Russia or Iran from the North by another treaty. 21
In 1857 when the English East India Company's hold on India was badly shaken by a rebellion in the native army Dost Mohammad cooperated with the British. 22
The English East India Company's Indian territories were taken over by the British Government in 1858 and from then onwards the British Empire became Afghanistan's Eastern neighbour.
British policy towards Afghanistan generally remained constant till 1873-74.In 1873 the first major political development occurred when Afghan Emir Sher Ali formally requested British support and guarantees against rapid Russian expansion moves in Central Asia. 23 Although the Russians had already agreed to Oxus River as the boundary of Afghanistan and had agreed that they had no territorial ambitions over Afghan areas of Balkh ,Andkhui Maimana and Herat 24 the Afghans were apprehensive about Russian designs.
The British response was an aggressive new policy adopted in 1874 known as the " Forward Policy". 25 The first British action being occupation of Quetta in 1876. 26 The situation got further complicated once the Russians sent a mission led by a Russian general to Kabul. 27 The Second Afghan War which was a clear cut British victory began once Afghans refused entry of a British diplomatic mission in November 1878 and ended in 1880 with British in complete control of Afghanistan's foreign policy and a new Afghan Emir Abdul Rahman. 28
In 1892-93 disturbed by further Russian expansionist moves in Central Asia and incursions of independent Pashtun tribes into British territory the British Indian Government finally decided to mark Afghanistan's southern boundary under a commission headed by Sir Mortimer Durand. The Boundary Commission completed its work in 1893 and the Afghan Amir Abdul Rahman renounced his claim over New Chaman, Bajaur, Swat, Bunner, Dir, Chilas and Chitral. 29
The Durand Line was subsequently recognised * by successive Afghan Governments in 1905, 1919, 1921 and 1930. 30
At the time of creation of Pakistan in 1947 the British Indian Government held a referendum in NWFP with a choice for the people to join India or Pakistan.The major Pashtun party of the province Khudai Khidmatgaran demanded from the British Government that the referendum should have a third option for an independent Pashtun state known as Pashtunistan. 31 The British government did not agree to this demand and the Khudai Khidmatgars boycotted the referendum.55.5 % of the eligible voters of NWFP participated in the referendum and 55 % of the eligible voters elected to join Pakistan . 32Since the Tribal Agencies were directly under the British Viceroy separate Jirgas were held in the tribal agencies with the option of joining India or Pakistan . All Jirgas in the five tribal agencies of Malakand, Khyber, Kurram, North and South Waziristan.All voted for Pakistan .32
At this stage the last British Viceroy Lord Mountbatten made a very controversial statement about the Durand Line once he stated that that "Agreements with the tribes on the Northwest Frontier will have to be negotiated with the appropriate successor authority". 33 The Afghan stance being that the frontier tribes had separate agreements with the British and therefore functioned as independent nations. Thus the Afghan stand that Pashtun areas of Pakistan be given the option to have an independent state called Pashtunistan.It may be noted that this exercise began in 1944 when the Afghan government in a letter reminded the British Indian government that it was interested in the fate of the Pashtuns on the Indian side of the Durand Line. 34
The Afghan Government had reservations about the way Pashtun areas were included in Pakistan and opposed * Pakistan's entry into the UN.The Afghan viewpoint being that as long as the issue of an independent Pashtunistan remained unresolved Pakistan should not be allowed inclusion in the UN. 35 This action of Afghanistan has been exaggerated by various Pakistani historians without appreciating the fact that Afghanistan withdrew its objections within one month and was one of the first states to establish diplomatic relations with Pakistan in February 1948. 36 The modified Afghan stand being that it would discuss the " Pashtunistan Issue" with Pakistan through normal diplomatic channels. 37
The Khudai Khidmatgar Party also soon accepted Pakistan's creation and expressed loyalty to the new state at their provincial party meeting held on 3rd and 4th September 1947. 38The party further stated that their future political objective was no longer independence but only provincial autonomy.Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan the Khudai Khidmatgar leader stated in the first Constituent Assembly of Pakistan that he accepted Pakistan's creation and merely desired provincial autonomy within the framework of the Pakistani state, but as much provincial autonomy as was allowed to all other provinces of Pakistan.
Afghan-Pakistan relations rapidly deteriorated once a Pakistani combat aircraft in the course of attacking a hostile tribal group bombed an Afghan village located about 2,000 yards from the Durand Line. 39 This intensified tension and led to Afghan Government convening a Loya Jirgah in Kabul on 26 July 1949 which voted national support for the Pashtunistan issue and officially declared the Durand Line agreement of 1893,Anglo Afghan Pact of 1905,Treaty of Rawalpindi of 1919 and the Anglo Afghan Treaty of 1921 as null and void. 40This was a watershed in Afghan history.No Afghan government since 1949 has abandoned this standpoint.Not even the Taliban who were very close allies of Pakistan .
Afghanistan also supported a meeting of a large number of Afridi Tribesmen in Tirah to establish a Pashtunistan Assembly.A larger meeting at Razmak elected the Faqir of Ipi as the Chairman of the Provisional Assembly of Independent Pashtunistan. 41
From 1949 till 1963 relations between the two states generally remained tense.Afghanistan sought US military and economic assistance to strengthen its defence and on being refused moved closer to USSR.Just like Pakistan sought US assistance in order to militarily resolve its Kashmir dispute with India during the period 1947-64.The high point of conflict being 1955 when Pakistani abolished its West wing provinces and created a single province of West Pakistan.This move was perceived by Afghanistan as a violation of Pashtun political rights and relations between the two countries became extremely tense,bringing the two at one stage close to declaration of war with Afghanistan mobilising for war. 42 Better sense finally prevailed and both sides agreed to international mediation.The situation became complicated once the Afghan Government again convened a Loya Jirga which demanded a plebiscite in Pashtun areas of Pakistan. 43
Relations between the two states reached another flashpoint during 1960-61 when insurgency broke out in the Pakistani frontier state of Dir.Afghan Government supported Dir insurgents and a Pakistani infantry division was inducted to deal with the crisis.
Tension continued to increase leading finally to closure of Pakistani mission in Kabul on 23 August 1961.By 23 September Pakistani interests were represented in Afghanistan by the Saudi Arabian Embassy. 44
The Afghan premier Sardar Daud Khan unilaterally announced closure of Afghan Pakistan border leading to great econonomic hardship for Afghanistan. 45 Pakistan responded by declaring that it would honour international law obligations by allowing Afghan Transit Trade to continue, thus placing the burden of responsibility for the crisis on Afghan shoulders. 46 Sardar Daud Khan told a West German journalist in course of an interview that " the border will remain closed till the Pashtunistan issue is settled" ! 47
The blockade resulted in great hardships for the Afghan common man since all of Afghanistan's imports and exports were historically routed through regions comprising post 1947 Pakistan.This led to Afghan King Zahir Shah asserting his previously unexercised authority and resignation of Sardar Daud Khan from the post of premier on 9th March 1963. 48
During the period 1963-73 relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan remained peaceful and Afghanistan remained totally neutral during the Indo Pak Wars of 1965 and 1971 thus allowing Pakistan to re-deploy the vast bulk of its forces stationed opposite Afghanistan against India.This was a great gesture of Afghan goodwill towards Pakistan rarely discussed by most Pakistani analysts.
Afghan-Pakistan relations once again became complicated from 1973 once Sardar Daud Khan staged a coup and removed King Zahir Shah.This was a time once the renamed Khudai Khidmatgar National Awami Party (NAP) and its coalition partners were engaged in a highly charged with Pakistani Federal Government led by Premier Z.A Bhutto.Mr Bhutto had dismissed NAP's coalition governments in NWFP and Baluchistan provinces on allegations of conspiring against the integrity of Pakistan.The issue was more political than secessionist as alleged by Mr Bhutto.Sardar Daud Khan openly supported the NAP and the Baloch insurgents who were involved in a military conflict between Pakistani armed forces during the period 1973-76.Mr Z.A Bhutto in turn retaliated by encouraging anti Daud Islamist insurgents led by Hekmatyar,Ahmad Shah Masud and Prof. Burhanuddin Rabbani. 49
In 1976 major changes occurred once Sardar Daud Khan after having assessed aggressive Soviet designs decide to opt for a major policy change and rapprochement with Pakistan.Sardar Daud Khan visited Pakistan and made a statement " Pakistani brothers, I can assure you that we came to your country with the utmost goodwill and sincerity…..We will be able to solve our political problems and one day we will live as very close and intimate brothers". 50 This statement signified a major volte face.The Afghan leftists were alarmed and the Khalq and Parcham factions of the leftist PDPA became one party in July 1977. Daud Khan was overthrown by the leftists on 27 April 1978.The new leftist regime in Kabul initially adopted a moderate approach towards Pashtunistan and classified it as a political issue. 51 Pakistan at this stage was ruled by a military regime which had overthrown Pakistan's first democratically elected prime minister Z.A Bhutto.This regime which was facing a crisis of legitimacy adopted a hostile policy towards the new leftist regime,ostensibly to support anti leftist Afghan guerrillas , the real motivation being to solicit US aid .The leftist regime naturally reacted strongly and the Afghan Foreign Minister Hafizullah Amin in turn made strong public statements expressing solidarity with Pashtunistan issue.Refugees started pouring in Pakistan from April 1978 and their influx multiplied following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979.
There was no change in the viewpoints of Afghan or Pakistani governments about Durand Line from 1978 till to date.Pakistan seeing the Durand Line as a settled issue and Afghanistan not recognising it at all since the 1949 Loya Jirga Declaration earlier mentioned.
At one stage it was wishfully thought in Pakistan that following Soviet withdrawal and collapse of the leftist government in Afghanistan the victorious Afghan resistance who enjoyed close ties with Pakistani establishment, the Durand Line issue would be amicably settled. This did not happen and even after the fall of Kabul to the Mujahideen,no consensus emerged between Pakistan and Afghanistan about the Durand Line. The same situation continued during the Taliban regime.
After the US occupation of Afghanistan Durand Line again came in the limelight.The present Afghan regime's stand is that the Durand Line agreement was for one hundred years and expired in 1993,therefore Durand Line needs to be re-negotiated. 52
The US government formed a tripartite commission consisting of US , Afghan and Pakistani officials to coordinate the ongoing US operations on the Afghan-Pakistan border in 2002.The prime objective of setting up this commission was to coordinate joint US-Afghan-Pakistan military operations against various anti US elements operating on both sides of Pakistan-Afghanistan border.
In July 2003 there were some clashes between Afghan troops and Pakistani forces in Mohmand Agency because of misunderstanding about alignment of the border.
Analysis
A Complicated issue
The Afghan-Pakistan boundary question is not as simple as it is made to be by many analysts or politicians. Afghanistan in its present form emerged on world map as a state only in 1747,while the Durand Line was marked only in 1892.
The first problem is from where to start the discussion. From 972 when a large part of Afghanistan south of Hindukush including was ruled by a Punjabi Hindu Raja as earlier discussed or from 1700 when most of Afghanistan south of Hindu Kush subdivided as Kabul and Kandahar provinces was ruled by Mughals based at Delhi or from 1740 when Afghanistan was part of a Persian-Turk Empire led by Nadir Shah. Then there is the more in vogue method of assuming that history of Afghanistan starts from the time of elevation of Ahmad Shah Saddozai to leadership of the Afghans in 1747.This again is complicated since Punjab, Sindh, Kashmir and Baluchistan, all non Pashtun majority areas were also part of Ahmad Shah's Empire.If one assumes that Durand Line is disputable because it divided the Pashtun areas into two parts then this again is complicated since the Oxus boundary of Afghanistan divides Tajik,Uzbek and Turkmen populations.The ethnic angle also complicates the issue since the southern and northern parts of Durand Line do not divide the Pashtun population but Baloch,Chitrali and Kirgiz population who belong to different ethnic groups.
Then comes the issue whether Afghanistan is a multiethnic state or a Pashtun state.If Afghanistan claims the right to champion the cause of Pashtuns in Pakistan then Tajikistan ,Uzbekistan ,Turkmenistan and Iran can claim the same right for their respective compatriot ethnic and sectarian minorities living in Afghanistan.
A significant length of Durand Line in the north and south consists of non Pashtun racial groups like the Baloch and Chitralis.Relations between the Baloch and Pashtuns in Pakistani Balochistan have never been very cordial and the Baloch would not accept being a minority in another state.The Baloch regional parties have expressed a desire for greater autonomy within the framework of the Pakistani state while the more militant Baloch in minority want an independent Baloch state for all Baloch living in Pakistan,Afghanistan and Iran.The Chitralis on the other hand feel ethnically closer to the people of Northern Areas of Pakistan rather than the Pashtuns of NWFP , the province to which they administratively belong.
Pakistani Viewpoint
Pakistani official viewpoint is that Durand Line is a long settled issue recognised by all Afghan Governments from 1879 till 1947.That Pakistan is a successor state of British India and that Afghanistan must respect its earlier agreements concluded with British India.That the population of NWFP and Baluchistan decided by a referendum/Jirga/vote to join Pakistan in 1947.
Afghan Viewpoint
The Afghan viewpoint is that Durand Line was imposed on Afghanistan under coercion/duress and was a Diktat. The Afghan position is that Durand Line was a line demarcating zones of influence of British and Afghan governments. 53Further the Afghan stand is that Afghanistan has no territorial claims on Pakistan's Pashtun areas but feels that Pashtuns of Pakistan must be allowed to exercise the right of self determination and that the 1947 referendum/Jirga was a British colonial stage managed farce.The Afghan stand was formally declared in the 1949 Loya Jirga and has not been changed by any successive Afghan government till to date.The current Afghan Government because of its transitional nature has avoided making any controversial statement on the Durand Line.However after the parliamentary elections of April 2005 the Durand Line may again become a political issue.
Afghanistan 's ethnic minorities generally regard Durand Line as a non issue.Abdul Hafeez Mansur an important Tajik political leader has stated that Afghanistan should recognise the Durand Line and ask in return for sovereign guarantees from Pakistan regarding confirmed use of maritime facilities for Afghanistan .54
In a nutshell the general Afghan line is that Durand Line is a controversial issue and for the time being Afghanistan and Pakistan need to concentrate on " Confidence Building Measures" .That Afghans need to set their own house in order,with internal cohesion and economic stability being first priorities rather than the Durand Line.
Crux of the matter
The essence of the whole issue is that states are created or boundaries changed not simply by national determination , elections,referendums or plebiscites but by global grand geopolitical agendas of great powers.Thus the creation of Pakistan and India as two separate states was a direct result of British colonial policies of " Divide et Impera" deliberately adopted after the Great Sepoy Rebellion of 1857.Initially the British wanted India to be one state with Muslims and Hindus in constant communal strife,however later they modified this design once the Hindu dominated Indian National Congress opposed the British war effort in 1939.The British response was to accept the Muslim demand for a separate state.The British viewed India and Pakistan as subsidiary allies in the Cold War against USSR and did not want the fragmentation of the Indo Pak Sub continent into smaller ethnic states which would be to USSR's strategic advantage.In 1971 Bangladesh was created only because both USA and USSR agreed that the arrangement suited both camps.Vietnam,Korea and Germany was divided not by any plebiscite but because the great powers wanted it.Durand Line was created by British Imperial power and was designed for a specific strategic purpose.Historically great powers or superpowers or whatever one may call them have employed the ethnic card only when it suited their global strategic designs.Thus Wilsons 14 Points were designed to weaken the Central Powers with whom USA and Britain were fighting in the First World War.The Poles were given independence because the Allied Powers loved them but because they were viewed as a tool to weaken both Germany and Russia.The Kurds and Baloch have remained partitioned and subject people but their independence does not fit in the global great game, at least for the time being.The Kurds are the worst example in this game of contradictions.Despite having a distinct ethnicity and traditions they have remained divided simply because their independence does not fit in any neat global strategic solution linked with any great power.The Afghans were able to preserve their independence not because they were more martial than the Kurds but largely because their buffer status suited British imperial designs otherwise they have been condemned like the Kurds to the fate of being divided in between three states like they were from 1520 till 1709.
The great illusion of post WW II colonial people is that they think they are free while in reality their governments are controlled by political agents and residents now more politely known as ambassadors.Kashmir,Palestine,Durand Line , all were designed and devised to suit some great power strategic agenda. On the other hand ironically the regional interest groups in all post colonial states merely used disputes as Machiavellian arrangements to galvanise their masses in the name of various disputes and as a tool of strengthening their personal political power. The same game was played in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran , Iraq and India in the name of ideology or ethnic slogans. The net result being that borders were not changed but the common man used as cannon fodder! Afghanistan being the worst example of this Machiavellian exercise.
Provincial Autonomy
Provincial autonomy for Pashtuns of Afghanistan was the main demand of the Afghan Government all along the Durand Line controversy.This again is a complicated matter since Pakistan is organised along generally ethnic lines while Afghanistan is organised on mixed lines, the Afghan provinces being size of Pakistani districts. 55 The Pakistani standpoint in this regard being that greater provincial autonomy with Pakistan having unresolved disputes with its eastern and western neighbours is not in Pakistan's greater national interest.The trend in the last twenty years in Pakistan has been less on provincial autonomy with nationalist Pashtun and Baloch generally being reduced to legislative minorities and the stress being on inter ethnic cooperation particularly in the Pashtun heavy provinces of NWFP and Baluchistan.
No Border is perfect
History proves that no border is perfect whether it's the Rumanian-Hungarian border in Transylvania, German-Polish Border, Russo-Chinese Border, India-China Border, Russo-Japanese Border-Yemen-Saudi border,Iran-Iraq Border or even the Canadian-US border. The great lesson of history however is to move ahead of borders and deal with more important issues of the day like economic cooeration and trade. Today borders are irrelevant in Europe and the Franco-German or Polish-German rivalry is a forgotten epoch of history.Why cannot Pakistan and Afghanistan having a common religious,historical and cultural background move out of the vicious circle of conflict and rivalry into which they were placed by a Machiavellian impearalist plan conceived in the period 1849-1947.
Role of Afghanistan's neighbours
Afghanistan's neigbours need to understand and digest the fact that the entire region will be the net winner in case Afghanistan and Pakistan are good friends.The old theories of using Afghanistan as a pawn to open a second front against any third country need to be buried.This the age of globalisation and not of any " Forward Policies" employed by any state.Any state which has any motivation to incite sectarian or ethnic divisions in any of its neighbours is following a zero gain policy as far as the long term interest of the entire region is concerned.Afghanistan like Pakistan,Iran,India and its Central Asian neighbours is a multiethnic state where the issues and disputes need to be settled by the ballot rather than the bullet.Particularly Afghan history has proved that great issues of the day cannot be settled by fighting but by consultation and consensus.
Recommendations
· Both Afghanistan and Pakistan need to concentrate on confidence building measures and put sensitive political issues like Durand Line in cold storage for at least two decades.They need to learn from the post 1945 West European model of cooperation.
· Both the countries should initiate measures which can bring their people like totally abolishing the visa regime.Allowing people of both the states right of work in each others countries like the EU without imposing any restrictions .
· Allocate specific berths for Afghan trans shipments at Karachi,Port Qasim and Gwadar.
· Both countries should give unrestricted transhipment facilities to each others imports and exports with minimum red tape.Pakistan to Afghanistan for access to and from the sea and to/from India.Afghanistan for Pakistani trade with Iran and Central Asian Republics.
· Pakistan should integrate its tribal areas with rest of the country and adopt measures which discourage militants of any breed from using tribal areas of Pakistan as base for any sort of private war waged in the name of ideology or ethnicity.
Conclusion
Both Pakistan and Afghanistan have a very long common history and cultural similarities.Persian was the official language in India as well as regions comprising present Pakistan till 1837 once it was abolished by the English East India Company in order to divide the Muslims of India from Afghanistan,Iran and Central Asia.Both the countries inherited disputes created by the British.Disputes which were used by the political elites in both the countries to further concentrate their political power by mobilising their respective masses in the name of ideology and ethnicity.As a result Pakistan fought three costly wars with India , failed to gain Kashmir and lost one half of its territory in 1971.Afghanistan sought Soviet assistance to undo the Durand Line and was condemned to a twenty five year long civil war in which it was fragmented.Pakistan courted with Islamic fundamentalism and was came very close to being declared a terrorist state during the period 1989-2000.By supporting the Taliban Pakistan became militarised and till to date is a victim of sectarian conflict.Both the countries fought for things which were not really important, losing in the process many opportunities to gain economic strength and prosperity for their people.The Afghan Pak border issue was a colonial creation designed to divide people and ironically succeeded in dividing two Muslim states with a long common historical past.Durand Line can be undone not by redrawing borders but by abolishing the visa regime and pedantic bureaucratic restrictions on movement of goods and traffic across borders.After fifty five years of conflict and confrontation sanity is fast returning and the Afghan or Pakistani child of tomorrow will question the phenomenal irrationalness of his ancestors for neglecting the real issues and fighting over imaginary issues !
The author is a researcher interested in Afghan history and Low Intensity Warfare. He is presently associated with the Afghanistan Study Centre in editorial and research capacities and also working in a construction and logistics business concern in Kabul.
DURAND LINE-AFGHANISTAN-PAKISTAN-BORDER DISPUTES-RESOLVING THE AFGHANISTAN PAKISTAN BORDER QUESTION-A.H AMIN-NOVEMBER 2004
The Afghan-Pakistan border question is merely another vindication of the above-mentioned premise. Dispute may be a stronger word since this is not the age of disputes but reconciliation.
Borders and boundaries have always been disputed and most of the major wars in history started with a border dispute or the violation of a border. Kandahar's mastery was the main reason why Mughal India and Saffavid Persia repeatedly fought wars. Balkh was the bone of contention between Mughal India and Uzbek Central Asia.Danzig the direct cause of the Second World War. Kashmir remains the cause of Indo Pak conflict. Violation of Ansbach enclave forced Prussia to declare war on Napoleon and consequently be overrun. Violation of Belgian neutrality by forces of Imperial Germany led to British declaration of war against Germany. In short border disputes have the potential to be fatal although this may not be the case in many scenarios.
Afghan-Pakistan relations remained tense for many years because of the Durand Line. The border issue brought the two neighbours close to war on at least three occasions between 1947 and 1976.Following the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in December 1979 the Durand Line became irrelevant. The once prized ally of the Afghan state was now ironically occupying Afghanistan . Afghans, a brave race, were forced to seek refuge in Pakistan by an unfortunate twist of historical fate. Pakistan became the base of the Afghan freedom fighters, as they were known! For some time it appeared that Afghanistan and Pakistan will finally be friends and allies once the USSR withdrew from Afghanistan.
What happened after the Soviet withdrawal however once again proved Plekhanov's saying that history does not move in straight lines. Instead of Afghan-Pakistan friendship another era of double-dealing and intrigues started. In this unfortunate period from 1989 till 2001 Pakistan lost much of the goodwill and respect that it had gained in the heart of the Afghans for its solidarity and support during the Soviet Afghan War. Unfortunately for most part of the Soviet Afghan War Pakistan was ruled by a military ruler who viewed the Afghan War as a golden opportunity to gain international legitimacy and economic aid that he badly wanted after having launched a military coup against Pakistan's first civilian prime minister elected by direct adult franchise. Resultantly the Afghans, although grateful to Pakistan for its solidarity ,did not forgive the pre 1989 Pakistani political leadership, for having divided Afghanistan, if not physically then at least ethnically, as well as tribally, merely to fulfil ,the short term and myopic agenda of a military regime.
Restoration of democracy in December 1988 and elevation of M/s Benazir Bhutto did not improve the scenario since Afghan policy was out of bound for the civilian prime minister and regarded as the sole preserve of the military-intelligence complex. Clemenceau's verdict that war is too serious affair to be conducted by general was met with yet another faux pas i.e. foreign policy or at least the Afghan policy being conducted by generals. The consequences were disastrous, Afghanistan plunged into a civil war which continued with unequal intervals from 1989 till 2001.Some armchair strategists who had never set a squadron in the field saw Afghanistan as Pakistan 's strategic depth came to grief once Afghanistan as it stood in conflict with itself proved to be Pakistan's strategic liability.
The return of USA to Afghanistan has once again re-activated the Durand Line question although in a low-key manner since Pakistan is a US ally or an auxiliary in the present so called war against terror.
The Durand Line question needs to be resolved so that Pakistan and Afghanistan can work as partners in progress and development rather than neighbours in uneasy peace.
This article is an attempt to study the question in the light of history, and to suggest some possible solutions, which may act as a catalyst in resolving the Durand Line question.
Historical Background
The Afghan-Pakistan boundary question is not as simple as it is made to be by many analysts or politicians. Afghanistan emerged as a state only in 1747, while the Durand Line was agreement was signed only in 1893. 1 Afghanistan was ruled by a large number of Pashtun and non Pashtun dynasties during the period 1000-1747 . 2 During this period Afghanistan was partititioned as part of three non Afghan empires from at least 1504 till 1709-47. 3
The origins of the modern Pashtun majority state of Afghanistan can be traced to Mirwais Ghilzai who raised the banner of Pashtun independence against the Safavid Persians expelling them from Kandahar in 1709. 4 The Ghilzais were finally overpowered by a Turkish adventurer Nadir Shah but the Pashtun war of liberation had begun and Nadir Shah interlude was merely one short chapter in the history of Afghanistan. 5
Finally in 1747 in the panic following Nadir Shah's assassination one of his divisional commanders Ahmad Shah Abdali (a Saddozai Pashtun) was declared as the first king of Afghanistan. Afghanistan in its modern form was thus born out of the decline of the Mughals, Saffavids and Nadir Shah.
Ahmad Shah Abdali established a large Afghan Empire albeit for a short period. 6 His successors,unfortunately for Afghanistan , were less competent and some highly incompetent. [7]They lost most of what they had inherited by 1823. [8] The last chapter of this era of Afghan misfortunes was marked by an almost 25 year's civil war. [9]
The Afghans made many efforts to recover their Trans Khyber possessions but the Sikh army of Ranjit Singh trained by ex Napoleonic French Army officers was too strong a foe to deal with. *
In the First( 1845-46) and Second (1848-49) Sikh Wars the Sikhs 10 were defeated by the Bengal and Bombay Armies of the English East India Company and in 1849 the English East India Company became the neighbour of Afghanistan with Peshawar,Kohat and Bannu designated as districts of Bengal Presidency of the company. The English East India Company followed an aggressive policy towards its new western frontier and extended its influence either by direct occupation or political control. 1854 was the high point of this policy. 11 Kalat 12 being transformed from a subsidiary ally 13 to a vassal. 14 Meanwhile Afghanistan and the English East India Company became close allies after the First Afghan War of 1839-42 and Afghanistan's Emir renounced his territorial ambitions on Peshawar vide the Treaty of 1855. 15
The immediate reason for this agreement was threatening attitude of Qajar Persia as well as Dost Mohammad's plans to reoccupy Kandahar till then ruled by a virtually independent chief. 16
Afghan historian Reshtia who rarely minces his words observed thus "the agreement in effect, suggested the surrender by the Amir of all his claims to the lost provinces of Afghanistan, but hinted also at the loss of political independence of the country." 17A deeper glance at history however proves that the Afghan Emir was a supreme realist 18 and had perceptively studied military history. 19
In 1856 the Persians occupied Herat and the city was saved for the Afghans only by English East India Company's action of landing a force on the Persian Gulf Coast of Persia in 1857.As a result of this attack vide Treaty of Paris the Persian Shah " agreed to evacuate Afghanistan and to recognize its independence". 20
In 1857 the English East India Company's further secured Afghanistan as a reliable subsidiary ally against any attack from Russia or Iran from the North by another treaty. 21
In 1857 when the English East India Company's hold on India was badly shaken by a rebellion in the native army Dost Mohammad cooperated with the British. 22
The English East India Company's Indian territories were taken over by the British Government in 1858 and from then onwards the British Empire became Afghanistan's Eastern neighbour.
British policy towards Afghanistan generally remained constant till 1873-74.In 1873 the first major political development occurred when Afghan Emir Sher Ali formally requested British support and guarantees against rapid Russian expansion moves in Central Asia. 23 Although the Russians had already agreed to Oxus River as the boundary of Afghanistan and had agreed that they had no territorial ambitions over Afghan areas of Balkh ,Andkhui Maimana and Herat 24 the Afghans were apprehensive about Russian designs.
The British response was an aggressive new policy adopted in 1874 known as the " Forward Policy". 25 The first British action being occupation of Quetta in 1876. 26 The situation got further complicated once the Russians sent a mission led by a Russian general to Kabul. 27 The Second Afghan War which was a clear cut British victory began once Afghans refused entry of a British diplomatic mission in November 1878 and ended in 1880 with British in complete control of Afghanistan's foreign policy and a new Afghan Emir Abdul Rahman. 28
In 1892-93 disturbed by further Russian expansionist moves in Central Asia and incursions of independent Pashtun tribes into British territory the British Indian Government finally decided to mark Afghanistan's southern boundary under a commission headed by Sir Mortimer Durand. The Boundary Commission completed its work in 1893 and the Afghan Amir Abdul Rahman renounced his claim over New Chaman, Bajaur, Swat, Bunner, Dir, Chilas and Chitral. 29
The Durand Line was subsequently recognised * by successive Afghan Governments in 1905, 1919, 1921 and 1930. 30
At the time of creation of Pakistan in 1947 the British Indian Government held a referendum in NWFP with a choice for the people to join India or Pakistan.The major Pashtun party of the province Khudai Khidmatgaran demanded from the British Government that the referendum should have a third option for an independent Pashtun state known as Pashtunistan. 31 The British government did not agree to this demand and the Khudai Khidmatgars boycotted the referendum.55.5 % of the eligible voters of NWFP participated in the referendum and 55 % of the eligible voters elected to join Pakistan . 32Since the Tribal Agencies were directly under the British Viceroy separate Jirgas were held in the tribal agencies with the option of joining India or Pakistan . All Jirgas in the five tribal agencies of Malakand, Khyber, Kurram, North and South Waziristan.All voted for Pakistan .32
At this stage the last British Viceroy Lord Mountbatten made a very controversial statement about the Durand Line once he stated that that "Agreements with the tribes on the Northwest Frontier will have to be negotiated with the appropriate successor authority". 33 The Afghan stance being that the frontier tribes had separate agreements with the British and therefore functioned as independent nations. Thus the Afghan stand that Pashtun areas of Pakistan be given the option to have an independent state called Pashtunistan.It may be noted that this exercise began in 1944 when the Afghan government in a letter reminded the British Indian government that it was interested in the fate of the Pashtuns on the Indian side of the Durand Line. 34
The Afghan Government had reservations about the way Pashtun areas were included in Pakistan and opposed * Pakistan's entry into the UN.The Afghan viewpoint being that as long as the issue of an independent Pashtunistan remained unresolved Pakistan should not be allowed inclusion in the UN. 35 This action of Afghanistan has been exaggerated by various Pakistani historians without appreciating the fact that Afghanistan withdrew its objections within one month and was one of the first states to establish diplomatic relations with Pakistan in February 1948. 36 The modified Afghan stand being that it would discuss the " Pashtunistan Issue" with Pakistan through normal diplomatic channels. 37
The Khudai Khidmatgar Party also soon accepted Pakistan's creation and expressed loyalty to the new state at their provincial party meeting held on 3rd and 4th September 1947. 38The party further stated that their future political objective was no longer independence but only provincial autonomy.Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan the Khudai Khidmatgar leader stated in the first Constituent Assembly of Pakistan that he accepted Pakistan's creation and merely desired provincial autonomy within the framework of the Pakistani state, but as much provincial autonomy as was allowed to all other provinces of Pakistan.
Afghan-Pakistan relations rapidly deteriorated once a Pakistani combat aircraft in the course of attacking a hostile tribal group bombed an Afghan village located about 2,000 yards from the Durand Line. 39 This intensified tension and led to Afghan Government convening a Loya Jirgah in Kabul on 26 July 1949 which voted national support for the Pashtunistan issue and officially declared the Durand Line agreement of 1893,Anglo Afghan Pact of 1905,Treaty of Rawalpindi of 1919 and the Anglo Afghan Treaty of 1921 as null and void. 40This was a watershed in Afghan history.No Afghan government since 1949 has abandoned this standpoint.Not even the Taliban who were very close allies of Pakistan .
Afghanistan also supported a meeting of a large number of Afridi Tribesmen in Tirah to establish a Pashtunistan Assembly.A larger meeting at Razmak elected the Faqir of Ipi as the Chairman of the Provisional Assembly of Independent Pashtunistan. 41
From 1949 till 1963 relations between the two states generally remained tense.Afghanistan sought US military and economic assistance to strengthen its defence and on being refused moved closer to USSR.Just like Pakistan sought US assistance in order to militarily resolve its Kashmir dispute with India during the period 1947-64.The high point of conflict being 1955 when Pakistani abolished its West wing provinces and created a single province of West Pakistan.This move was perceived by Afghanistan as a violation of Pashtun political rights and relations between the two countries became extremely tense,bringing the two at one stage close to declaration of war with Afghanistan mobilising for war. 42 Better sense finally prevailed and both sides agreed to international mediation.The situation became complicated once the Afghan Government again convened a Loya Jirga which demanded a plebiscite in Pashtun areas of Pakistan. 43
Relations between the two states reached another flashpoint during 1960-61 when insurgency broke out in the Pakistani frontier state of Dir.Afghan Government supported Dir insurgents and a Pakistani infantry division was inducted to deal with the crisis.
Tension continued to increase leading finally to closure of Pakistani mission in Kabul on 23 August 1961.By 23 September Pakistani interests were represented in Afghanistan by the Saudi Arabian Embassy. 44
The Afghan premier Sardar Daud Khan unilaterally announced closure of Afghan Pakistan border leading to great econonomic hardship for Afghanistan. 45 Pakistan responded by declaring that it would honour international law obligations by allowing Afghan Transit Trade to continue, thus placing the burden of responsibility for the crisis on Afghan shoulders. 46 Sardar Daud Khan told a West German journalist in course of an interview that " the border will remain closed till the Pashtunistan issue is settled" ! 47
The blockade resulted in great hardships for the Afghan common man since all of Afghanistan's imports and exports were historically routed through regions comprising post 1947 Pakistan.This led to Afghan King Zahir Shah asserting his previously unexercised authority and resignation of Sardar Daud Khan from the post of premier on 9th March 1963. 48
During the period 1963-73 relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan remained peaceful and Afghanistan remained totally neutral during the Indo Pak Wars of 1965 and 1971 thus allowing Pakistan to re-deploy the vast bulk of its forces stationed opposite Afghanistan against India.This was a great gesture of Afghan goodwill towards Pakistan rarely discussed by most Pakistani analysts.
Afghan-Pakistan relations once again became complicated from 1973 once Sardar Daud Khan staged a coup and removed King Zahir Shah.This was a time once the renamed Khudai Khidmatgar National Awami Party (NAP) and its coalition partners were engaged in a highly charged with Pakistani Federal Government led by Premier Z.A Bhutto.Mr Bhutto had dismissed NAP's coalition governments in NWFP and Baluchistan provinces on allegations of conspiring against the integrity of Pakistan.The issue was more political than secessionist as alleged by Mr Bhutto.Sardar Daud Khan openly supported the NAP and the Baloch insurgents who were involved in a military conflict between Pakistani armed forces during the period 1973-76.Mr Z.A Bhutto in turn retaliated by encouraging anti Daud Islamist insurgents led by Hekmatyar,Ahmad Shah Masud and Prof. Burhanuddin Rabbani. 49
In 1976 major changes occurred once Sardar Daud Khan after having assessed aggressive Soviet designs decide to opt for a major policy change and rapprochement with Pakistan.Sardar Daud Khan visited Pakistan and made a statement " Pakistani brothers, I can assure you that we came to your country with the utmost goodwill and sincerity…..We will be able to solve our political problems and one day we will live as very close and intimate brothers". 50 This statement signified a major volte face.The Afghan leftists were alarmed and the Khalq and Parcham factions of the leftist PDPA became one party in July 1977. Daud Khan was overthrown by the leftists on 27 April 1978.The new leftist regime in Kabul initially adopted a moderate approach towards Pashtunistan and classified it as a political issue. 51 Pakistan at this stage was ruled by a military regime which had overthrown Pakistan's first democratically elected prime minister Z.A Bhutto.This regime which was facing a crisis of legitimacy adopted a hostile policy towards the new leftist regime,ostensibly to support anti leftist Afghan guerrillas , the real motivation being to solicit US aid .The leftist regime naturally reacted strongly and the Afghan Foreign Minister Hafizullah Amin in turn made strong public statements expressing solidarity with Pashtunistan issue.Refugees started pouring in Pakistan from April 1978 and their influx multiplied following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979.
There was no change in the viewpoints of Afghan or Pakistani governments about Durand Line from 1978 till to date.Pakistan seeing the Durand Line as a settled issue and Afghanistan not recognising it at all since the 1949 Loya Jirga Declaration earlier mentioned.
At one stage it was wishfully thought in Pakistan that following Soviet withdrawal and collapse of the leftist government in Afghanistan the victorious Afghan resistance who enjoyed close ties with Pakistani establishment, the Durand Line issue would be amicably settled. This did not happen and even after the fall of Kabul to the Mujahideen,no consensus emerged between Pakistan and Afghanistan about the Durand Line. The same situation continued during the Taliban regime.
After the US occupation of Afghanistan Durand Line again came in the limelight.The present Afghan regime's stand is that the Durand Line agreement was for one hundred years and expired in 1993,therefore Durand Line needs to be re-negotiated. 52
The US government formed a tripartite commission consisting of US , Afghan and Pakistani officials to coordinate the ongoing US operations on the Afghan-Pakistan border in 2002.The prime objective of setting up this commission was to coordinate joint US-Afghan-Pakistan military operations against various anti US elements operating on both sides of Pakistan-Afghanistan border.
In July 2003 there were some clashes between Afghan troops and Pakistani forces in Mohmand Agency because of misunderstanding about alignment of the border.
Analysis
A Complicated issue
The Afghan-Pakistan boundary question is not as simple as it is made to be by many analysts or politicians. Afghanistan in its present form emerged on world map as a state only in 1747,while the Durand Line was marked only in 1892.
The first problem is from where to start the discussion. From 972 when a large part of Afghanistan south of Hindukush including was ruled by a Punjabi Hindu Raja as earlier discussed or from 1700 when most of Afghanistan south of Hindu Kush subdivided as Kabul and Kandahar provinces was ruled by Mughals based at Delhi or from 1740 when Afghanistan was part of a Persian-Turk Empire led by Nadir Shah. Then there is the more in vogue method of assuming that history of Afghanistan starts from the time of elevation of Ahmad Shah Saddozai to leadership of the Afghans in 1747.This again is complicated since Punjab, Sindh, Kashmir and Baluchistan, all non Pashtun majority areas were also part of Ahmad Shah's Empire.If one assumes that Durand Line is disputable because it divided the Pashtun areas into two parts then this again is complicated since the Oxus boundary of Afghanistan divides Tajik,Uzbek and Turkmen populations.The ethnic angle also complicates the issue since the southern and northern parts of Durand Line do not divide the Pashtun population but Baloch,Chitrali and Kirgiz population who belong to different ethnic groups.
Then comes the issue whether Afghanistan is a multiethnic state or a Pashtun state.If Afghanistan claims the right to champion the cause of Pashtuns in Pakistan then Tajikistan ,Uzbekistan ,Turkmenistan and Iran can claim the same right for their respective compatriot ethnic and sectarian minorities living in Afghanistan.
A significant length of Durand Line in the north and south consists of non Pashtun racial groups like the Baloch and Chitralis.Relations between the Baloch and Pashtuns in Pakistani Balochistan have never been very cordial and the Baloch would not accept being a minority in another state.The Baloch regional parties have expressed a desire for greater autonomy within the framework of the Pakistani state while the more militant Baloch in minority want an independent Baloch state for all Baloch living in Pakistan,Afghanistan and Iran.The Chitralis on the other hand feel ethnically closer to the people of Northern Areas of Pakistan rather than the Pashtuns of NWFP , the province to which they administratively belong.
Pakistani Viewpoint
Pakistani official viewpoint is that Durand Line is a long settled issue recognised by all Afghan Governments from 1879 till 1947.That Pakistan is a successor state of British India and that Afghanistan must respect its earlier agreements concluded with British India.That the population of NWFP and Baluchistan decided by a referendum/Jirga/vote to join Pakistan in 1947.
Afghan Viewpoint
The Afghan viewpoint is that Durand Line was imposed on Afghanistan under coercion/duress and was a Diktat. The Afghan position is that Durand Line was a line demarcating zones of influence of British and Afghan governments. 53Further the Afghan stand is that Afghanistan has no territorial claims on Pakistan's Pashtun areas but feels that Pashtuns of Pakistan must be allowed to exercise the right of self determination and that the 1947 referendum/Jirga was a British colonial stage managed farce.The Afghan stand was formally declared in the 1949 Loya Jirga and has not been changed by any successive Afghan government till to date.The current Afghan Government because of its transitional nature has avoided making any controversial statement on the Durand Line.However after the parliamentary elections of April 2005 the Durand Line may again become a political issue.
Afghanistan 's ethnic minorities generally regard Durand Line as a non issue.Abdul Hafeez Mansur an important Tajik political leader has stated that Afghanistan should recognise the Durand Line and ask in return for sovereign guarantees from Pakistan regarding confirmed use of maritime facilities for Afghanistan .54
In a nutshell the general Afghan line is that Durand Line is a controversial issue and for the time being Afghanistan and Pakistan need to concentrate on " Confidence Building Measures" .That Afghans need to set their own house in order,with internal cohesion and economic stability being first priorities rather than the Durand Line.
Crux of the matter
The essence of the whole issue is that states are created or boundaries changed not simply by national determination , elections,referendums or plebiscites but by global grand geopolitical agendas of great powers.Thus the creation of Pakistan and India as two separate states was a direct result of British colonial policies of " Divide et Impera" deliberately adopted after the Great Sepoy Rebellion of 1857.Initially the British wanted India to be one state with Muslims and Hindus in constant communal strife,however later they modified this design once the Hindu dominated Indian National Congress opposed the British war effort in 1939.The British response was to accept the Muslim demand for a separate state.The British viewed India and Pakistan as subsidiary allies in the Cold War against USSR and did not want the fragmentation of the Indo Pak Sub continent into smaller ethnic states which would be to USSR's strategic advantage.In 1971 Bangladesh was created only because both USA and USSR agreed that the arrangement suited both camps.Vietnam,Korea and Germany was divided not by any plebiscite but because the great powers wanted it.Durand Line was created by British Imperial power and was designed for a specific strategic purpose.Historically great powers or superpowers or whatever one may call them have employed the ethnic card only when it suited their global strategic designs.Thus Wilsons 14 Points were designed to weaken the Central Powers with whom USA and Britain were fighting in the First World War.The Poles were given independence because the Allied Powers loved them but because they were viewed as a tool to weaken both Germany and Russia.The Kurds and Baloch have remained partitioned and subject people but their independence does not fit in the global great game, at least for the time being.The Kurds are the worst example in this game of contradictions.Despite having a distinct ethnicity and traditions they have remained divided simply because their independence does not fit in any neat global strategic solution linked with any great power.The Afghans were able to preserve their independence not because they were more martial than the Kurds but largely because their buffer status suited British imperial designs otherwise they have been condemned like the Kurds to the fate of being divided in between three states like they were from 1520 till 1709.
The great illusion of post WW II colonial people is that they think they are free while in reality their governments are controlled by political agents and residents now more politely known as ambassadors.Kashmir,Palestine,Durand Line , all were designed and devised to suit some great power strategic agenda. On the other hand ironically the regional interest groups in all post colonial states merely used disputes as Machiavellian arrangements to galvanise their masses in the name of various disputes and as a tool of strengthening their personal political power. The same game was played in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran , Iraq and India in the name of ideology or ethnic slogans. The net result being that borders were not changed but the common man used as cannon fodder! Afghanistan being the worst example of this Machiavellian exercise.
Provincial Autonomy
Provincial autonomy for Pashtuns of Afghanistan was the main demand of the Afghan Government all along the Durand Line controversy.This again is a complicated matter since Pakistan is organised along generally ethnic lines while Afghanistan is organised on mixed lines, the Afghan provinces being size of Pakistani districts. 55 The Pakistani standpoint in this regard being that greater provincial autonomy with Pakistan having unresolved disputes with its eastern and western neighbours is not in Pakistan's greater national interest.The trend in the last twenty years in Pakistan has been less on provincial autonomy with nationalist Pashtun and Baloch generally being reduced to legislative minorities and the stress being on inter ethnic cooperation particularly in the Pashtun heavy provinces of NWFP and Baluchistan.
No Border is perfect
History proves that no border is perfect whether it's the Rumanian-Hungarian border in Transylvania, German-Polish Border, Russo-Chinese Border, India-China Border, Russo-Japanese Border-Yemen-Saudi border,Iran-Iraq Border or even the Canadian-US border. The great lesson of history however is to move ahead of borders and deal with more important issues of the day like economic cooeration and trade. Today borders are irrelevant in Europe and the Franco-German or Polish-German rivalry is a forgotten epoch of history.Why cannot Pakistan and Afghanistan having a common religious,historical and cultural background move out of the vicious circle of conflict and rivalry into which they were placed by a Machiavellian impearalist plan conceived in the period 1849-1947.
Role of Afghanistan's neighbours
Afghanistan's neigbours need to understand and digest the fact that the entire region will be the net winner in case Afghanistan and Pakistan are good friends.The old theories of using Afghanistan as a pawn to open a second front against any third country need to be buried.This the age of globalisation and not of any " Forward Policies" employed by any state.Any state which has any motivation to incite sectarian or ethnic divisions in any of its neighbours is following a zero gain policy as far as the long term interest of the entire region is concerned.Afghanistan like Pakistan,Iran,India and its Central Asian neighbours is a multiethnic state where the issues and disputes need to be settled by the ballot rather than the bullet.Particularly Afghan history has proved that great issues of the day cannot be settled by fighting but by consultation and consensus.
Recommendations
· Both Afghanistan and Pakistan need to concentrate on confidence building measures and put sensitive political issues like Durand Line in cold storage for at least two decades.They need to learn from the post 1945 West European model of cooperation.
· Both the countries should initiate measures which can bring their people like totally abolishing the visa regime.Allowing people of both the states right of work in each others countries like the EU without imposing any restrictions .
· Allocate specific berths for Afghan trans shipments at Karachi,Port Qasim and Gwadar.
· Both countries should give unrestricted transhipment facilities to each others imports and exports with minimum red tape.Pakistan to Afghanistan for access to and from the sea and to/from India.Afghanistan for Pakistani trade with Iran and Central Asian Republics.
· Pakistan should integrate its tribal areas with rest of the country and adopt measures which discourage militants of any breed from using tribal areas of Pakistan as base for any sort of private war waged in the name of ideology or ethnicity.
Conclusion
Both Pakistan and Afghanistan have a very long common history and cultural similarities.Persian was the official language in India as well as regions comprising present Pakistan till 1837 once it was abolished by the English East India Company in order to divide the Muslims of India from Afghanistan,Iran and Central Asia.Both the countries inherited disputes created by the British.Disputes which were used by the political elites in both the countries to further concentrate their political power by mobilising their respective masses in the name of ideology and ethnicity.As a result Pakistan fought three costly wars with India , failed to gain Kashmir and lost one half of its territory in 1971.Afghanistan sought Soviet assistance to undo the Durand Line and was condemned to a twenty five year long civil war in which it was fragmented.Pakistan courted with Islamic fundamentalism and was came very close to being declared a terrorist state during the period 1989-2000.By supporting the Taliban Pakistan became militarised and till to date is a victim of sectarian conflict.Both the countries fought for things which were not really important, losing in the process many opportunities to gain economic strength and prosperity for their people.The Afghan Pak border issue was a colonial creation designed to divide people and ironically succeeded in dividing two Muslim states with a long common historical past.Durand Line can be undone not by redrawing borders but by abolishing the visa regime and pedantic bureaucratic restrictions on movement of goods and traffic across borders.After fifty five years of conflict and confrontation sanity is fast returning and the Afghan or Pakistani child of tomorrow will question the phenomenal irrationalness of his ancestors for neglecting the real issues and fighting over imaginary issues !
The author is a researcher interested in Afghan history and Low Intensity Warfare. He is presently associated with the Afghanistan Study Centre in editorial and research capacities and also working in a construction and logistics business concern in Kabul.
DURAND LINE-AFGHANISTAN-PAKISTAN-BORDER DISPUTES-RESOLVING THE AFGHANISTAN PAKISTAN BORDER QUESTION-A.H AMIN-NOVEMBER 2004
Comment