RFI: lashkar tribal militias

[SiiNii]

(request for info)

With the 2nd Amendment in the current media spotlight, I've been thinking about the role of ordinary people armed with privately owned military grade weapons in both Afghanistan and my own country.

Historically the United States employed a militia type of system for local defense and large wars, the small, regular Army being used for offensive operations against the Indians and to provide leadership for the militias during larger call ups such as the Civil War. These militias were armed with weapons from the federal armories and their own private weapons. This is what is meant by 'well regulated militia' and the reason for the 2nd Amendment. Not only is it not possible for the government to wage large scale war without the consent of the people who were required to provide the manpower for large units, actions contrary to the consent of the people by the standing regular army would be checked by an immensely larger citizen army composed of nearly all able bodied citizens.

Is the lashkar system still in effect in Afghanistan or Pakistan? Did Pakistan's govt, the Northern Alliance, or the Taliban regime recruit using this system? Are lashkars a part of Pashtunwali? Is anyone here in a lashkar?

Where can I read about the historical lashkars (pre-1930s) and also find out about the roles they've had since the beginning of the Afg-USSR war? Resources in English, Pashto, Dari, Russian or Urdu are appreciated, altho google translate will have to suffice for the last two.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Da aminiati depara azado melk yaw tamrin aw vadan lashkar ta zaroorat lari, dzeka da wasla lari aw istemalawi halak haq tajavoz na kawel.

* lutfan zma pashto jor kri , manana

[ډګروال]

this system used to be very honourable thing but nowadays it is corrupted.
nowadays it is warlord militias,drug addicts and other losers are gathered together and named arbakai.Arbakai is totally different than these morons,Arbakai is called on in the time when the country is invaded but these guys are using it for the opposit reasons.

[یاسمینه]

Sinii, I tihnk in our kitabtoon should be a paper about arbakai. It has the Arbakai in its title. I am not sure how relevant it is.
Let me know if you can't find it - i will check if I still have e-version.

Ok here you have the link:

http://www.pashtunforums.com/search.php?searchid=1204709

Also check the dictionary recently posted in the Kitabtoon.

[khushal]

this system used to be very honourable thing but nowadays it is corrupted.
nowadays it is warlord militias,drug addicts and other losers are gathered together and named arbakai.Arbakai is totally different than these morons,Arbakai is called on in the time when the country is invaded but these guys are using it for the opposit reasons.

That's because there is no king for the Arbakai to take orders from. The whole system was put into disarray starting with the toppling of the monarchy and when the Kabul government collapsed, there was no choice but for warlords to rise from the lack of a single leader who could give orders to local Arbakais. A tribal society works better under a system like a monarch or an Emir. A Republic system like the one in place now under Karzai and the ones that were placed from Daud to Najib have proved disastrous. In fact the only time Afghanistan saw relative stability was during 96-2001 when an emir was in place.

So in essence as long as you have a republic system, you will have warlords or Arbakais that have no loyalty to the republic because it is just not natural in a tribal society whose autonomy is its utmost goal. The republic does not guarantee the tribes autonomy on the contrary it takes away the autonomy. The republic system is actually a contradiction to how the pashtun tribes are structured.

[khushal]

(request for info)

With the 2nd Amendment in the current media spotlight, I've been thinking about the role of ordinary people armed with privately owned military grade weapons in both Afghanistan and my own country.

Historically the United States employed a militia type of system for local defense and large wars, the small, regular Army being used for offensive operations against the Indians and to provide leadership for the militias during larger call ups such as the Civil War. These militias were armed with weapons from the federal armories and their own private weapons. This is what is meant by 'well regulated militia' and the reason for the 2nd Amendment. Not only is it not possible for the government to wage large scale war without the consent of the people who were required to provide the manpower for large units, actions contrary to the consent of the people by the standing regular army would be checked by an immensely larger citizen army composed of nearly all able bodied citizens.

Is the lashkar system still in effect in Afghanistan or Pakistan? Did Pakistan's govt, the Northern Alliance, or the Taliban regime recruit using this system? Are lashkars a part of Pashtunwali? Is anyone here in a lashkar?

Where can I read about the historical lashkars (pre-1930s) and also find out about the roles they've had since the beginning of the Afg-USSR war? Resources in English, Pashto, Dari, Russian or Urdu are appreciated, altho google translate will have to suffice for the last two.



Da aminiati depara azado melk yaw tamrin aw vadan lashkar ta zaroorat lari, dzeka da wasla lari aw istemalawi halak haq tajavoz na kawel.

* lutfan zma pashto jor kri , manana

Your pashto is pretty good. I have not read your introduction but I assumed you are/were an American soldier deployed in Afghanistan?

The Arbakai system is somewhat similar to the original American defence system. It has changed though. There are no longer militias, they have been replaced with the national guard. The original militia system was to keep an independent armed force made up by the people's own will to prevent a tyrannical police state controlled by a central figure. It was to keep the original thirteen colonies independent but for national tragedies/threats and national defence as one united force.

The same with arbakais, it is to keep the tribes independent but for national threats/tragedies and defence, the king or emir would call upon the tribes assistance. The arbakias would have their own private weapons and would have their own commanders but those commanders would usually follow the orders of the king/emir or one of his generals.

During the First Anglo/Afghan war when General Elphinstone was marching out Kabul, Wazir Akbar Khan did not use his own army against Elphinstone, he basically called upon the Tribal Arbakais to ambush Elphinstone's forces as they marched to Jalalabad. He did not use any of his direct assets.

[SiiNii]

za gwarum chi pe pashto ravani khabery kawel, bey ghalati.
(I want to speak Pashto fluently, without errors)

I'm an American soldier of the National Guard that you mentioned. Although it uses the Minuteman logo, draws lineage from historical state militia units, the NG isn't quite the same as the original militias. The old militias used their own gear, elected their own officers, and conducted their own training and operations. Today's guardsmen are usually trained at regular Army facilities, use the same equipment and uniforms, often conduct the same missions alongside active duty counterparts. It's like a 'Federal' National Guard. The old timers tell me that the modern NG is a big improvement from the old 'go shoot guns then have a bbq w beers' NG.

There actually are still some independent, organized state militias. Their uniforms have the name of their state instead of US Army like ours. From what I hear they're not serious military combat formations.

There seems to be many parallels with the lashkars/arbakais and US militias

[Kushan Prince]

It is actually " Lashkar-e-Taiba" and they are a paki terrorist group founded by a punjabi militant. They have nothing to do with pashtuns.

[SiiNii]

Lashkar and Arbakai aren't interchangeable terms?

[khushal]

There seems to be many parallels with the lashkars/arbakais and US militias

The old US militia system is almost exactly the same as the arbakais.

Lashkar means army and arbakai means militia and in afghanistan it would be a tribal militia.