“O Pakhtuns! Your house has fallen into ruin. Arise and rebuild it” –
Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan
Although
there are many dates which are of great significance to historians interested
in the Pashtun question, but for me 2013 is a very important year. Departure of
Hakeemullah Mehsud resulted in further confusion within the ranks and files of the
Pakistani intelligentsia.
Some
of them mourned his death and labelled drone attacks as the sole factor
responsible for Islamist militancy, others termed drones the best option
against Taliban, conveniently forgetting that Baitullah Mehsud’s death in a
similar drone attack did not help in curbing the problem. It is interesting how
desires and threats have framed the analysis and positions of the intellectuals.
We
have two extreme sides blinded by their idols. At the one hand we have the liberals
who are desperate to kill each and every religious extremist, and on the other
hand, we have the Pakistani religio-nationalists who think we can tame the Taliban.
A third simplistic view is that all these problems can be solved by one stroke
of the pen, by declaring Pakistan a secular state. While the prior two
extremist positions are founded on assumptions, the third view also neglects the
structural problem inherent within the Pashtun geography and instead presents
the Pakistani state’s religious politics as the prime problem.
Any
analysis without considering the Durand Line, which divided the Pashtuns to
serve the interests of the British Empire and Russian Tsars is bound to fail.
Pashtun land, on both sides of this line, is of immense strategic importance,
not only for regional players but also for the superpowers of the world. It is
this fear that restricted both Pakistan and Afghanistan from enjoying cordial
relations. Unfortunately, instead of building trust the two aligned themselves with
opposite blocs, which contributed in creating more doubts.
This
anxiety first led both the countries towards an ideological war and then towards
a proxy one. The victims of both the wars were political workers and general
Pashtuns on both sides of the border. While the Afghan government considered
every Islamist an agent of Islamabad, every Pashtun carrying a red flag was
labelled an Afghan and Russian agent by Pakistan. The Cold War between the US
and USSR further added to this misery - which has resulted in continued
violence since the 1970s.
After
the Soviet retreat, the US camp had a great opportunity to develop Afghanistan
and build a reliable partner along with Pakistan in the region. But it chose to
leave the war-torn Afghanistan in the hands of the warlords. Pakistan also
failed to set aside its suspicions and helped the Taliban in defeating the
warlords and forming a Pakistan-friendly government in Afghanistan.
Nevertheless,
no matter how regressive and brutal a state is, gaining autonomy is a natural
aspiration of every individual, community and nation. After reaching a stage of
relative stability, aspirations of autonomy and self-rule are but a natural
outcome. The Taliban’s denial to serve imperialist interests, without any ifs
and buts, led to a conflict that has held the entire world in its grips since
the turn of the new millennium.
These
circumstances, along with a weak ruler in the shape of Pervez Musharraf, resulted
in Pakistan playing a role that intensified the state of affairs. Like every
dictator, Musharraf was also looking for external support to strengthen his
illegitimate rule over Pakistan. Without realizing the consequences, he
succumbed to the US demand of joining the War on Terror. While many have minted
dollars from this war, people of Afghanistan and Pakistan have gone through the
most gruesome violence due to this war.
But
more than this violence, what the War on Terror revived was the Pashtun identity,
which was once replaced by the ‘Islamic identity’ by the US and Pakistan for
their own benefits during the Soviet-Afghan war. Pashtuns on both sides of the
border not only faced the most horrific violence including the US drone
attacks, state-led military operations and suicide attacks, but also an
identity crises. Till this day, the Pashtuns face the most demeaning racism and
hatred all over the world, despite the fact that it was them who became the
biggest victims of terrorism.
The
circumstances continue to worsen as not only Washington’s but also its favourable
government’s, the Afghan government, interests have also now come into conflict
with Islamabad’s interests. Both Afghanistan and Pakistan are accusing each
other of playing a double game. As the two countries are now trying to tame, who
they consider to be the saner Islamist elements, doubts are hitting their peak.
Any dissenting voice is seen with suspicion - the Afghan Taliban are considered
Pakistan’s proxy in Kabul, and the Pakistani Taliban are considered Afghanistan’s
proxy in Islamabad.
Thus,
it would not be incorrect to state that no matter how good the intentions of
all these players may be, the inherent conflict cannot bring any betterment to the
lives of the Pashtun population. After the departure of Hakeemullah Mehsud, who
was considered not only the last bridge between the Afghan and Pakistani
Taliban, but also a rare Talib who wanted to negotiate with Islamabad as well
as Kabul, mistrust has further grown.
If 17
years of war have failed to bring any peace in the region, it will not take any
rocket science to understand that more years of external involvement will only breed
more violence. There is no one who can save the Pashtun society other than the Pashtun
themselves. History has proven time and again that neither external powers nor
state authorities have ever solved any conflict. A real change is the construct
of the society and not the state.
The
Pashtun society (in Afghanistan and Pakistan) is calling upon a new Bacha Khan,
as only a non-aligned movement emerging from the masses can resolve these
conflicts, which are not only serving the external forces but have also been created
by them.
Is Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM) an answer to the Pashtun Question?