Why Afghanistan's partition may be unpreventable

Discussion in 'Subcontinent & Central Asia' started by Ray, Mar 3, 2013.

  1. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Why Afghanistan's partition may be unpreventable

    Brahma Chellany

    America's war in Afghanistan, the longest and costliest in its history, is finally drawing to a close. How this shapes Afghanistan's future will have a significant bearing on India's security. Will the fate of Afghanistan be different from two other countries where the US also intervened militarily - Iraq and Libya? Iraq has been partitioned in all but name into Shia, Sunni and Kurdish sections, while Libya seems headed toward a similar three-way but tribal-based partition. Will there be an Iraq-style "soft partition" of Afghanistan, with protracted strife eventually creating a "hard partition" ?

    Afghanistan's large ethnic minorities already enjoy de facto autonomy, which they secured after their Northern Alliance played a central role in the U.S.-led ouster of the Taliban from power. Having enjoyed autonomy for years now, the minorities will resist with all their might from coming under the sway of the ethnic Pashtuns, who ruled the country for generations.

    For their part, the Pashtuns, despite their tribal divisions, will not rest content with being in charge of just a rump Afghanistan made up of the eastern and southeastern provinces. Given the large Pashtun population resident across the Britishdrawn Durand Line, they are likely sooner or later to seek a Greater Pashtunistan - a development that could directly affect the territorial unity of another artificial modern construct, Pakistan.

    The fact that the ethnic minorities are actually ethnic majorities in distinct geographical zones makes Afghanistan's partitioning organically doable. Ethnic minorities account for more than half of Afghanistan - both in land area and population size.

    The US effort for an honourable exit by cutting a deal with the Pakistan-backed Taliban, paradoxically , is deepening Afghanistan's ethnic fissures and increasing the partitioning risk. With President Barack Obama choosing his second-term team, the US effort to strike a deal with the Taliban is back on the front burner.

    This effort, in coordination with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, is stirring deep unease among the Afghan minorities, who fought the Taliban and its five-year rule fiercely and suffered greatly. The Taliban's rule, for example, was marked by several large-scale massacres of Hazara civilians.

    The rupturing of Karzai's political alliance with minority leaders has also aided ethnic polarization. Some non-Pashtun power brokers remain with Karzai, but most others now lead the opposition National Front.

    The minority communities are unlikely to accept any power-sharing arrangement that includes the Taliban. In fact, they suspect Karzai's intention is to restore Pashtun dominance across Afghanistan. Karzai, however, does not belong to the mainstream Pashtun tribes, whose traditional homeland straddles the Durand Line; rather, like key Taliban leaders, he is from the tribally marginal Kandahar region.

    The minorities' misgivings have been strengthened by the recent "Peace Process Roadmap to 2015" issued by the Karzai-formed Afghan High Peace Council, empowered to negotiate with the Taliban. The document sketches several striking concessions to the Taliban and to Islamabad, ranging from the Taliban's reconstitution as a political party to a role for Pakistan in Afghanistan's affairs. The roadmap dangles the carrot of cabinet posts and provincial governorships to the Taliban.

    The ethnic tensions and recriminations, which threaten to undermine cohesion in the fledgling, multiethnic Afghan Army, are breaking along the same lines as when the invading Soviet forces withdrew in 1989, an exit that led to civil war. This time the minorities are better armed and prepared to defend their interests after the U.S. exit. A new civil war, however, would likely tear Afghanistan apart, Balkanizing the country into more distinct warlord-controlled zones than the situation prevailing today.

    This raises a fundamental question: Is the territorial unity of Afghanistan essential for regional or international security? The sanctity of existing borders has become a powerful norm in world politics, yet this principle has allowed weak states to survive. Ungovernable and unmanageable states can be a serious threat to regional and global security. Outside forces, in any event, are hardly in a position to prevent Afghanistan's partitioning along Iraqi or Yugoslavian lines.

    A partitioned Afghanistan may not be the best outcome. Yet it will be far better than an Afghanistan that dissolves into chaos. And infinitely better than one in which the medieval Taliban returns to power and begins a fresh pogrom. With a partitioned Afghanistan, Pakistani generals, instead of waging proxy war against India and sponsoring Afghan Pashtun militant groups, will be compelled to focus on fending off a potent threat to Pakistan's unity. This is the only conceivable scenario that will force the Pakistan military to bury the hatchet with India.

    Why Afghanistan's partition may be unpreventable - The Times of India

    ***************************

    US invaded Iraq and it was also being touted that Iraq would have to be partitioned between the Shias and the Kurds.

    However, that has not happened and things continue as before, though the bombings are nowhere less in degree or density.

    I wonder if there is any 'soft partition', but then I am not in the know

    Unlike Iraq where Saddam rule with an iron hand and did not allow ethnicity or sectarianism to flourish, Afghanistan has been always a tribal oriented with strong and warring fiefdoms where rival groups have their regional power bases. And interestingly, notwithstanding this, Afghanistan has been a country per se for almost over 250 years!

    [​IMG]

    A look at the map will indicate the mishmash that make up the various ethnic groups and their distribution in Afghanistan.

    What complicates the issue in Afghanistan is ethnicity, sectarianism, religious extremism and external intervention and it has become complex, entangled as it is in so many domestic and international webs of power politics.

    Interestingly, the Soviet backed invasion of Afghanistan allowed the non-Pashtun minorities to become more powerful than they were 20 years back. Three factors contributed to their empowerment:

    Firstly was the Soviet policy of ruling through encouraging their ethnic differences. For the first time in Afghanistan's history, the UZbeks, Tajiks and Hazaras got their political and administrative autonomy and that was a heady elixir.

    Secondly, Iran poured in funds for the Hazaras wherein they established their own political machinery.

    These groups have become politically and militarily strong and having tasted 'independence' are not ready and willing to surrender it to the historical ascendant group i.e. the Pashtuns. And yet, they are not ready to clamour for secession! A very Gordian Knot like situation.

    On the other hand, if Afghanistan is partitioned, it will be a dangerous situation for Pakistan.

    The Pathans or Pashtuns of such a partitioned Afghanistan will look East and the dreams of Pakhtoonistan will ignited leading to chaos and turbulence in the area consisting of both Afghanistan and Pakistan. And given the nature of the Pashtuns, in the finally analysis, not only Afghanistan would have been partitioned, Pakistan would also face the same fate wherein Pakhtoonistan would become a reality.

    It would be some sort of a poetic justice for the mad Mullah in military uniform, Zia's stupidity of unleashing the Taliban Frankenstein upon the world!
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2013
  2.  
  3. LordOfTheUnderworlds

    LordOfTheUnderworlds Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    407
    Location:
    Patal Lok
    Who will do it? Western countries did not do it when there was a chance. Now they are leaving, so who will do it now. They didn't do it in Iraq too.
     
  4. datguy79

    datguy79 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    937
    Location:
    Canada
    We have been a state since 1747. We will be fine.
     
  5. gokussj9

    gokussj9 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,068
    Likes Received:
    1,137
    Location:
    USA
    Before 1747 was Afghanistan part of any other country?
     
  6. hello_10

    hello_10 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,880
    Likes Received:
    670
    Location:
    unconfirmed
    I guess, China's control on Gwadar was a start, and hence mineral rich/low population Balochistan as whole. rest, the above news doesn't surprise me. lets see how its all ends up :ranger:

    and also, what about lease of POK to China? is Pakistan is bargaining on it, or, its also like Gwadar/Balochistan, for free??? :fishing:

    => http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/gilgit-baltistan/31577-pakistan-lease-gilgit-baltistan-china.html

    anyway, we do know that China's control on this part of the world would provide peace/security to the whole world. we wish them all the best :china:
     
  7. musalman

    musalman پاکستان زنده باد

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    905
    Likes Received:
    127
    Location:
    Lahore
    Will never happen for start !!!! If it ever happens, than pushtuns from Pakistan won't be joining the pushtuns on western side to form a greater pushtunistan. In fact it will be the other way around. Before you Indian trolls start your work, read this first. With the construction of Islamabad Peshwar motorway, pushtuns are now 1 hour drive from Islamabad and 5 from Lahore. Because of this they started investing in Lahore Karachi and Islamabad. Now the situation is nearly 100% of Pakistani transport sector is in the hands of Pushtun Pakistanis. The largest pushtun presence in any city is Karachi followed by Islamabad and Lahore.
     
    Agnostic Muslim likes this.
  8. anoop_mig25

    anoop_mig25 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,195
    Likes Received:
    2,223
    Well Afghanistan's had soft-partition while it was ruled by taliban , remember northen-alliance was rulling some -northen parts while rest of parts where ruled by taliban . i see that happening again post 2014
     
  9. trackwhack

    trackwhack Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,757
    Likes Received:
    2,573
    Thats pretty good news for the suicide bombers.:thumb:
     
  10. Agnostic Muslim

    Agnostic Muslim Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    140
    I can't really see how the author justifies his conclusion that a 'partitioned Afghanistan would result in the Pashtun majority territory posing a significant challenge to Pakistan' given that Pakistan has more than twice the Pashtun population of Afghanistan with the Pakistani Pashtun's integrated into the military and business interests across Pakistan.

    If anything, a partition of Afghanistan would inevitable result in the Pashtun regions of a 'partitioned Afghanistan' being absorbed into Pakistan.
     
  11. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,523
    Likes Received:
    1,547
    Well there's already a "soft" partition in Iraq case - the Kurdish Autonomous Region

    Will Afg. be modelled on Iraq?

    [​IMG]
    Kurdish oil dispute a domestic issue for Iraq, Ankara says
     
  12. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,552

    will Afghans agree to this?? Can India look forward to the same with Pakistan?
     
  13. Agnostic Muslim

    Agnostic Muslim Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    140
    You would have to ask the author about that - it is his hypothesis. The question would be whether ethnic ties and the fear of the majority/plurality Pashtun's causes the minority ethnic groups to seek independence/autonomy.
    No - nothing remotely close to the Pashtin dynamics between Afghanistan and Pakistan - Pakistan and Afghanistan are both Muslim majority countries, the Pashtun population on both sides of the border is Muslim and on the Pakistani side is far more affluent and better integrated in business and key government institutions.
     
  14. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,552
     
  15. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    Afghans don't really display allegiance by ethnicity. It is a tribal country. You can't really partition it small enough to meet all of them.
     
    TrueSpirit likes this.
  16. Agnostic Muslim

    Agnostic Muslim Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    140
    Pakistan is not looking at an ethnic divide and civil war along the lines of Afghanistan, so your analogy and hypothesis are flawed to begin with given that the underlying dynamics that would cause a partition of Pakistan similar to the Afghan partition described by the author do not exist.

    With respect to your point about 'Aghan's hating Pakistan', the fact is that for the author's hypothesis to come true any Afghan national identity will have dissolved away as the various ethnic groups assert their ethnic identity over their Afghan identity - the chaos and inter-ethnic strife that would cause such a partition would subsume any 'hatred of Pakistan'. The existing familial and economic ties between the Afghan and Pakistani Pashtun, and the Pakistani Pashtun control of a significant chunk of the economic interests would inevitably overshadow any of the current distrust of Pakistan on the Afghan Pashtun side.

    Those significant economic, familial, religious and ethnic ties between Afghan and Pakistani Pashtuns are not duplicated between any major demographic group in India and Pakistan, which is why your analogy of a similar situation developing between India and Pakistan is flawed.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2013
  17. Agnostic Muslim

    Agnostic Muslim Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    140
    FATA is one way to do it, though, as we can see, it comes with its own issues.

    However even the violence in FATA is not separatist - it is if anything expansionist in that religious extremists are fighting to impose their version of Islam across the Tribal belt and, eventually, across all of Pakistan.
     
  18. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,552
    same exact arguement can be made for India absorbing parts of Pakistan.
     
  19. Agnostic Muslim

    Agnostic Muslim Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    140
    I just pointed out why that 'same exact argument' is flawed in my second to last post.
     
  20. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    FATA is a horrible example. It is complete anarchy and a breeding ground for terrorism.
     
  21. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,552
    Would US allow this after the bitter pill USA had to swallow from Pakistan in Afghan war?
    If US is against this Pakistan might wind up being split??
     

Share This Page