David Ignatius of the Washington Post is an intelligent, thoughtful writer. He is one of the best opinionators at Washington Post, in our opinion. But, we have learned that raw intelligence without knowledge and insight can lead to dreadful mistakes. Our maxim is that lack of education breeds ignorance and ignorance breeds cultural supremacism, a form of racism.
This, we believe, is the hidden factor behind American media’s portrayal of the events in Pakistan or more specifically Pashtunistan (the North West Frontier Province that was annexed from Afghanistan in 1893 by British-run India and then gifted to Pakistan in 1947). Pashtunistan, the “Stan” or abode of the Pashtuns is where the Taleban movement was born and where it lives & hides to attack today’s Afghanistan at will.
President Obama has realized that no semblance of victory in today’s half of traditional Afghanistan is feasible without taking out the Taleban bases inside Pashtunistan. But the Pakistani Army & its sovereign pride stands in the way.
It is evident to everyone including David Ignatius that the Pashtuns of Pashtunistan, the Taleban in particular, do not recognize the 1893 Durand Line, the British imposed border that is today’s line of control. The Taleban cross it at will because they believe correctly that both sides of the Durand line are their homeland.
The reality is that Pakistan is an artificial state, an attempt to combine different ethnicities under one religious banner. The other reality is that Pakistani Panjabis, the dominant ethnic group, imposed their supremacy in all of Pakistan. This “single country” facade was first destroyed in 1971 when East Bengal broke away from Pakistan to become Bangla-Desh, “Desh” being a synonym for “Stan“. Pakistani Bengalis wanted their own language, the beautiful Bengali, to dominate their land. It was language, race & culture that broke 1947 creation into today’s Pakistan and Bangla-Desh.
We see a version of the Bangla-Desh struggle being repeated in Pashtunistan. Pashtuns, especially the Taleban, think of themselves as Pashtuns and they call the Panjabis as Pakistanis. In other words, they see themselves as Afghans and not Pakistanis.
The Pakistani Panjabi generals realize this very well and they have let the Pashtuns manage their own affairs. This is why despite well-meaning American pressures, they have refused to deploy the Pakistani Panjabi Army, the heart & mass of that Army, in Pashtunistan. The Panjabi Generals understand that such a deployment will bring on a broad racial conflict between Pashtuns & Pakistani Panjabis, in other words a full scale repeat of 1971 Bangla-Desh war.
In to this situation steps in David Ignatius with his “new” strategic concept – America should help Pakistan “gain sovereignty over its “tribal territory” for the first time in history and thereby finally complete the task of building its own nation.” He describes this “new” concept in his Washington Post article How partnering with the U.S. could strengthen Pakistan’s sovereignty.
Before we dissect this “new strategic concept” of Ignatius, let us quote what some knowledgeable observers say about the Pashtun problem. CNN’s Fareed Zakaria said after President Obama’s speech on Afghanistan that President Karzai of Afghanistan must “get Pashtuns on his side“. Michael Ware, CNN ‘s knowledgeable and insightful war correspondent, agreed with Zakaria and said “The Pashtuns lost the war“. Ware was referring to the fact that in 2001 America helped the Northern Alliance of Afghanistan defeat the Taleban regime.
The Northern Alliance was composed mainly of Tajik Afghans and Uzbek Afghans. So the 2001 victory essentially became a victory of the minority ethnic groups of Afghanistan over the largest ethnic group, the Pashtuns.
The Pashtuns now found themselves ruled by other ethnic groups on both sides of the Durand line border, to the south by the Pakistani Panjabis and to the north by Afghani Tajiks & Uzbeks. This simmering resentment lies at the heart of today’s Af-Pak problem. The simmer has not come to a full boil because the Pakistani Panjabi Army has generally left the Pashtuns alone and actually helped the Taleban to attack American troops in Afghanistan.
In the face of this reality, David Ignatius suggests that America help Panjabi-dominated Pakistan to impose its writ in Pashtunistan. In its essence, the Ignatius “new strategic concept” is to re-colonize the Pashtuns. He says “Pakistan will not be a confident and fully successful modern state until it has extended its writ to the lawless tribal regions. Lacking that control, the Pakistanis fear that their national fabric could rip along its seams.”
America won in Iraq because America helped end the colonization of Iraqi Shias by the Iraqi Sunnis. This is why the Shias, the majority of Iraqis, supported America and this is why the minority Sunnis could not keep up their insurgency.
In stark contrast, David Ignatius wants to make America an active partner in the re-colonization of the Pashtuns, the majority community in Pashtunistan & Afghanistan, by the Pakistani Panjabis. A brilliant concept indeed, America – the new colonial arbiter in Asia. The perfect Ignatius theme for the first African-American President in history.
Speaking of history, David Ignatius should read some. For nearly 1,200 years, the Pashtuns and the Panjabis have gone to war against each other. The Pashtuns usually won. Today, the Taleban Pashtuns feel that they can take on Pakistan as well as America-protected Afghanistan. Just look at the frequency and ferocity of attacks in the heart of Pakistani Panjab.
The reason the Taleban problem is still manageable is because the moderate Pashtuns do not support the Taleban. They have rejected the Talebani version of Islam by defeating the Islamic parties and electing the moderate non-Islamic parties in every election .
If America attempts to re-colonize the Pashtuns, the moderate Pashtuns will revolt and throw in with the Taleban to fight the colonization. This will bring the simmering problem to a full boil. The end result will be another breakup of Pakistan, this times courtesy of America as a colonial power.
David Ignatius is a bright man but he is ignorant of history. He has fallen prey to the prevalent racial notion in American media about the Pashtuns being uneducated, tribal people who live in a medieval culture. He is not entirely to blame. His friends in Pakistani Panjabi Army feel the same way and Ignatius has been infected by their racial supremacism.
This is why the Ignatius “new strategic concept” is a rehash of the old British “White Man’s Burden” wrapped in the American flag. A recipe for utter disaster for both America & Pakistan, in our opinion.
Michael Ware is right. The ideal way to solve the Af-Pak problem is to let the Pashtuns win. This is best done by enabling the Pashtuns to get their homeland back, a unified Afghanistan-Pashtunistan or the traditional Afghanistan. In other words, the complete opposite of the Ignatius
“new” 18th century colonial strategic concept.
Send your feedback to [email protected]
