Dr. Ejaz Akram, with Pepe Escobar – posted with permission and widely cross posted.
What happened in Afghanistan was not a mere change of government. A puppet state responsible for spreading subversion in the region was overthrown.
After the Taliban named an interim government that was regarded as quite controversial inside Afghanistan and did not exactly please the nation’s Eurasian neighbors, I asked Dr. Ejaz Akram, Professor of Religion & World Politics at the National Defense University in Islamabad, for a detailed analysis. He sent me an astonishing, unique essay that is a must-read for both East and West, presented here in a slightly edited version but with its mighty punch intact. Dr. Ejaz carries the necessary authority to not only map the regional chessboard but to suggest to the Taliban the righteous paths to heal Afghanistan after four decades of imposed war (P.E.)
On the demand for an “all-inclusive government”
Imagine if the French revolutionaries were asked to retain the elements of the kingdom of Louis XVI while forming the new republic to keep it all ‘inclusive’.
Imagine that the American revolutionaries were asked to keep the British loyalists as a part of the new American republic to keep it all inclusive.
Imagine that the Bolsheviks were asked to keep the Czarist loyalists in the government to keep it all inclusive.
Imagine that Chairman Mao was asked to keep the Kuomintang as a part of his new set up to keep things all inclusive.
Imagine that Imam Khomeini was asked to keep the elements of Reza Shah’s puppet government to keep the new Iranian government all inclusive.
Imagine that Erdogan was asked shortly after the coup to keep the Gulen movement intact to keep the Turkish government all inclusive.
Imagine that the Saudis are asked to give due representation to a quarter of its Shi’ite population to keep the Kingdom all inclusive.
Imagine that India’s Modi is asked to give full citizenship rights to Muslims, Sikhs and other minorities to keep RSS-India all inclusive.
If all of the above cannot be, then what logic is the so-called international community practicing when asking the Taliban to keep those who aided and abetted the utterly unjustified foreign occupation as a part of their government to keep things all inclusive?
What happened in Afghanistan was not a mere change of government. A puppet state responsible for killing their own people and spreading subversion in the region was overthrown. Any talk of government comes after the state formation is complete. To keep the elements of the Ancien Regime is to keep the fifth columnists alive who can undo their half-century long struggle to keep foreign rule out. It is like asking a surgeon not to remove all the cancerous tissue from a cancer patient as it might come in handy later.
A state is one group that has to have a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. All other groups have to be disarmed and disbanded. After the state is formed and all groups subscribe to a creed that is shared by all, only then a government can be formed by a wider group of people who will reflect peoples’ sensibilities and beliefs and values. If that government does not do that the people will not consider it legitimate and the state will stage a coup and send home the government.
That state’s legitimacy comes from a principle to which the population of that country subscribes through their primordial socio-religious moorings. This common denominator in Afghanistan is none other than Muslim beliefs and values. Even though the Taliban’s overwhelming force are Pashtun (which means they practice Pashtunwali code and its understanding of Hanafi Sunni Shariah), non-Pashtun Afghans are all Muslims too. So, their common denominator still remains Islam.
Therefore, for the Taliban to insist that their rule should be built on Islamic principles is rooted in sound logic. To expect that the Afghans will subscribe to Swedish liberalism is a daydream. Ashraf Ghani was prepared to go down that foolish path, but the Taliban are too smart to do the same.
Keep in mind that the Taliban took control of the entire country without a fight. The so-called Afghan National Army disbanded so easily and hugged the Taliban fighters and many even joined them. If public opinion is not behind a resistance movement, it can never succeed.
This is the proof of Taliban’s inclusion. Unlike the Bolsheviks, the French revolutionaries, the American revolutionaries, the Saudis, the Iranians and many others who butchered their opponents on their path to power, the Taliban gave general amnesty to all. Who has more mercy in their hearts, the progenitors of the modern republics or the Taliban? We have never seen such a spectacle in recent human history. If this is not inclusion, then what is?
The reason the “international community”, as in a gang of Western nations gone rogue, is shrieking and fretting over an Islamic system for Afghanistan is because of their habitual and historical prejudice against Islam and Muslims. From crusades to colonialism, in the West’s imagination, Islam is the ultimate boogeyman. Edward Said illustrated that quite well in his famous classic, Orientalism. The contemporary Islamophobia industry is another proof of the West’s unfounded hatred of Islam. One would only hope that the Chinese and Russian political systems do not allow their ruling elite to go down that path, or else the long-term consequences for both these superpowers may not be pleasant. So far, their state media are toeing the Western logic of inclusivism, similar to their pro-America positions in the aftermath of 9/11, without much reflection as to who was right and who was wrong. We have faith that these two political systems will make better judgments this time around.
Another absurd proposition by the “August” international community is that the Taliban must fulfill the promises they made overnight. This is like asking a newborn baby to start running immediately right after being born. For anyone who knows the ABC of statecraft should know that it is not possible. First the state has to be consolidated. This will take a few months.
The interim set up must not include elements of the Ancien Regime who were on the payroll of the enemy they fought for twenty long years. Then a variety of cross-ethnic elements in the country must be recruited who subscribe to the common denominator of beliefs and values that the state is expected to be a vanguard of. This is inclusion and this will yield legitimacy of the state in the eyes of its people.
Once the state is consolidated, a government should be formed in accordance to Islamic principles. Islam is neutral to the form of government. It only insists that regardless of the form of the government, the outcome must be justice. Whether it is a kingdom, a city-state, a democracy or any other form, the outcome must be justice.
The Quran also suggests that justice is not equality. Equality is giving everyone the same; justice is giving whomever their due. Quran is kitab-al-insaf (book of justice) and not kitab-al-masawat (book of equality).
After the period of state consolidation, government formation should be achieved on the principle of meritocracy, and not multi-party democracy, in which global capitalists will turn democrats into their prostitutes and rip off the people. Honest and competent people from all ethnic backgrounds should be chosen, then trained and then run the government.
But that phase comes after the state formation process in which it must never be forgotten that that community which struggled and sacrificed enormously to throw out the foreigners should have more say in matters of state formation, compared to those who sided with the oppressor to kill their own people and their neighbors. This is common sense, which is beyond the IQ of the “international community”.
A message to the Taliban
I extend my congratulations to the ghazis of the Emirates of Afghanistan and offer prayers of condolence for those mujahideen who became martyrs in their jihad against the oppressive, atrocious and cruel governments of the U.S. and its Western allies. In two centuries of humiliation against the Muslim world, you buried the British, Bolsheviks and Yankees in your mountains along with their empires.
The hardships you have suffered and the sacrifices you have rendered for the millat have produced a character in you that is worth being proud of. Now that you have successfully defeated the foreign occupation, lots more needs to be done. The world is already suggesting you to adopt a direction which will be disastrous for you in the long run. As a scholar who is familiar with the West and East Asia, as well as the various understandings of Islam within the Islamic civilization, perhaps I am in a position to make some humble suggestions that may prove useful in charting out your future.
First and foremost, the sword from your right hand can now shift into your left hand, and you will have to grab the pen in your right hand.
Your military resistance era is now over, but you still need to defend and develop your country. While your enemies are still planning to bomb you, their kinetic efforts will be supplemented by a mischievous hybrid war, for which you may not be fully prepared. Without the power of knowledge, this hybrid war cannot be won.
Your decades-long steadfastness comes from the principle of istiqamat (one of the nine principles of Pashtunwali). You were tortured, incarcerated and killed, but the enemy could neither buy you out with money, nor could they bludgeon you into submission over the last twenty years. This shows that you have basirat (ability to see beyond the apparent facades and false promises).
These are quintessential aspects of character, which are necessary prerequisites of a morally and spiritually upright leadership in statecraft. Basirat comes from tazkiyya-i-nafs (cleansing of the soul), which in turn comes from austerity and being strict with yourself and generous with others. This too, you proved after you gave general amnesty to all who fought against you, even though it would have been perfectly Islamic to demand retribution as was done by the Nuremberg trials conducted by the victors of WWII.
Bear in mind that movements start with great spirit which wanes over time because the adherents recede into their comfort zones, become complacent and are finally overcome by the forces of evil that always lurk behind the shadows. Afghanistan will soon become one of the world’s richest countries under your leadership. Make sure that your peoples’ needs are met and they have moderate prosperity, or else excessive riches will make your population fat, lazy and coward like the Gulf Arabs.
The last big wave of Western oppression came to Afghanistan after 9/11. This wave will take about 2-4 more years to finally wane and subside permanently. When it wanes, like a tsunami it will take many unwanted bad things from your neighborhood also. Even though you do not want to transform your neighbors, many of us are already beginning to be transformed by your victory. The Kashmiri movement, the Khalistan independence movement, the Palestine movement, and the movement against corruption in Pakistan are already drawing inspiration from your victory against forces of oppression.
Islam does not accommodate secular liberal political philosophy, from the womb of which the modern democratic fraud was born. Steer clear of it. Modernist Muslims will tell you that the concept of Shura is democracy. It is not. Shura is not Western style democracy, but a system of consultation prevalent at all tiers of society, from the realm of the family to the state. Use that at every level, as you have during your resistance years.
How to deal with the big powers
The governments of Western countries were your enemies. They occupied you, spilled your blood, and destroyed regional peace. You may forgive them, but do not forget. It is best to do aggressive diplomacy at the moment, but under no circumstances should you deal with them with clemency. They do not deserve it. Starve if you have to, but do not yield to these forces. Apply the law of Pashtunwali and Shariah in dealing with them.
You say that Pakistan is your second home. If you form your government according to Islamic principles, it will eventually become a part of your first home. Afghanistan is not a nation. It is a territory that comprises many nations. Pakistan is not a nation either. It is a union of four big nationalities and a few smaller ones. It too came about in the name of Islamic values but its corrupt and westernized elites forgot the original mission. So many Pashtuns, Hazaras and Tajiks came to Pakistan successively through various wars and made it their home. You can too, not as a refugee, but as confederated citizen.
Both Afghanistan and Pakistan have learnt that on matters of defense and foreign policy, both need to be on the same page, or else there will always be trouble. If we do integrate defense and foreign policy, the economic control of your resources can remain in the Afghan hands just as the economic control of Pakistani resources may remain in the Pakistani hands.
This will only work for the short run. But since you are landlocked, you need to have access to the Pakistani territory in a way that Pakistan doesn’t need access to your territory. However, since trade with landlocked Central Asia is paramount, you can allow access to Pakistan to have access to Central Asia through which a one-sided dependency will turn into co-dependency, which will be better for both countries. Moreover, consider the following very important point.
Afghanistan is approximately 653,000 sq km, out of which arable land is only a little less than 12%, amounting to 78,360 sq km. One sq km has 247 acres. In the U.S. one acre feeds about 1-2 people. In Afghanistan, if one acre fed 10-15 people, then you can only feed less than 2 million people out of a population of approximately 38 million. The other 36 million have to be fed from Pakistan, because it is the cheapest source of surplus wheat. Pakistan’s 882,000 sq km has more than 40 percent arable land and it produces surplus wheat and rice.
You need Pakistan for your access to the sea, food security and building up a modern defense capability. If you keep practicing Afghan nationalism, and Pakistan also keeps practicing Uncle Tom’s backward ideologies from the bygone days of European enlightenment, both will remain adversaries. Pakistan will remain poor and you will starve to death. By the time you dig your resources and sell them for food and building infrastructure, you will keep indebting the Afghan people.
Pair up and partner up with Pakistan’s various sectors, except your politics. If you pledge your politics with Pakistan, we will let you down. Until a fully awake political elite comes into life in Pakistan, you should stay away. If and when it happens, then integrate with Pakistan as closely as possible.
You are most likely to produce an Iran-type of social space in the beginning. But make sure not to follow the Saudi model, because it is utterly un-Islamic. Remember, Muslim women have led armies of men in our history. We produced female scholars before any other civilization could do so. We even produced female sultanas before anywhere else.
However, since the last half a century, Afghanistan saw no peace, and women’s predicament, similar to men was focused on survival only. So, your current policy regarding women in Afghanistan is realistic enough for a conservative, warn-torn Pashtun society.
Others do not share the same outlook. Stick to Islamic injunctions and protect your women. Disallow man-hating feminist ideologies to protect the family unit. There should be enough freedom for our women. Our wellbeing depends on the wellbeing of our mothers, sisters, daughters and wives. Resist all pressure from abroad on this account and gradually re-engineer society in which women will be modest but fully participating in our civilizational and national lives.
From the point of view of food security, revisit the Islamic position on population control. Family size now should be smaller than the days of war. In two generations, manageable population size in Afghanistan should be below 20 million, as in the case of Pakistan, which should drop from 220 million to 150 million.
That is the difference between civilization and barbarism. We in the West have chosen democracy…barbarously exploited!
that seems like honest and wise advice to the peeps of afghanistan.
if only they could read it…
This letter, published as an article, has reached Suhail Shaheen, the Taliban-appointed ambassador to the UN and until recently their Doha-based spokesman.
Wel done and Thannk You Pepe!
> Imagine that India’s Modi is asked to give full citizenship rights to Muslims, Sikhs and other minorities to keep RSS-India all inclusive.
Can only come from a Pakistani. They do have full citizenship rights and India has had Muslim and Sikh Presidents. And a Sikh Prime Minister and plenty of Sikh and Muslim governors.
I request him to show me one example of Hindu counterpart in his beloved country.
yeah, there is that…
why l went the way l did was to point out, that there is NO way the people of afghanistan almost completely analphabetic, likely pathologised by generations of kinetic modern war, famine, poverty, malnutrition, tribal and familial feuds, child and sex abuse will pull themselves out of this quicksand by the strap of their boots(what boots?) – all the while the wolfs in sheep’s clothing are around every turn they may be able to actually make.
NO WAY…even if l sympathize with them.
I admire them for what they have accomplished, by the rivers of blood they have shed, but you have to realize, the numerous afghan affairs affair are ALWAYS proxy wars…and judging by the amount of hardware left behind – always will b.
c’est la guerre
He is talking about citizenship amendment act (CAA) and national register of citizens (NRC). Separately both laws seem innocent enough but taken together they constitute an attempt at genocide of muslims through revocation of citizenship. The BJP is trying its best to disenfrenchise muslims and lower castes by creating laws like the NRC while keeping loopholes like CAA open for Hindus. Already in states like Assam, muslims are languishing in internment camps and labelled Bangladeshi tresspassers because they could not produce documents in a country where majority of population never had any documents ever. People are illitrate and so.poor that they would never be able to negotiate the corrupt prejudiced burocracy and administrative officials to get their documents so as to be on the NRC.
So stop trying to feign ignorance. The writer is right on spot when he includes Modi’s RSS among the list of opressors.
“Already in states like Assam, muslims are languishing in internment camps and labelled Bangladeshi tresspassers because they could not produce documents in a country where majority of population never had any documents ever. People are illitrate and so.poor that they would never be able to negotiate the corrupt prejudiced burocracy and administrative officials to get their documents so as to be on the NRC.”
Making statements like these needs substantiation, in my opinion.
I am no fan of India, and what you say could very well be true, but you should back it up with something, a link at the very least.
There are many Pakistani trolls here of late, and one can never know who is telling the truth and who is not.
India with the world’s second largest muslim population, the Muslims have nothing to fear for. Unless they have other thoughts in mind. The writer shows his bias by calling it RSS-India. If that’s the case and y’all hate India so much, sure there’s enough countries to its east and west welcoming them. Havn’t heard that invite yet. Hell, y’all won’t take your own Syrian bretheren. Or Palestinians. If you want to say, you want to turn India into one of yours with uncontrolled birth rates and depopulate Hindus’ say it. It’s almost visible in the no-go muslim areas in India.
As it has been shown in India clearly, muslims are Muslims first and Indian next. NM as the elected leader of India owes it to his electorate and not to Pakistan.
This is India today. Open genocide of poor downtrodden muslims.
Even reporters joining in the massacre of the poor and weak.
“Hell, y’all won’t take your own Syrian bretheren. Or Palestinians.”
Check how many syrian and palestinian refugees Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon took.
“If you want to say, you want to turn India into one of yours with uncontrolled birth rates and depopulate Hindus’ say it.”
Pew study: Little change in India’s religious make-up in 70 years. (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-58595040)
Fertility rates of Hindus and Muslims converging: study
Sharp decline in fertility rate among Muslims: Study
“As it has been shown in India clearly, muslims are Muslims first and Indian next.”
You will get the same response from most of the practicing muslims that they are muslims first, irrespective of their nationality. Some do not even believe in the modern system of nation states. To a muslim, the sovereignty of a nation state is a blasphemy, sovereignty belongs to god alone and nothing can be supreme that god. Muslims believe that humans cannot make their own laws and constitution to replace the god’s law for humans.
As far as i can see, this non-inclusiveness thing in the case of India might get two different readings. It s rather ambivalent in the author s own way of assessment.
Is it historically OK and necessary to suppress the previous ruling class and their main stream currents just to make it feasible to stabilize a new process? or do we readers in general judge it under severe moral bans?
>I request him to show me one example of Hindu counterpart in his beloved country.
Do not expect Pakistan to have a hindu leader, because Pakistan is a declared Islamic republic while India is a secular republic.
Well, Pashunistan is in the making. The Durand line senselessly not only separated Pashtuns it also cut their source of livelihood if they live on the unluck side. All this talk of self sufficiency would go away if that line did not exist and Baluchistan was either independent or part of Afghanistan. What will be left of Pakistan then?
65% Pushtun live in Pakistan, while Afghanistan has only 35% of the total population. So Pushtuns of Afganistan would merge together with those in Pakistan. What would happen to Akhand Bharat then?
Pashtunistan is more like a dead idea now. Taliban split into afghan taliban and TTP due to disagreement over taking back pashtun areas from pakistan, which shows that the afghan taliban in power wants to have a peaceful relationship with Pakistan. And Pakistan has in the past defeated TTP. many pashto nationalists are secular, so do not expect them to be supported by afghan taliban.
Dwell on this passage:
“You say that Pakistan is your second home. If you form your government according to Islamic principles, it will eventually become a part of your first home. Afghanistan is not a nation. It is a territory that comprises many nations. Pakistan is not a nation either. It is a union of four big nationalities and a few smaller ones. It too came about in the name of Islamic values but its corrupt and westernized elites forgot the original mission. So many Pashtuns, Hazaras and Tajiks came to Pakistan successively through various wars and made it their home. You can too, not as a refugee, but as confederated citizen.”
The author proposes a confederation built of two countries, which he says both are not nations.
I find this explosive. Pakistan is a nuclear nation. And this guy calls for Taliban to be a confederated citizen of Pakistan.
So, what is wrong with a major terrorist group becoming confederates of a nuclear armed state sponsor of terrorism?
Don’t you want Pakistan to kill all the Indians?
Don’t you want Pakistan to destroy Iran, so they can take their rightful place as the leader of the Muslim world?
Don’t you want Afghanistan to be the fourth brother — next to Turkey, Baku, and Pakistan?
Don’t you want ISIS-K to finally have their own state?
Why is everyone so anti-Pak anti-Muslim?
the move now is to start smuggling some of the left behind hardware into the xinjiang uighur autonomous region
that is the way you do it…
Now. I get it.
Wondered for whom the left behind weaponry was intended.
and from xinjiang uighur autonomous region smuggle it to hk and taiwan!
WooHoo! Mission Accomplished!
I can see the article has shaken you up and rattled up your fears now that manifest destiny is looking you right in the face.
The fact that you have to make efforts to stick all these abbreviations together to try and make some perverted sense speaks volumes that you are.one of those who understand the truth and yet try to create mischief and corruption by trying to subvert it. Mark my words Your narrative is lost.
“The author proposes a confederation built of two countries, which he says both are not nations.”
There is nothing to be surprised about, Pashtuns move between both the nations regularly and many have Pakistani nationality.
The devout muslims of both the states want to see a islamic system in pakistan with full implementation fo sharia law, so the orthodox muslims would not oppose any attempts for such a transformation. Pakistani muslims were celebrating the taliban takeover hoping for a similar islamic system in Pakistan and a mosque even hoisted the taliban flag.
“Imagine that Imam Khomeini was asked to keep the elements of Reza Shah’s puppet government to keep the new Iranian government all inclusive.”
It was Mohamadreza Shah, not Reza Shah.
And the Iranian Revolutionaries made up something like 90% of the Iranian adult population, and the Revolutionary leaders were not all from one very racist ethnic group.
Then you point to the fact that nobody put up a fight against the Taliban. Let’s look at the most famous example, Ismail Khan. Why didn’t he put up a fight? Because he was in favor of the Taliban? Or because Iran told him to stand down for the sake of peace?
Then you say that the Afghan government killed their own people. Did the Taliban never kill Hazaras and Shias? I guess they are not “their own people”, eg. Pashtuns.
There are many politicians in Afghanistan who are true nationalists, and are absolutely not Western puppets. Hamid Karzai and Abdullah Abdullah are the first ones that come to mind. Better get the Taliban to murder them, so your logic of “can’t have anyone from the previous ‘regime’ involved in the new government, because they are all Western puppets” actually becomes true.
I could go through this article sentence by sentence and argue against every single point made here. Does that mean I do not want what is best for Pakistan? Or you don’t want what’s best for Afghanistan?
Yes, the essay is full of holes because the like of the Escobar left, like Hollywood Yanks, have a fetish for turban heads galloping into the sunset. But people on horsebacks, or humvees, can’t govern which requires literacy and the ability to sieve truth from a jumble of facts existing today in propaganda.
Here’s another factual error. Between the birth of CPC in 1931 and 1949, the party collaborated with the Kuomintang not once but three times for extended periods. Still in Taiwan today, the Kuomintang is tolerated to rule the island on only one condition. That’s inclusive isn’t it?
The trouble with the essay’s argument is known as false equivalence, and worse for it, resting entirely on one leg – inclusive. This is so Yankee in thought, by an Anglo-trained academic who, like Taliban 2.0, is bothered by what other people think or say and so spent more time on TV than to administer, which is not even for the sake of, say, China and Russia. (We Chinese don’t care other than you don’t touch Xinjiang. Where we can help, we will, being neighbors.) Afghanistan belongs to all Afghans, regardless of a colonial past which you can’t undo. That is the starting point. And the Taliban knows what’s meant by inclusive. As to other opinions like this essay, they are just postmodern jingoist claptrap.
The author is Pakistani. He ignores three facts of Pakistan history.
First, the Taliban have been supported by the Pakistan government as a terrorist group.
Second, the Haqqani Network is supported by the Pakistan government as a terrorist group.
Third, the Khorsan ISIS terrorists (ISIS-K) are supported by the Pakistan government.
Ignoring these realities and the internal dynamics at play within the formation of the government is most peculiar.
Like any military, they are hard to send to the barracks and stand down.
There are plenty of sources of pay to keep thousands of fighters in action.
US, UK, Pakistan, India and Iran for starters.
“There are many politicians in Afghanistan who are true nationalists, and are absolutely not Western puppets. Hamid Karzai and Abdullah Abdullah are the first ones that come to mind. ”
You mentioned the very first puppets to be independent.
“Third, the Khorsan ISIS terrorists (ISIS-K) are supported by the Pakistan government.”
Can you provide any link backing the claim?
“Third, the Khorsan ISIS terrorists (ISIS-K) are supported by the Pakistan government.”
Can you provide any link backing the claim?”
What stands out is that you did not ask for a link to back up the claim that Pakistan supports the Taliban and the Haqqani Network, which means you know that much is true.
ISIS-K was formed by Pakistani and Afghan terrorists who were previously members of the Taliban. They did so because they were supposedly dissatisfied with the Taliban.
So, ISIS-K is an offshoot of the Taliban, just like the Haqqani Network is an offshoot of the Taliban. Why would Pakistan support the two, but not the third? I don’t know, but I can think of why Pakistan would support the third: to keep the Taliban in check, for one.
Another relevant fact here is that ISIS-K boasts Al Qaeda members among its ranks, and as an organization is much more sympathetic to ISIS and Al Qaeda, than the Taliban.
And now that the Taliban are the Islamic Emirate, together with the Haqqani Network, and they are expected to act civilized, who will be the terrorists?
Enter ISIS-K, right on time.
The Taliban are a tool, and to form an ISIS-style offshoot from the Taliban is as easy as 1-2-3, for those who command and handle the Taliban; hence, ISIS-K.
What does all this mean, when added together? It means the Pakistanis have been working with the CIA and Mossad, orchestrating this whole terrorist freak show, from the very beginning.
Dr. Ejaz Akram speaks the words of a sage :
— Your military resistance era is now over, but you still need to defend and develop your country.
— You gave general amnesty to all who fought against you, even though it would have been perfectly Islamic to demand retribution as was done by the Nuremberg trials conducted by the victors of WWII
— Shura is not Western style democracy, but a system of consultation prevalent at all tiers of society, from the realm of the family to the state. Use that at every level, as you have during your resistance years.
Dr. Ejaz Akram also speaks the words of a realist :
— Afghanistan is not a nation. It is a territory that comprises many nations. Pakistan is not a nation either. It is a union of four big nationalities and a few smaller ones. It too came about in the name of Islamic values but its corrupt and westernized elites forgot the original mission.
— If you keep practicing Afghan nationalism, and Pakistan also keeps practicing Uncle Tom’s backward ideologies from the bygone days of European enlightenment, both will remain adversaries.
But Dr. Ejaz Akram’s remedy is certainly not strategically far-sighted :
— Pair up and partner up with Pakistan’s various sectors, except your politics.
It seems to me that the Taliban’s own pronouncements are made in full knowledge of the complexity of the present context and their vision appears to be way more strategic. They have indeed expressed their willingness to find a way to insert Afghanistan as one of the most strategic nodes in the New Silk Roads (Belt and Roads). Well executed such a move would gain the country the following :
— the financing of a modern infrastructure and of a mining sector that would procure steady revenues to the country
— this infrastructure would rapidly procure a real inter-connectedness with its neighbors and with the world at large which would be the mightiest incentive for liberating the economic creativity of its citizens
— its newly found inter-connectedness would open the possibility of all kinds of partnerships with its neighbors including with Pakistan.
The idea of pairing up and partnering with Pakistan in the present context would, I’m afraid, unnecessarily inflame ideological passions …risking to annihilate the present show of goodwill by the country’s neighbors.
“Dr. Ejaz Akram also speaks the words of a realist :
— Afghanistan is not a nation. It is a territory that comprises many nations. Pakistan is not a nation either. ”
Not ‘realistic’ at all, laodan.
Pakistan is not a nation. It has not existed for very long, and it has no history as “the Nation of Pakistan.”
Afghanistan is a nation. I wonder how many Afghans you have met? I have met hundreds, like most Iranians. There are millions of them in Iran, mostly in Tehran.
They all identify as “Awghan” ie. Afghan. Not once have I heard an Afghan in Iran say that he is a Tajik, Hazara, or anything else except “Awghan”. And even the fully Persian ones from the North of Afghanistan, are so nationalistic, that the mere idea of becoming part of Iran, does not bode well with them at all, because they proudly proclaim their “Awghan” heritage and nationhood. (Forget the idea of becoming part of Pakistan, whom they despise.)
Afghanistan has a relatively long history (compared to Pakistan).
Mahmud Hotaki, aka Mahmud the Afghan, the Emir of Afghanistan, sacked the Iranian capital of Isfahan in 1722, and for a very brief period, ruled as Shah of Persia, before he suddenly and inexplicably went mad and dropped dead.
So, if 300 years ago, there were people who identified as Afghans, who had their own King or Emir, and who conquered neighboring nations in the name of the Afghans, by what logic does this author claim that Afghanistan is not a nation?
And of course, after the fall of the Hotaki dynasty,
“Ahmad Shah Durrani, who is considered the founder of the modern state of Afghanistan, belonged to the Abdali tribe. In 1747, after establishing the Afghan Empire based in Kandahar, he adopted the epithet Shāh Durr-i-Durrān, “King, Pearl of Pearls,” and changed the name of the tribe to “Durrani” after himself.”
So, not only were the Afghans a distinct nation under Mahmoud, but they also became the modern state which you see today, under Ahmad Durrani, in 1747.
The only logic I can see against Afghanistan being a nation is that not everyone there is a Pashtun. But Iran is a nation, and not everyone in Iran is a Persian. So, why would this double standard apply to Afghanistan?
This article has a clear and unashamed agenda, and it resorts to telling the Afghans that they are not a nation, in order to try and put them on the same footing with Pakistan.
And the author also has other hidden motives.
Afghan and Pashtun are synonymous. The Pashtuns were the original Afghans, who gave the country its name, like the Persians who gave their name to Persia, which was only renamed to Iran in the last century.
The Pashto language is also called the Afghani language.
So, this clever Pakistani writer, rather than concede that Pashtunistan belongs to the Afghans, which is the sane and rational option, wants all of Afghanistan to become part of Pakistan.
” [He]…ruled… before he suddenly and inexplicably went mad and dropped dead”?
Poison, the lubricant of conspiracies. Ever modern, ever present, ever effective.
All it takes is a knowledge of mushrooms.
Ask any ‘advanced’ Western nation’s “intelligence agencies” even today.
“Mahmud Hotaki, aka Mahmud the Afghan, the Emir of Afghanistan, sacked the Iranian capital of Isfahan in 1722, and for a very brief period, ruled as Shah of Persia, before he suddenly and inexplicably went mad and dropped dead.”
He was surely poisoned by British agents who then blamed Russia… old cor-Sirs ethos coming from Dioclecianus at least…
Can you kindly point out where this “clever” Pakistani wants Afghanistan to be part of Pakistan.
If you run after your own tail, you are going to become dizzy.
Read the article again. Perhaps it might broaden your outlook and the horizons might become visible.
It seems you are one of those for whom the Emirate does not bode well.
The biggest tragedy for Afghanistan and Taliban is that as a revolutionary movement they’re allied with a counter revolutionary state of Pakistan. Because such an alliance will only lead to even more ethnocentrism and sectarianism and even more violations of basic humanity of all Afghans – women men and children. Pakistani alliance as the Pakistani author of this article has stated is with the western bankrupt elites and the job of its ruling class is to do the work of the western ruling class in the region. An alliance with such a society can only lead to disaster for the Taliban as was the case 20 years back. If indeed Taliban 2.0 are smarter they’d begin taking immediate steps towards learning from a true Islamic Republic that actually had a real revolution: Iran. And politely tell Pakistanis to begin packing their bags. Patriotic Afghan Taliban have nothing to learn from Pakistan. Pakistan may however have a lot to learn from Afghanistan on how to at the very least check imperialism. Even more sickening is Pakistanis taking credit for the expulsion of the US from Afghanistan. Afghans very imperfect no doubt expelled the US.
Distinguished historian, I am grateful for your insights, and I agree that asking the taliban to be inclusive is imracical. Please forgive me for being pedantic by adding this item which I read here, simply because you mentioned the kuomintang, Mao, and inclusion. Perhas there is a distinct mainland kuomintang party?
By Godfree Roberts
“One-third of National People’s Congresspeople are not Communist Party members, nor are other parties merely decorative. Parties like the Kuomintang and the Jiusan Society (whose all-PhD members campaign for climate initiatives, increased R&D budgets, and data-driven health policies) regularly produce outstanding Ministers.”
Thank you Pepe for getting this interview.
A heart-felt piece from a Pakistani to the Taliban with some sincere advice on how to move forward. Some parts quite similar to what Imran Khan said to an American talking head on TV who was insisting on ‘inclusivity’ and ‘human rights’ from the Talibs.
First and foremost, the sword from your right hand can now shift into your left hand, and you will have to grab the pen in your right hand.
I hope the Talibs will take this on board and obey the Islamic injunction to take advice — whether on economic, diplomatic, educational, social matters — from those who are learned in their fields and not promulgate policies solely based on their own opinion.
Imran Khan interview:
I can’t help but notice that several commentators continue to refer to the Talibs as ‘terrorists’ and conflate them with ZioWahhabi projects such as Al-Qaeda or ISIS. That’s unfortunate because to my mind these commentators have swallowed hook, line and sinker the MSM narrative about the Taliban — they’re terrorists while we, who drop bombs on wedding parties, are the beacon of all that is good, completely obscuring the fact that as practitioners of terror, the Empire has no equal.
You are wrong in thinking that non-muslims will welcome the taliban as a liberating force. Most of the people who come to this site oppose western imperialism, but it does not mean that they are sympathetic towards taliban or even orthodox muslims who share the same goal as them of opposing western imperialism. Having the same goal does not mean being friends and allies. The taliban are seen as terrorists because they gave refugee to osama bin ladin, the accused in 9/11. So non-muslims are not going to see the taliban as a force of good. Most of the people are also from societies that have undergone liberalism, which is the antithesis of sharia law, so they will oppose sharia and those who implement it, including the taliban.
Excellent advice, as a Muslim I appreciate it. The sunsets in the West. Nations need to remember that or they will be doomed. The professor’s rebuttal to the West is superb. I have to bring your attention to two things: 1- 1 km square equals 247 acres. The arable land is 78360 square km. That is 19.35 million acres. If we we take 4 people for each acre, they can feed 77 million people. I think the 4 people can live off of an acre. In the USA every thing is over priced and over taxed.
2- the population reduction subject is very sensitive a subject to many Muslims to discuss. I deal with it all the time. I have hard time discussing it with some fellow Muslims. I hate for you to lose some readers because of it. I appreciate your writings, I feel they stem from the heart and sincere. Peace, Salam.
Indeed, I agree with your comment.
It has excellent tone and gravitas.
With the mainland Chinese achieving escape velocity in 30-years after 300 years of shame (from British drug dealers) and maintaining a Government (of/by the people) with firm control over its emerging oligarch business class — the Jack Ma’s who were meant to become corrupted to the core, take over and bring the mainland colony back under the criminal Anglo-American control — we have reason why the ‘Londonites’ went full mouth-foaming mental in their so called, common parliament when the Washington DC gangland regime pulled the plug and ran.
As for you “The sunsets in the West. Nations need to remember that or they will be doomed.” — perhaps a bit more wishful thinking on your part, imo. It is simply returning to a more multipolar mix at the geopolitical levels. There are good and right cantered peoples in the USA and other localities. The hegemonic criminal systems must and will fail and dissolve — but only to the point (we trust) that allows these same types grounded in the real world of family and honest work to rise up as the class they are and retake control of their governments.
There were many wise points in the professor’s essay. But the clearest one, imo, relates to defocus on the specific form of government — they are and should be culturally attuned to be good (ethically and technically) — and rather a focus on the outcomes achieved and their relationship to justice.
There is just one minor metaphorical point I would comment on. “Crusades to Colonialism” is a catchy phrase.
But the British (European) colonial phase bursting out of the European Enlightenment and Industrial revolution (with its enclosures etc) is only the last of several waves of the same. Whence did Islam invade and colonise the Indian sub-continent? Go ask the Tamils. Whence were skulls pilled wall-high in Persia from Mongol swords? Whence today’s Turks that pray in the Greek and Eastern Roman empire’s Hagia Sophia? Whence did a handful of cunning and conniving Spanish/Portuguese get the subaltern support to overthrow the Inca and south American empires? Did not the Islamic empire that basically informed and enculturated a medieval Europe in the religious Dark Ages (that then bit the hand that raised it) also rise and fall due to macro-historical cycles — as the Islamic philosopher Ibn Khaldun observed?
Let’s smile and wash our hands at the apparent trends on this cusp of opportunity; and learn which one is used for what end(s); and get on with the job of building a new world and deconstructing the parasitic criminal networks that are infesting the body corporate globally like chronic mange on an infested street dog. Very few places are exempt.
However, let’s not grin and smirk in a superior sense as if it has not happened before, and will happen again in the long stretch of time. There is much to be thankful for from the European phase (e.g. technology). It has clearly had its ‘mandate from heaven’ for a time. But now, at least in the USA and UK, it is failing from its own backstabbing, agreement incapable, amoral confused mediocrity lead from behind by criminal genius in imaginary fiat-finance affairs. Who holds up the sky when the pillars fail? Let’s not fall into the same hubris we see in them and wish for its end. Rather, let’s prepare for its reconstruction on reverted (not converted) terms. The professor’s words are Sufi-wise. I hope the people in Afghanistan can hear him and follow his advice.
All those ‘Whences’ requires money, lots of money. Who today, as back ‘then’, has/had that kind of control of finances to fund trillion dollars wars; adjusted for today’s inflation of course?
If writing articles like this is what Pakistan’s Sufi-wise are doing nowadays, then they have completely missed the point of Sufism. And if you find these words to be ‘Sufi-wise’, then you must have never read Rumi or Shams.
Either way, half of the statements made in this article have already been shown to be false or inaccurate by the commentators.
Your praise and deference here says more about you, than it does about the professor or the article.
“To expect that the Afghans will subscribe to Swedish liberalism is a daydream.”
I don’t see what is to prevent the Afghans subscribing to Swedish Liberalism. Why couldn’t the Taliban shoot gun down their Prime Minister out for a quiet stroll outside his home? Why couldn’t the Taliban set a honey trap and start an international conspiracy to imprison and execute an innocent man for telling the truth? Why couldn’t the Taliban whip up an anti-Russian confrontation that will most likely lead to nuclear winter?
I can dream, can’t I?
“To expect that the Afghans will subscribe to Swedish liberalism is a daydream”. If Swedish (and Western) way of life is so unacceptable to Muslims, why do so many Muslims seek to make a better life for themselves in Sweden and the West? Or perhaps they seek to undermine their hosts while accepting their hospitality?
” legitimacy comes from a principle to which the population of that country subscribes through their primordial socio-religious moorings”. Primordial? What is the origin of ‘their primordial moorings’? How far back in history? And if Sweden becomes Sharia Islamic in its socio-religious beliefs as a result of giving hospitality to countless ‘refugees’, is this “primordial” or something imposed in the name of inclusion?
It seems to me that Dr Akram argues in favour of bigotry and intolerance of the self-righteous and the suppression of non-believers. Smacks of Saudi Arabia to me.
Most muslims dont eagerly go to these countries. The reason why muslims seek to make life in west is because many muslim countries have been destroyed by the west. People from these countries will naturally go to states which would provide them the best economic outcomes. Muslim countries like Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq have been destroyed by the NATO. Muslim countries like Iran which do not submit to the hegemony are under endless sanctions. States like Pakistan still reeling under the effects of doing the dirty work of NATO. France played a similar role of destroying north african countries.
A simple strategy of preventing muslim immigrants from entering western christian states is to not invade muslim countries and destroy them.
Though I mostly agree with Dr. Ejaz Akram, He has made an error regarding the ability of Afghanistan to feed its own people. If 12 % of Afghanistan is arable = 78,342 km2…. that is ample land to feed all Afghani. Denmark measures 42.933 km2 i all and feeds 10-15 million mostly by way of livestock, meaning Denmark could transition to a more crop-centred farming strategy.
Even by Dr Akram’s on calculus the arable lands of Afghanistan could feed 78,332 km2 * 247 acres/km2 * 10 people feed/acre = 193,5 million people…
LOL! The sneaky Pakistanis trying to get one over on the illiterate Taliban.
Definitely you must be a “Bhakt”. Am I right? That is why you used the word “sneaky”. You probably saw yourself in the mirror.
The leadership in charge of the emirate are brave, and sophisticated people who speak Persian, Pushto and Arabic. They respect their own culture and take pride in it.
It is you who is illiterate with an inborn inferiority complex unsure where he belongs.
Wake up. Times are changing. The Emirate is a reality. And it is going to wake up a lot of downtrodden and disenfranchised people.
‘crop-centred farming’; vast fields of wheat, oat, and pulses liberaly sparyed with glycophosphates which in turn will boost the bottom end of Denmarks Royal Dutch Shell (if they still own it)………stick with the animals, we humans have always been hunter gathers.
“In two generations, manageable population size in Afghanistan should be below 20 million,”
I am assuming Afghanistan’s demographic pyramid looks like a pagoda rather than like an obese Western man (or woman, or lghdekfjkdf whatever fake cybertransorganism being concocted as the new mandatory *normality*).
And professor is talking here of killing 10 million of Afghans in 40-50 years?
Does he work for the Bill Graves and Vaccina Foundation?
Just 10 million of the people who harbor anti-Pakistani sentiment.
They’ve already got the name of everyone who was chanting “death to Pakistan” in Kabul last month.
Exquisitely imaginable — since it really happened:
“Imagine that Chairman Mao was asked to keep the Kuomintang as a part of his new set up to keep things all inclusive.”
The good professor of religion should read up on China: Until this very day, Guó’míndǎng (Kuo-min-tang) have been represented in both govenment and representative organs in the People’s Republic of China (“Red China”). Sun Yat-Sen’s widow and several other Kuomintang grandees stood on top of the Tiananmén then the new Peopl’s Republic of China was proclaimed on the first day of October 1949. Nowadays, there are even representatives of the non-Hàn tribes on the island of Táiwan (the Gāoshān nationalities) present at major political acempbly events in China (Bĕijing and other places) almost every year.
“Pen and sword (should be ) in accord.”
Belief in an all powerful god which has handed down the “right” way to live is destined to failure. There is no supernatural power of any kind nor is there any need in the universe for one. The Abrahamic religions worship power – the power of Yahweh – far above human life. The slaughter of innocents to appease a vengeful god and rid the world of evil is fundamental to all three cosmologies which in the end are the same, power over human life and not life itself is what is adored and worshiped. There are no gods, there is lust for power.
There are no gods, there is lust for power. Creating societies based on the dominance of power over human life will never work to produce “justice” The Abrahamic religions all have the same cosmology of the worship of power over human life. Islam, Judaism, Christianity all worship the same god a god of power over all and it is that power which is most holey and sacred not human life.
Re: Pakistan and stability
Perhaps much was lost in translation, as I am assuming the author originally wrote in Urdu or Pashtu to the Taliban.
English can be an inadequate language translating from richer languages.
Several dangerous ideas stood out, if translated correctly.
Does the author realize he may be inciting battle-tested guerrillas with $85 billion of US hardware to cross the Durand line and help dissolve his own nation?
And that was the likely motive for leaving all that hardware behind?
Pakistan helped opened Pandora’s Box in the late 1970s and the chickens are coming home to roost.
It never ends well becoming the playground of both extremism and the Anglo-Zionists.
We may soon have the terrifying simultaneous spectacle of civil war in the nuclear armed territories of USA and Pakistan.
For northern Eurasia, the billions invested in pipelines, train tracks and nuclear ice breakers will mitigate the endless foolish tribalism and hatreds of southern Eurasia. But Europe has to be standing too for there to be trade to that western peninsula!
Reminder of the Pentagon’s 2001 road map, typed up a Col. Ralph Peters: 𝙎𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮, 𝘼𝙢𝙚𝙧𝙞𝙘𝙖’𝙨 𝙀𝙣𝙚𝙢𝙮
Some of the author’s statements are made from an ivory tower:
“𝘈 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦. 𝘈𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥.”
▪︎ Pashtuns, like fierce tribal peoples worldwide, will never accept being disarmed. Think of deplorables in USA or Yemenis; some cultures will always remain macho. And this has been the case in parts of his own Pakistan up to today.
“𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 “𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺”, 𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘨𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘶𝘦, 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘈𝘧𝘨𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘫𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘴…”
▪︎ Agreed. Unfortunately, the main issue is currently not the Western countries, who can be relied to maintain this evil course for another 1,000 years, but the traitors and 5th columns within body of Islam who love to maintain their sectarianism and ancient hatreds of each other. Like Pakistan for example, which was the primary base of logistics of the war on Afghan by outsiders. Time to stop blaming outsiders for problems mainly caused within.
“𝘞𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘸𝘰 [Russian and Chinese] 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘫𝘶𝘥𝘨𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥”
▪︎ Relying on the goodwill of different civilizations with their own interests is unwise. Manage/strengthen your own house and it will draw respect and cooperation. Rely on others and eventually a corrupt generation of outsiders will arise which will enslave you.
“𝘗𝘢𝘪𝘳 𝘶𝘱 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘯𝘦𝘳 𝘶𝘱 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘗𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯’𝘴 𝘷𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴…”
▪︎ Most unwise. Until Pakistan becomes a reliable and trustworthy neighbor, it should be handled with care. The author himself admits the corruption of Pakistan’s elites. Trade with Pakistan and have cordial relations, but do not trust or dream about having a symbiotic relationship until their western comprador-mentality changes. Rather, consideration should be given to multilateral platforms currently fighting for stability and supporting Afghan against Anglo-Zionists, such as SCO and CSTO.
I could go on, and appreciate the good will shown by the author, but the key issue is not Taliban or inclusiveness but a perfidious Pakistani neighbor.
Afghanistan should keep clear until dignified sovereignty, neighborly beneficence and Islamic integrity are established first most among Pakistani elites.
The author meant to disarm ‘groups’, not individuals. For example, disarming ISISK and not pashtun individuals.
The support to NATO was first given by gen, Pervez Musharraf, who is hated by many in Pakistan for this very reason of supporting the NATO because Bush gave him the ultimatum of ‘you are either with us or against us’. The NATO arm twisted Pakistan. Pakistan also had to pay a heavy price of NATO bombings.
The taliban is cautious of Russia and China as much as both of these countries are cautious of the taliban. The taliban being orthodox muslims, understands that on is a primarily christian country and the other one is an atheist. But as the author mentioned, Afghanistan is a landlocked country and needs support from it’s neighbors to develop.
The current Pakistani military-civilian government has indicated many times that the destiny of Pakistan and Afghanistan is essentially tied, there wouldn’t be peace and stability in Pakistan without peace and stability in Afghanistan.
It’s disappointing that Pẹpẹ Escobar endorses this balderdash coming from an apparent fanatic academic.
“I could go on, and appreciate the good will shown by the author, but the key issue is not Taliban or inclusiveness but a perfidious Pakistani neighbor.
Afghanistan should keep clear until dignified sovereignty, neighborly beneficence and Islamic integrity are established first most among Pakistani elites.”
This approach appears to make a lot of sense. The ‘westernized Pakistani elite’ Pakistan appears to be a wedge the Empire has left to continue waging war on Afghanistan/regionally by other means, possibly extending war to other targets by way of Afghanistan.
The related question is the vast amount of weapons reportedly left behind by the Americans. There surely is a calculated reason for that, that is not consistent with the supposed hurried flight of the Americans from Afghanistan leaving massive weaponry behind.
The Taliban must govern in their nationalist ways and programs they see as essential for nationalist development, developed over many years using their party in the process. That is obvious, logical and the only way to go unless the Taliban are prepared to be subverted by ‘inclusiveness’!
Why is the Pakistani role basic in SCO approach? How influential is the Hegemon in SCO Affairs?
Lots of positive noise about the SCO its huge positive potential and independent orientation that locks out the hegemon. Yet the hegemon is likely to be in there somewhere working against SCO development.
The appearance of Pakistan, a major potential regional source of subversion/destabilization, in a pivotal role in attempts at Afghani reconstruction is quite suggestive of activity of hegemonic/Zionist money influence within the SCO
Thank you for writing and publishing this, Dr. Akram, and thank you for sharing it, Pepe. I hope the interim government in Afghanistan will have the room and wisdom to follow and act on your counsel.
I am surprised that Pepe Escobar has not seen such hogwash from the Pakistani religio-millitary establishment before. They talk like this to disarm the unsuspecting while ISI starts with the dirty work in the background.
But, to me, at this time it doesn’t seem that this game can’t continue for long now.