What's new

The partition of Afghanistan for peace

ajtr

BANNED
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
9,357
Reaction score
0
The partition of Afghanistan for peace
— Musa Khan Jalalzai

Experts understand that in the case of an ethnic division, Northern Afghanistan would be a safe and a modern independent country

The recent debates about the partition of Afghanistan for peace in London and Washington have received plenty of reactions from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Afghans understand that the old state machine of their country is no more working as it cannot accommodate all ethnic colours within its torn and bruised body. Technocrats believe that all parts of the machine have become outdated as it has not been able to address the issue of ethnicity, sectarianism and national reconstruction since 1992. Conversely, there are different opinions in Pakistan. Some believe that Pakistan needs a strong and united Afghanistan, while some agree on the issue of partition for peace. The 30-year long civil war all but consumed the state and society and now Afghanistan is considered to be a failed, militarised, corrupt and a less than functioning state.

As per its tribal structure and ethnic composition, the country has never built up a professional army as it has been dependent on tribal, private and criminal militias for decades. As a failed, broken and polarised state, the country has been embroiled in intense ethnic and sectarian violence and unable to deliver good governance to its citizens. The government of President Hamid Karzai has lost its legitimacy. To elucidate the main causes of state failure in Afghanistan, I want to quote prominent author Robert I Rotberg’s valuable ideas about a failed state:

“Weak states include a broad continuum of states that are: inherently weak because of geographical, physical, or fundamental economic constraints; basically strong, but temporarily or situationally weak because of internal antagonism, management flaws, greed, despotism, or external attacks; and a mixture of the two. Weak states typically harbour ethnic, religious, linguistic, or other inter-communal tensions that have not yet, or not yet thoroughly, become overtly violent. Failed states are tense, deeply conflicted, dangerous, and contested bitterly by warring factions.”

In the case of Afghanistan, the state failure is characterised by weak and corrupt governance, lawlessness, unprofessional approach to the affairs of the state, drug and arms trafficking and the Taliban insurgency. As mentioned earlier, civil wars that characterise failed states like Afghanistan usually stem from or have roots in ethnicity, factionalism and sectarianism. According to Rotberg’s recent analysis, in most failed states, regimes prey on their own constituents. Most experts understand that criminal violence is also a contributing factor to the causes of a failed state. As Afghan state authority has weakened, failed and became criminal in the oppression of its citizens, lawlessness became more apparent. Criminal gangs take over the streets and arms and drugs trafficking has become more dangerous.

The issue of the adjustment of various ethnic colours in the tribal structure of the country has never been discussed on government level. Durranis ruled the country for centuries but brought no change in the lives of poor Afghans; therefore the only solution to the century old conflict is a partition for peace. War criminals in Northern Afghanistan and some elements in the Karzai administration demand a decentralised system of power but suggest partition on ethnic lines will bring peace to the whole region. In May 2012, the US signed a strategic agreement with Afghanistan and proposed the removal of the Durand Line between Pakistan and Afghanistan. US General David Petraeus proposed that the international boundary between Pakistan and Afghanistan is to be eliminated. The Durand Line divides Pashtuns between Pakistan and Afghanistan. When Pakistan became independent in 1947, it declared the Durand Line its international border. Afghan rulers tried to settle the issue by offering Pakistan some sort of a secret recognition of the border as an internationally recognised border. President Daud in a Shalimar Bagh ceremony gave Ziaul Haq the same offer. Experts understand that in the case of an ethnic division, Northern Afghanistan would be a safe and a modern independent country and in the South Pashtuns would be allowed to join Pakistan.

The recent Plans B and C for the ethnic division of Afghanistan began a new debate in both the US and Europe. Plan C worked out by Tory MP and Foreign Office aide Tobias Ellwood proposes the partition of Afghanistan into eight kingdoms (Kabul, Kandahar, Herat, Mazar-e-Sharif, Kunduz, Jalalabad, Khost and Bamyan). This plan, though still under discussion, has enraged some elements in the corrupt Afghan administration. Ellwood warns that Afghanistan will face a bleak future after the withdrawal of the NATO forces. According to newspaper reports, this plan was presented by the British Foreign Minister William Hague and discussed with the US administration. On September 9, Ellwood had shared this plan with the Pakistani officials in London. Recently in Kabul, the US ambassador to Afghanistan denied the plan to break up Afghanistan as part of a peace deal with the Taliban, but some of my friends in both the defence and foreign ministries in Kabul confirmed the plan and said the game has started.

The former Indian diplomat and writer, M K Bhadrakumar in his recent article has doubted the security transition process in Afghanistan, saying things have come to a pass that the NATO can no longer trust the Afghan army. A British filmmaker in his recent revelation warned, “I think that various warlords will once again have their fiefdoms and that this will be exacerbated by the reduction in foreign aid. I think Afghanistan will disappear from our newspapers...”

Since 2001, after thousands of US soldiers killed and injured, about $ 400 billion spent and hundreds of thousands of Afghan men and women dead, the mission still remains incomplete. By the end of 2014, when the Americans leave the country, the Taliban will return. Democracy will stop working and the economy will not be self-sustaining. Once the threat of civil war or the Taliban marching to Kabul emerges, thousands of Afghan army soldiers will leave their barracks and a large-scale defection will start. The partition of Afghanistan may not be acceptable to the Afghans but it is the only option for them to live in peace.
 
. .
The partition of Afghanistan for peace
— Musa Khan Jalalzai

Experts understand that in the case of an ethnic division, Northern Afghanistan would be a safe and a modern independent country

The recent debates about the partition of Afghanistan for peace in London and Washington have received plenty of reactions from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Afghans understand that the old state machine of their country is no more working as it cannot accommodate all ethnic colours within its torn and bruised body. Technocrats believe that all parts of the machine have become outdated as it has not been able to address the issue of ethnicity, sectarianism and national reconstruction since 1992. Conversely, there are different opinions in Pakistan. Some believe that Pakistan needs a strong and united Afghanistan, while some agree on the issue of partition for peace. The 30-year long civil war all but consumed the state and society and now Afghanistan is considered to be a failed, militarised, corrupt and a less than functioning state.

As per its tribal structure and ethnic composition, the country has never built up a professional army as it has been dependent on tribal, private and criminal militias for decades. As a failed, broken and polarised state, the country has been embroiled in intense ethnic and sectarian violence and unable to deliver good governance to its citizens. The government of President Hamid Karzai has lost its legitimacy. To elucidate the main causes of state failure in Afghanistan, I want to quote prominent author Robert I Rotberg’s valuable ideas about a failed state:

“Weak states include a broad continuum of states that are: inherently weak because of geographical, physical, or fundamental economic constraints; basically strong, but temporarily or situationally weak because of internal antagonism, management flaws, greed, despotism, or external attacks; and a mixture of the two. Weak states typically harbour ethnic, religious, linguistic, or other inter-communal tensions that have not yet, or not yet thoroughly, become overtly violent. Failed states are tense, deeply conflicted, dangerous, and contested bitterly by warring factions.”

In the case of Afghanistan, the state failure is characterised by weak and corrupt governance, lawlessness, unprofessional approach to the affairs of the state, drug and arms trafficking and the Taliban insurgency. As mentioned earlier, civil wars that characterise failed states like Afghanistan usually stem from or have roots in ethnicity, factionalism and sectarianism. According to Rotberg’s recent analysis, in most failed states, regimes prey on their own constituents. Most experts understand that criminal violence is also a contributing factor to the causes of a failed state. As Afghan state authority has weakened, failed and became criminal in the oppression of its citizens, lawlessness became more apparent. Criminal gangs take over the streets and arms and drugs trafficking has become more dangerous.

The issue of the adjustment of various ethnic colours in the tribal structure of the country has never been discussed on government level. Durranis ruled the country for centuries but brought no change in the lives of poor Afghans; therefore the only solution to the century old conflict is a partition for peace. War criminals in Northern Afghanistan and some elements in the Karzai administration demand a decentralised system of power but suggest partition on ethnic lines will bring peace to the whole region. In May 2012, the US signed a strategic agreement with Afghanistan and proposed the removal of the Durand Line between Pakistan and Afghanistan. US General David Petraeus proposed that the international boundary between Pakistan and Afghanistan is to be eliminated. The Durand Line divides Pashtuns between Pakistan and Afghanistan. When Pakistan became independent in 1947, it declared the Durand Line its international border. Afghan rulers tried to settle the issue by offering Pakistan some sort of a secret recognition of the border as an internationally recognised border. President Daud in a Shalimar Bagh ceremony gave Ziaul Haq the same offer. Experts understand that in the case of an ethnic division, Northern Afghanistan would be a safe and a modern independent country and in the South Pashtuns would be allowed to join Pakistan.

The recent Plans B and C for the ethnic division of Afghanistan began a new debate in both the US and Europe. Plan C worked out by Tory MP and Foreign Office aide Tobias Ellwood proposes the partition of Afghanistan into eight kingdoms (Kabul, Kandahar, Herat, Mazar-e-Sharif, Kunduz, Jalalabad, Khost and Bamyan). This plan, though still under discussion, has enraged some elements in the corrupt Afghan administration. Ellwood warns that Afghanistan will face a bleak future after the withdrawal of the NATO forces. According to newspaper reports, this plan was presented by the British Foreign Minister William Hague and discussed with the US administration. On September 9, Ellwood had shared this plan with the Pakistani officials in London. Recently in Kabul, the US ambassador to Afghanistan denied the plan to break up Afghanistan as part of a peace deal with the Taliban, but some of my friends in both the defence and foreign ministries in Kabul confirmed the plan and said the game has started.

The former Indian diplomat and writer, M K Bhadrakumar in his recent article has doubted the security transition process in Afghanistan, saying things have come to a pass that the NATO can no longer trust the Afghan army. A British filmmaker in his recent revelation warned, “I think that various warlords will once again have their fiefdoms and that this will be exacerbated by the reduction in foreign aid. I think Afghanistan will disappear from our newspapers...”

Since 2001, after thousands of US soldiers killed and injured, about $ 400 billion spent and hundreds of thousands of Afghan men and women dead, the mission still remains incomplete. By the end of 2014, when the Americans leave the country, the Taliban will return. Democracy will stop working and the economy will not be self-sustaining. Once the threat of civil war or the Taliban marching to Kabul emerges, thousands of Afghan army soldiers will leave their barracks and a large-scale defection will start. The partition of Afghanistan may not be acceptable to the Afghans but it is the only option for them to live in peace.

They always try to divide the country before they laeave the country
 
.
What is with powerful hegemonic countries? why are they hell bent on dividing nations?

They have divided India, Germany, Korea, sudan and many other examples.

I wish Afghanistan is not partitioned.........
 
.
Partition based on political/ethnic/religious reasons never work,even more likely to fail if done by an external force.
It will inevitably trigger a struggle for dominance in the region,a much bigger problems in the long run,for the local population there.

Look at the examples of recent times that history has in store to offer us.North Korea-South Korea,North Vietnam-South Vietnam,India-Pakistan,Israel-Palestine,Yugoslavia... many more examples are there.All became grounds for either full-scale war or continuous skirmishes.
It all results in tremendous loss of wealth,resources and lives.

Partition is one of the tested and trusted exit-strategy of the western powers,mainly the British.Look what they did with India-Pakistan,Israel-Palestine.They will not have to fire a single bullet in anger,just draw an imaginary line across the map,and the people there will foolishly fight over it.These regions then become the most bustling markets for Western arms & ammunitions.People loose their lives fighting for nothing and the Western powers make truck-loads of money out of it.

Any such idea should be met with strongest form of protest by the Afghans,if they have learnt something from history and know what is good for them.I am personally totally against this idea.
 
. . .
I think such partition would create hope for future Peace in Afghanistan, It's better for them.

partition of India Pakistan also brought some good things , It separated religious extremist group from other people otherwise India would have in same condition as pak. Everyday religious killings. :coffee:
 
.
I think such partition would create hope for future Peace in Afghanistan, It's better for them.

partition of India Pakistan also brought some good things , It separated religious extremist group from other people otherwise India would have in same condition as pak. Everyday religious killings. :coffee:

Lets talk about your India-Pakistan example..Imagine what we could have done without the the wars between the two nations,the border skirmishes,infiltration,terrorism,Kashmir conflict and ofcourse the continuous arms race.A unified country would have put an end to all these problems.Presently,we are loosing crores of rupees buying jets,building up stockpiles,both the countries.None of these would have been there.
 
.
I think such partition would create hope for future Peace in Afghanistan, It's better for them.

partition of India Pakistan also brought some good things , It separated religious extremist group from other people otherwise India would have in same condition as pak. Everyday religious killings. :coffee:

It killed lotta people during partition plus 4 wars with the neighbour !! If they had been with us, maybe they wouldbt be have radicalised at all...
Dividing afghanistan is no hope at all...
In ur case even India can be divided, as Indian states fight with each other fa various water problems and other issues...
Afghanistan should remain one like India, and they should borrow our experience in uniting diverse cultures and ethnic groups....
 
.
In May 2012, the US signed a strategic agreement with Afghanistan and proposed the removal of the Durand Line between Pakistan and Afghanistan. US General David Petraeus proposed that the international boundary between Pakistan and Afghanistan is to be eliminated.

Is there any verification of this claim?

Talk of partition would be an admission by NATO that plan A (puppet government in Afghanistan) has failed, that the Taliban have effectively won, and that it's time for plan B (break up the country to maintain a puppet foothold in the region).
 
. . .
Afghanistan wont be divided, Afghans wont let it happen. IF Pashtuns want to join us, we will welcome them with both arms opened, but not at the cost of a divided Afghanistan which would be the first one in its history. Pakistan and Afghanistan are born to integrate, not necessarily in union but in modern times, such things can be carried out through mutual cooperation.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom