Pashtun / Pashtunwali / Pashtunistan (catch all)

[TROUFION]

In a review of both historical actions, the dubious validity of the Durand line and the recent battles in and around the Pashtun stronholds in both Afghanistan and Pakistan it appears the insurgent goals have changed slightly. This is more of a question to those who are interested in this region, are we seeing a merging of the Pakistan and Afghan Taliban in the pursuit of a new status quo: the formation of an independent Pushtunistan? A Pushtun ethnically centric tribal region carved from both Pakistan and Afghanistan. This would then be a launch pad region for future conquest. THoughts?

[Ron Humphrey]

In a review of both historical actions, the dubious validity of the Durand line and the recent battles in and around the Pashtun stronholds in both Afghanistan and Pakistan it appears the insurgent goals have changed slightly. This is more of a question to those who are interested in this region, are we seeing a merging of the Pakistan and Afghan Taliban in the pursuit of a new status quo: the formation of an independent Pushtunistan? A Pushtun ethnically centric tribal region carved from both Pakistan and Afghanistan. This would then be a launch pad region for future conquest. THoughts?

Wouldn't something like that almost place them at a larger disadvantage considering that not only would it help to further define the "safe Haven" but make them even more likely to be under attack by both Afghan/NATO forces but Pakistani forces on a much larger scale.

Bad guys do tend to band together when they need to but still not quite sure they could pull off what your suggesting even if they'd like to

[Hacksaw]

You would really have to divide this up among several players and sub-divide that by long and short term objectives...

Tribal folks - might long term enjoy having a Pashtun-stan, but only as a tribal federation

Taliban folks - might settle for a Pashtun-stan, but only as lesser outcome. Why settle for a sliver of area when you used to rule a country. Besides their style is a little too directive for tastes of mountain tribals. So Taliban and Tribal folks outlooks not really the same.

AQ folks - They don't need a constituted state, ungoverned areas are far more conducive to what they need now. A Pashtun-stan would have no big-daddy if they hosted terrorist training camps.

In light of all that, I don't see this great confluence of interests - long term.

Of course I'm dated in my understanding of the tribes and their affiliation/interests. As we could see in Iraq, those can change quickly.

[bourbon]

Insurgent goals or our goals?

The foreign reaction to Ralph Peters' "Blood Borders" was very interesting. Some believe that it's concepts are driving our strategy. More discomforting is they trace the contemporary strain of this to the ideas of a center-right Israeli strategist named Oded Yinon. I've heard many Pakistani's think that we want to break up their country, and cite alleged support given to Baloch groups. A Pushtunistan would erode Pakistan's reason for being.

[Hacksaw]

Bourbon,
If it is me, then I wasn't nearly clear enough... I suppose either way I don't see any single group wanting a seperate nation of Pashtun-stan. My impression is that the huddled masses of Pashtun's on either side of the border are pretty ambivalent. In the FATA, they are already considered an autonomous zone, on the AFG side they are not nearly as postured to do what the Kurds did in the Northern Zone. Insurgents don't benefit from a Pahstun-stan - because the ambiguity of the current situation far better suits their needs. Neither the Pak nor Afg gov'ts want to jetison the areas.

So.... All around I don't see any group that when pressed would support the idea of Pashtun-stan.

Live well and row

[Ken White]

you said...

[TROUFION]

BUT, as I am ever in a debate mode here are some historical precedents and some of my own thoughts having been looking hard at the region lately.

Here is a JSTOR article from 1973. Dated yes, but the folks in this region don't follow timelines the way westerners do.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2569059

The seed for the Pushtoonistan concept was planted in the 1947 at the time of the Partition of Pakistan and India. The Brits offered the NWFP residents the choice of Pakistan or India, and not of joining Afghanistan. It is deeper than that as it actually goes back several dynasties of Afghans claiming Peshawar, but for sake of this argument the 1947 date will suffice. There was a movement in the tribal agencies for a plebiscite for self determination as had been held in Kashmir. Pakistan held on and defeated this movement despite a 1949 Loya Jirga in Afghanistan in support of Pushtooinstan.

In any event there exists a deep rooted concept of pushtun ethnic unity that could be the basis of a greater organization.

Now looking at it many of the points made by council members are valid, an overt "state" would be futile. We cannot think in the terms of state in this region. That the Pakistan Taliban and the Afghan Taliban are one in the same, which is the concept here. Traditionalist Pashtuns forming up across the border as a tribal confederacy of sorts. The Taliban may be seeing greater gains in driving into Pakistan as it only has to face the Pakistan Army vice NATO. But this concept of Pushtunistan goes beyond that. It allows them to operate cross border without thought.

In any event the prominence of the minorities in the Afghan government are also a driving factor. Pashtuns are the majority but may feel under represented in the government. The Pashtuns Traditionalist may be looking at the world in a different way, a state for the Pashtuns, ethnically and religiously “pure”.

By the way I am not advocating this idea, I am only looking at the fight we have and see a change in the goals of the Taliban and their supporters. Namely the formation (even covert) of a Pushtoonistan- the fulfillment of an ancient desire to unify all Pashtuns on both sides of the Durand line.