From what sky did Omar Daudzai fall?
Author: Nurullah Valizade, analyst, especially for "Sangar"
Thoughts on the election of Omar Daudzai as the head of the Executive Council of the National Salvation Assembly of Afghanistan!
1 - It is still unclear whether the National Salvation Assembly of Afghanistan or the National Salvation Council of Afghanistan is the same as the Supreme Council of Resistance for the Salvation of Afghanistan or another political organization. Some members of the Supreme Salvation Council say that the council has not changed its name and will continue its work. Still, another council or assembly has been formed under the National Salvation Assembly or the National Salvation Council of Afghanistan. However, others say that the Supreme Salvation Resistance Council has been renamed the National Salvation Council or the National Salvation Assembly. Such ambiguity and confusion have always existed in the political organizations of Afghanistan. It has always been the case that a council and structure is created, but later other people join on the condition that if the name is changed to such and such, then we will also be there. Old members also change the name of the organization to expand it and make it politically and ethnically inclusive as they see it. Experience has shown that changing the name also meant changing the nature of the councils and coalitions.
2 - Regarding the Supreme Council of Resistance for Salvation, some sources claim that this council was renamed as the National Assembly for Salvation. Here we continue the discussion, taking the word of these sources. According to sources, the number of Pashtun members in the Supreme Council of Resistance for Salvation was small, and several non-Pashtun political figures tried to make the council, in their opinion, multi-ethnic and provide a platform for Pashtun presence in it. Of course, the demand and condition of the Pashtuns was to remove the word resistance from the name of the council. As a result, the old members responded positively to this request and changed the name of the Supreme Council of Resistance, renaming the above organization as the National Salvation Council/Assembly. From this proposal and its acceptance, we can guess what it is all about. Pashtuns are putting conditions for participation in non-Pashtun structures. A condition that transforms the essence and nature of the organization and leads to discord and collapse. However, non-Pashtun politicians do not care about this issue and readily agree to change their names and symbols to have a few Pashtun personalities by their side and ensure ethnic participation of Pashtuns. This is one of the most fundamental weaknesses of non-Pashtun politicians, which indicates their lack of vision, planning, and ideals. They sacrifice the name, symbol, and essence of their organization for the purposeful will of a few Pashtun personalities. On the other hand, there are Pashtun politicians who create conditions for their presence in non-Pashtun organizations seeking justice. This provision also refers to specific ethnic goals, programs, and perspectives from which Pashtuns do not deviate under any circumstances. They say that unless the goals, programs, name, and nature of the organization are changed to suit our ethnic views, we will not cooperate.
3 - Why should the word resistance be removed from the name of the Supreme Council of Resistance? Because Pashtuns consider the word resistance as a non-Pashtun word attributed to Tajiks. Resistance is a narrative created by Ahmad Shah Massoud. This narrative includes resistance against fascism/Pashtunism. However, the current so-called resistance does not care much about this issue and tries to deny the ethnic factor in its narrative. However, from the Pashtun perspective, resistance means a non-Pashtun movement aimed at resisting Pashtun totalitarian ideas. For this reason, Pashtun politicians do not feel comfortable in a structure that operates under the slogans of resistance and feel that they are part of an anti-Pashtun structure. To ensure their comfort and security, they demand that the symbols and names of the resistance be removed from the organisations. In fact, one of the conditions for Daudzai to join the Supreme Council of Resistance for the Salvation of Afghanistan was to change the name of the council to the National Salvation Assembly. The founders also accepted this condition. By accepting this condition, they created a ground for Daudzai's presence.
4 - Why was Daudzai invited to the Supreme Council of the Resistance, even at the cost of changing its name? In response to this question, as far as I understand, several reasons are given.
- Daudzai is a Pashtun and one of those Pashtuns who, in the opinion of senior members of the Resistance Council, are more moderate and trustworthy.
- Daudzai has money.
- Daudzai has good relations with regional and trans-regional intelligence networks.
- Daudzai is approved by Karzai (the main and hidden patron of the itinerant non-Pashtun politicians).
- Daudzai is a Pashtun from Karabakh (Kabul), who has good knowledge and connections with currents in the North and Shamali itself (north of Kabul, populated by Tajiks - “Sangar”).
- Daudzai also has family and ideological ties with Ustad Sayyaf.
It is reported that senior members of the Supreme Council of Resistance/National Assembly decided to invite Daudzai to the council for the above reasons, so they accepted his terms for membership in the council.
5 - Who invited Daudzai to be a member of the council? In response to this question, one of the sources told me that three senior members of the Supreme Council of Resistance/National Assembly invited Daudzai to be a member of this council. This source named Marshal Dostum, Ustad Ata, and Yunus Qanuni. I cannot confirm the accuracy of this source's claims, but this is all I could get from searching.
6 - What is the main scenario? Why did Daudzai join an organization that is mainly composed of non-Pashtun and anti-Taliban political figures? If readers remember, a few days ago I wrote about three scenarios for the future of Afghanistan that are being discussed by political currents. One such scenario was that if attempts to reform the Taliban from within failed, then the political movements and figures that had been maneuvered between the Taliban and anti-Taliban forces for the past four years and had failed to define their own role would be integrated into a Taliban/Pashtun ruling structure under Pashtun leadership and management to claim that the Taliban’s internal legitimacy was assured and that the ground was ripe for its recognition. As I said in a previous post on this topic, this is the second scenario and non-Taliban Pashtuns are seriously trying to implement this scenario with the help of some foreign countries. In reality, this scenario is aimed at ensuring that the Pashtun power structure does not change. The Taliban must control the system, but non-Pashtun politicians who do not aspire to fundamentally change the system must also have a symbolic partnership with the Taliban within the structure. In my opinion, Daudzai was thrown into the council of non-Pashtun politicians to implement the same scenario.
7 - Who are the unfortunate and wandering politicians? Basically, they are people who were relatively organized within the Supreme Council of Resistance for Salvation, but they seem to have been unable to do anything on their own or find a source of external support. In their statements, they always supported the resistance movement to some extent or another, but also expressed a desire to cooperate with the Taliban. In reality, they were waiting for the formation of a strong foreign movement that would mobilize them according to a written plan and prepare the ground for their participation in one structure with the Taliban. We remember that when Trump returned to the White House, Marshal Dostum happily considered the whole event a good omen. This enthusiasm shows that the politicians in Ankara and the forces associated with it were eagerly waiting for America. Although Khalilzad had previously told them not to expect the US to return them to Afghanistan. However, Khalilzad's recent visit to Kabul has raised hopes that the US has taken a different stance on Afghanistan and is interested in making pro-American politicians partners with the Taliban.
8 - What would it mean if this scenario were to become reality? The shortest answer is a repeat of the 2001 Bonn Conference, but with the difference that the non-Pashtun and northern politicians are now stripped of the power and influence of 2001 and are returning to the battlefield not on their own but thanks to the US and the countries involved in Afghanistan, and must work in pre-defined symbolic roles and have little ambition. If you pay attention, there is a strong pull in the US and the countries of the region towards the political model of the republican era. This model is the Pashtun model with a combination of modest non-Pashtun politicians, which was implemented under the guise of national unity and national partnership, etc. This alternative can change in two ways. First, if the armed resistance forces against the Taliban gain capabilities that allow them to destroy the Taliban structure by force or force it to comply with their demands. Secondly, in a situation where the younger generation and intellectual elite of Afghanistan from all ethnic groups are mobilized and develop a new plan for the country, and also provide domestic popular mobilization and foreign support for their plan. Otherwise, a relatively acceptable model for foreigners is the chaotic “salad” model of the twenty-year republican era, in which random politicians, foreign affiliates, and domestic mafiosi in a heterogeneous assembly under the guidance and support of foreign countries carry out missions in a structure called the system. The raison d’être of such a structure is to put a lump in water and cross it. If you look closely, this plan is essentially foreign, and foreigners, logically, are not obliged to provide a fundamental solution for Afghanistan, nor do they want to do so.
