Nowadays, the ethnic debate in Afghanistan has reached its peak. While the Taliban chants Islamic slogans and Islam strongly condemns ethnicism as blasphemous, in fact, a policy of Pashtun ethnicism or mono-ethnicity, the legacy of monarchical, even communist regimes and, US-backed technocrats in the last 20 years, was moved forward.
Where is the problem? Why did a united Afghanistan never come about?
Our interlocutor is Hamid Saidov, a former politician and diplomat, who served from 1978 to 1989 in various positions, including senior military adviser of Soviet Union, in Afghanistan.
Author: Ferdows Nezam
- You have worked in Afghanistan for many years. What is your definition of the ethnic composition of this country?
- Afghanistan is a young country but has an old history. Humans have been living there for over 2,500 years. Afghanistan was and is the gateway to India and the main gateway for the conquerors. Perhaps because of these movements of people through its territory, more than 53 ethnic groups, peoples, tribes, and ethnic groups now live in it. There is a group of people in this land, who are still not recognized - their ethnic identity is not very clear.
Once again, let's group the tribes of Afghanistan more broadly. Their number reaches 20 ethnic groups. If we talk about the basic ethnic groups, the country is divided mostly into four ethnic groups - Tajiks, Pashtuns, Hazaras, and Uzbeks. Together, they created a governmental structure at all times.
- The question of the minority and the majority in Afghanistan has always been acute. Pashtuns always claim to be the majority, but there was no population census. What grounds do they rely on?
- Everybody wants to know the truth of this issue. But the issue requires a scientific approach. A country is founded mainly by a central nation or state-builder. From this point of view, the Pashtuns established Afghanistan, but that Afghanistan did not exist today.
In 1747, when Ahmad Shah Durrani established the Khanate of Kandahar, his goal was not Afghanistan. He wanted to establish a Pashtun Khanate. Make no mistake. Afghanistan's real geography is historically located territories around Quetta city of Pakistan. Its center was called Mustung. But Afghanistan's border today is more than 600 miles far from Quetta.
On this basis, there was a misconception that the Pashtuns created Afghanistan and they are an ethnic majority. For more than a recent era, Pashtuns have dominated the current geography of Afghanistan. But they have never been and are not the majority. All the so-called Pashtun regions historically were Tajik. And in the new era, the Pashtuns are not in the majority.
- Can we say that the Tajiks are the majority?
- Tajiks have always been the majority, although in Afghanistan the census has never been conducted scientifically and accurately. Pashtuns have always been considered 7-8 million people, but there is another fact: 3 million of them are Pashtun nomadic tribes, who do not consider themselves affiliated with Afghanistan or Pakistan. If they spend the summer in Afghanistan, they spend the winter in Pakistan, or vice versa. Most of them do not have a birth certificate and a document that proves their personality. Accordingly, there have been about 4 to 5 million Pashtuns in Afghanistan at all times. After 1978, when the Saur Revolution won, the population of Afghanistan was estimated at about 15 million. By this logic, how can Pashtuns be the majority?
Another logical proof, if the Pashtuns were the majority, why was Dari the official language of the country throughout history? The language of Khanate of Kandahar, which Ahmad Shah Durrani wanted to establish, was Dari. On the other hand, the Ghorian state, which stretched from current Afghanistan to India, existed for 97 years.
- You believe that the Tajiks were and are the majority, but why were they never in power except for two periods (the governments of Habibullah Kalakani and Ustad Burhanuddin Rabbani)?
Without a doubt, power was in the hands of the Pashtuns. This must be admitted. But at the middle levels, for example, lawyers and ministers were mostly Tajiks. The majority of poets, writers, scientists… were Tajiks and Dari speakers.
This was the reality of other states of our region. In Central Asia, for example, the Turks ruled for the last nine centuries but were never the majority. They even lost their identity by mingling with indigenous peoples. This never means that we Tajiks did not have a government in Khorasan and Transoxiana.
Some people say that after Samanids Tajiks did not have a government for a thousand years. This argument is scientifically flawed. Because Persian-Tajik was always the official, science and culture language. Several Kings of the Russian monarchy were originally foreigners, such as the Germans, but Russia was the Russians' state. Rulers cannot represent the ethnic identity of a country. Some people are warlike or always seek power.
Another issue was our dispersion. We have been scattered to India and other regions in different historical periods. As a result, the Tajiks were unable to establish a centralized state in later periods. The fact is, however, that the proportion of political power to ethnic composition in many countries does not match.
- You have worked in Afghanistan for many years. Can you identify the geography of the Tajiks?
- Pashtuns moved to the current territories of Afghanistan from the 12th century from that side of Durand. The intermingling of people began from this time. Even now in Gardez, the capital of Paktika province, the majority is Tajik, but Paktika is said to be Pashtun. In Jalalabad (center of Nangarhar), most of them are Tajiks and Arabs. In Mihtarlam, the center of Laghman is also Tajik city. These are just a few examples of places where I visited and called Pashtun areas. There is no need to define the ethnicity of Herat, Balkh, Badakhshan, Baghlan, and other northern and eastern territories. Most important is Kabul, which has always been and remains a Tajik city.
In 1977, an attempt was made in Afghanistan to conduct a census. I want to tell you a story from those days. A senior Tajik adviser, Ferdows Aliakbarov, and an Afghan Tajik woman, Suraya Baha, oversaw the process. I do not know where Aliakbarov is now, but the notes he has written to us in detail are interesting.
It is stated in these notes that we started the census from the east (Nangarhar and Kunar). After working in this area, the documents were brought to the Kabul Statistics Office and reviewed by the Ministry of Planning. In the eastern provinces, which are defined as the main geography of Pashtun settlements, only 35% declared themselves Pashtun. Of this number, 25 percent said they knew Pashto. The others said that their mother tongue is Dari. The issue became controversial and the census became complicated.
- Apparently, both the Soviet Union and the United States had the power to carry out a census, but why did they not take many actions? Or is it a half-bowl under the bowl?
- The story of the 1977 census clarifies the issue. Controversy over the results escalated between the Statistics Office and the Ministry of Planning. Even the head of the Afghan Statistics Office was killed for preventing the revelation of the proof. The results of the census were never published. Because it posed a political threat to the Pashtuns and called into question their claim to a majority.
Pashto-speaking people in Afghanistan have always been a minority and do not reveal this in fake ways. Why don't they want the Durand Line to be recognized as the official border? The main reason is that the Pashtuns were brought from Pakistan at urgent moments, including in the same census, which we mentioned.
In summary, the 1977 census was conducted in 70% of Afghanistan. If we examine the results in terms of mathematical calculations, 80% of the truth can be revealed. For this reason, they did not allow to finish the census and publish preliminary results.
On the other hand, in April 1978 came the "Saur Revolution". I tell an incident from my memories. Hafizullah Amin came to power in a coup. Amin was a staunch Pashtun. He tried to prove the Pashtun majority more than his predecessors. "We are destroying the landowners, we are building socialism, so we have to accept a new constitution," - he said.
Because of this, the census resumed. In November 1978, I traveled with a group to Paktia and Paktika provinces as a consultant in the Ministry of Defense of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan to secure this political event. We - my Russian colleagues and I witnessed one case.
When the population census began, the borders all opened. The Durand Line was always completely open. We saw that kochies - nomads came to Paktia and Paktika provinces. According to the intelligence report, we knew, that 250,000 people were living around Paktia. But the census they conducted showed that the population was about 400,000.
When we compared our data with the statistical data, the number of Pashtuns was over 150,000. The same thing happened in Paktika province. As a result, there were heated discussions at the Soviet Embassy in Afghanistan and the issue reached the senior Soviet leaders. However, the result did not change. Unfortunately, Russian advisers supported this tendency.
- Why? What was the goal of the Soviet Union?
- We, who saw such injustices a lot, were constantly criticizing. But the Soviets wanted to keep Afghanistan under their influence. On the other hand, at that time, the United States wanted to bring Afghanistan and Pakistan into the organizations under its control, such as SENTO and SEATO. The Soviet Union considered it necessary to create problems between Afghanistan and Pakistan, in order to prevent their membership enlargement in these organizations. Another factor was the political power of the Pashtuns. They lobbied, not letting the Soviets ignore their ethnic interests.
- Why was the issue of Pashtunism not so hot before the reign of Davud Khan?
- Pashtunism was mainly highlighted after the overthrow of Zayer Shah during the reign of Mohammad Daud Khan. Davud thought of building Pashtunistan. "Great Pashtunistan" is the idea of Mohammad Daud. He constantly asked the Russians to support this project.
- Should the Pashtunistan of Davud Khan bring together the Pashtuns on both sides of the Durand Line?
- Yes. That is why the Pashtuns consider the Durand Line seriously. Pashtunistan also includes Pakistan's Waziristan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provinces. They wanted to get to the "hot waters" and sought help from the Soviet Union, which had the same goal.
In 1960, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev traveled to Afghanistan. The main slogan proclaimed by Khrushchev was to encourage Zahir Shah to form a "Great Pashtunistan."
- Can we say, that Russia continues to follow the Soviet way in dealing with Pashtuns today?
- The construction projects that the Soviet Union was carrying out in Afghanistan, were mostly implemented in the Pashtun provinces. We saw, even protested. The same vision remains with Russia. They are always trying to make Pashtuns superior in their foreign policy in Afghanistan.
- And not only Russians, but Americans relied on Pashtuns too and even supported overt and covert Pashtunism. What is the reason that the choice of powers was not Tajiks?
The Pashtuns were able to create an understanding that the Tajiks are fewer people and came from outside. They called Tajiks muhajirs (migrants). They tried to ignore them. They instilled in all powers the vision that if you want to do something in Afghanistan, you must rely on us because we are the state-forming ethnic group.
When Habibaullah Kalkani, known as the "Bachae Saqav (Saqav Son)" came to power, it was a serious Tajik movement. These political upheavals shook the Soviet Union and forced it to form the Socialist Republic of Tajikistan in 1929.
- Why did this happen? Apparently, the Soviets should have felt threatened by the Tajiks gaining power in Afghanistan...
- This was to convince us - Tajiks in this side of Amudarya. They said we had had a separate state. They checked our border and told us not to deal with Tajiks on the other side of the river.
- Do you think that the above factors are the cause of ethnic conflicts in Afghanistan and today we see such a situation? Why did a united Afghanistan never come about?
- Afghanistan is a country of national minorities. If we take the four basic ethnics as state-builders, starting from 1747, the Pashtuns have always sought to monopoly the power, and this has led to serious ethnic conflicts and still does. Pashtuns do not consider others as a nation at all. If we examine the history of their rule, they didn't give other nations enough place at the leadership level. They accompanied one or two Tajiks to the government but did not allow Hazaras and Uzbeks at all.
Tajiks were mostly civilians, promoting science, culture, and commerce. Pashtuns, despite being at the forefront of political and military power, continued to pursue war and nomadism. Likewise, ethnic conflicts increased. Only in the relations between Pashtuns and Tajiks, there was less antagonism because the two nations were somewhat intertwined. Pashtuns have always conflicted with other ethnic groups, such as the Hazaras, Uzbeks, Nuristanis, etc.
- But the struggle for taking the political power was basically between Tajiks and Pashtuns...
- The controversy was various. Do you know how Nuristanis became Muslims? Amir Abdul Rahman Khan went to Nuristan, where the people were pagans, killed almost everyone and forced the rest to convert to Islam. In his book, he proudly writes, "In Nuristan, I made a minaret from heads of six thousand Nuristanis". Similarly, the massacre of Hazaras by Pashtun rulers has taken place many times. Such an occasion would never have allowed for friendly relations between ethnicities and a united Afghanistan.
ABOUT AUTHOR:
Hamid Saidov, orientalist, political scientist, candidate of philosophy, doctor of political science, professor. From 1978 to 1983 and from 1985 to 1989, he served as the Soviet Union's military advisor in Afghanistan. Consul of Tajikistan in Iran (1995-2001), Coordinator of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in Tajikistan (2001-2008), chairman of the Tajik chamber of industry in India (2009-2012), now director of the department of history and theory of international relations at the Slavonic University of Russia and Tajikistan.
Author of more than 150 articles on political and ethnic trends, international and security issues in Afghanistan, Iran and Central Asian countries.
