Islamic countries are being driven into such a hole where they have no choice but to choose one of two evils.
Author: Nurullah Walizada, analyst, especially for Sangar
These days, comparisons between Syria and Afghanistan have become popular, and therefore between the Syrian Islamist armed groups that have just come to power there and the Afghan Taliban.
When describing the situation in Syria, many world leaders refer to Afghanistan. Afghanistan is the benchmark against which every other war-torn country can be compared. Interestingly, during the Republican era, some were concerned about the Syrianization of Afghanistan. Now, Syrians are concerned about the Afghanization of their country.
These comparisons remind me of a story that the mujahideen of Afghanistan told about the mujahideen of Tajikistan. A group of Afghan mujahideen went to help the Tajik mujahideen and the jihad in that country. During one of the battles, an Afghan mujahideen aimed an RPG at a school building, but a Tajik mujahideen standing next to him stopped him from doing so. The Tajik mujahideen told him that we were fighting to change the ruling regime, not to destroy our country. This made the Afghan mujahideen angry. He said you can’t fight like this and it’s not jihad! He would lay down his arms and return to Afghanistan, where the mujahideen did not care about the destruction of schools, hospitals, etc. Of course, not all Afghan mujahideen were like that, but many did not care about the destruction of the country.
Now, comparing the Taliban and the Syrian armed groups, it can be said that although the Taliban has many similarities with them, the main difference is that the Syrian rebels focused their war on regime change in their country, and did not want to resort to measures that would cause irreparable damage to their country and society. For example, they did not prevent girls from studying and declared they would protect women and their rights. In the latter case, a woman was appointed head of the Syrian central bank.
But where does this difference come from? One of the differences, as Jolani, a leader of the armed group Tahrir al-Sham, points out, is the tribal nature of Afghanistan. Afghan society is tribal, and the tribe retains unpleasant and irrational customs and traditions. However, not all of the Afghan societies are tribal. In particular, non-Pashtun ethnic groups have emerged from tribal consciousness and gone through civilization, citizenship, and individualism. Since the Taliban now rule the country as a Pashtun group, they impose the tribal customs that prevail among the Pashtuns on the entire society and state.
But I believe that the institutionalized violence in Afghan society, which the Taliban represents well, is largely rooted in ignorance. For example, the Taliban's interpretation of Islam is very different from that of other Islamist groups in the Middle East. The Taliban interprets religion in the context of structured tribal violence. An ignorant interpretation of religion creates the conditions for violence. However, ignorance still has more opportunities to grow and survive in a tribal social context. Understanding the tribal structure places great importance on preserving customs and traditions. No matter how rational, correct, and moral these traditions are. A tribe needs to protect the traditions and culture of the tribe.
Although the Pashtuns who have settled in the cities and abroad are ashamed of their tribalism and criticize the tribal culture, where their interests are concerned, they are proud of the forces that have emerged from their tribe. Here we are faced with a contradiction. We have seen that many urban Pashtuns were unhappy with the leader of Tahrir Sham, why did he call Afghanistan a tribal society, but the same Pashtuns living in the cities and abroad support the Taliban with its tribal structure and thinking because they believe that the Taliban represents the state of the Pashtuns in Afghanistan.
However, we do not intend to condone the violence and crimes committed by armed groups such as Tahrir Sham. Despite the differences, if we look at the similarities between the Taliban and the Islamist groups in the region, they have all followed a regressive path to destroy the stability, development, and progress of their societies. Now more than ever, they have become the playthings of the colonial powers and are harming their countries and societies in various ways. Of course, we have no intention of defending the dictatorships of the region. Unfortunately, our region is in a situation where people either have to endure repressive and autocratic governments or they have to endure the rule of illegal armed groups that are supported by colonial powers that pursue their own goals.
But the problem with Afghanistan is that even its terrorists are the worst terrorists on earth. The terrorists of Syria do not adhere to gender and ethnic discrimination and speak of a stable future for Syria without the participation of all Syrian forces and citizens. But Afghan terrorists are enemies of all citizens and ethnic groups in Afghanistan and do not accept anyone but themselves. They have pushed women out of public life, divided men into different types, and established a repressive regime that even the Syrian rebels mock.
But what to do? The ethnic problem in Afghanistan must be solved. Everyone should think about solving the ethnic question. The solution to the ethnic conflict begins with the recognition of the existence of an ethnic problem. Up to this point, the Pashtuns have seized power using the tools of ethnic prejudice and incitement by nationalists devoid of modern logic and rationality, and through violence and fraud, with the help of foreigners. They have pushed other ethnic groups out of power, and all the Pashtun tribes seem to be celebrating this victory, openly and secretly.
The non-Pashtuns also lack a clear ethnic identity. Some of them, removing ethnic consciousness and allegiance from their system of thought and belief, think of interaction and selfish participation in the Pashtun power structures. And some others, who have perspective and ethnic allegiance and who look at the problems deeply, live in isolation. The ethnic factor of the crisis has been denied in different ways. And this denial turns into a benefit for the continuation of the crisis.
