The border region
Pashtunistan, between Afghanistan and Pakistan has caused turmoil for these
nations for many years. The establishment of the Durand line divided multiple
ethnic groups who live on both sides of the border. We have seen similar ethnic
division in Africa through early colonization by the Europeans. For centuries,
Britain has used a strategic plan, of divide and rule to alienate neighbors
during their conquest for colonization: Afghanistan and Pakistan. When drawing
a border, it is extremely important not to divide cultural or religious groups.
However, when the Durand line was drawn, no consideration of each unique group
was taken into account.
My first reaction
was that Pashtunistan could unite the two nations, since ethnic groups were
divided amongst the two nations. However, how can the conflict truly be solved
when Western powers intervene? Pashtunistan has been the United States’ target
for drone warfare over the years. I do not believe the involvement of the
United States has been beneficial at all. The usage of drones in this area is
only making the situation worse, and heightening the turmoil between
Afghanistan and Pakistan. A route that the United States should take is to
become the mediator for these two countries instead of an instigator. Hopefully,
by solving their problems, we could potentially end a lot of our own problems.
Have we ever considered redrawing the Durand line? I am indifferent on whether
or not redrawing the Durand line would make a difference at this point. What would
happen if Pashtunistan became an independent nation? In the short run, I do not
believe that it would be wise to allow Pashtunistan to become a nation.
Afghanistan and Pakistan are in the mist of mayhem. However, in the long run,
independence will probably be the best thing to resolve the conflict.
Pashtunistan would be able to form their own government and redraw its
boundary.
I think you ask an interesting question. Do Western Powers make anything better? If the answer is no, then maybe we shouldn't be trying to come up with the 'answer' no?
ReplyDeleteI think you were onto something when you said, "How can the conflict truly be solved when Western powers intervene?" Western powers have consistently attempted to change boarders, partition nations and colonize (in the sense of being too involved) for years. We could look to Bosnia as a good example of a failed case. Overall, perhaps it's best that the United States try and stay out of the boarders talks.
ReplyDeleteThis actually reminds me of something I studies in another one of my classes that dealt with the impact of colonialism in the developing world. My professor called it "neopatrimonial borders", which sort of described the phenomenon of these countries keeping these "flase" colonial borders upon achieving independence. It went into explaining why there are such phenomena as loose national identity and high factionalism within these countries.
DeleteHowever, I wouldn't think that the US simply coming in as an arbitrator during border discussions between Afghanistan and Pakistan would necessarily be the same as a western power asserting their will over how the border should look.
DeleteI agree with Matt, that it would be in the United States best interests to not attempt to resolve the border issue between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Rather than solve the problem, we would most likely escalate the situation.
ReplyDeleteThe United States should not be attacking Pashtunistan with drones. These attacks are only worsening the view other countries have of the United States and allowing us to obtain more enemies. It should be Pashtunistan as a country that chooses to declare its independence from Pakistan and Afghanistan.
ReplyDelete