• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by OTHES Changes in Pashtun tribal structures since 1978: the influence of war, foreign militaries and militant political Islam. May 21, 2012 1 Contents 1Preface&Introduction 4 1.1 Preface ................................ 4 1.2 Introduction.............................. 6 IDefinitions&TheoreticalFramework 9 2EthnicBoundariesandtheDefinitionofEthnicGroups 9 2.1 Tribe & Traditional Tribal Structures . 18 2.1.1 Islam in Pashtun tribal society . 28 2.2 Pashtun Identities, Ideals and the Pashtunwali . ... 32 2.2.1 Pashtun Identities . 32 2.2.2 The Pashtunwali as an idealized code of conduct among Pashtuns ........................... 35 II Foreign Interventions, The Soviet Occupation, Tribal Warfare,Migration&Exile 47 3ABriefLookintoAfghanistan’sHistory 48 3.1 The Beginnings of the Afghan State . 50 3.2 The Durand Line . 57 3.3 Preliminary Events to the Soviet Intervention . ... 60 4TheSovietIntervention,1978-1989 64 4.1 Traditional tribal warfare and its adaption under the influence of theSovietoccupation ........................ 75 4.2 Migration, exile and changes in Pashtun tribal society . ..... 84 4.3 Cold War strategies, foreign money, and the growing influence of Islamanditspoliticalrepercussions . 89 III Militant Political Islam, Tribal Structures & The Taliban - A Generational & Structural Divide? 94 5CivilWar,theOriginsandtheRiseoftheTaliban 95 5.1 The rise of the Taliban . 98 5.2 The Islamic extremist ideology of the Taliban . ..104 2 5.3 The organizational structure of the Taliban . ..108 5.4 Traditional tribal structures and the Taliban . ...114 6TheFalloftheTalibanandtheUSandNATOintervention117 6.1 The New Taliban . 123 6.1.1 Cohesion and unity of the (New) Taliban in a factionalized society.............................126 6.2 Tribal structures under the influence of post 9/11 government policies.................................132 IV Conclusion 135 7Conclusion 135 VReferences 140 References 140 VI Appendices 153 8Abstracts&CurriculumVitae 153 8.1 English Abstract . 153 8.2 German Abstract . 155 8.3 Curriculum Vitae . 157 3 Preface & Introduction 1Preface&Introduction 1.1 Preface This work aims to find explanations for current developments in Pashtun tribal society under the influence of war, foreign militaries and militant political Islam. For many years anthropologists have worked on understandingandexplaining the highly complex and inhomogeneous structures of Afghan society. Outside the realm of ethnographic research, the culture, tradition and organization of tribal communities have been prone to oversimplified and prejudiced (positive as well as negative) representations. Considering the public and media interest in the ongoing war, simplifying narratives seem to have takenastronghold in Western public discourse. Since Al-Quaeda established a strong network in Afghanistan under the Pashtun-dominated Taliban-regime, terrorist attacks in various countries and the US-led ‘War on Terror’, the general(media-)depiction of Afghans has often tended to portray them as archaic, medieval, bellicose and „invincible“ in the sense of Afghanistan being „the graveyard of super-powers“ (Shahrani, 2002, p.715). It might be fair to say though, that the enormous complexity ofsomany interrelated developments exacerbates any discussion and,inmanycases,only allows for simplification: the decades – if not centuries – of war, from the Mon- golian khans to the Anglo-Afghan wars, the geostrategic importance during the era of ‘The Great Game’, strongly interfering neighbouring countries such as Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Iran and others like India, Saudi-Arabia or the USA, of- tentimes supporting various opposing factions, the Soviet invasion in 1979, the civil wars furthering ethnic factionalism, the absence of state-institutions, the growing influence of various Islamist groups and, since 2001,theeffortofthe USA and NATO – who still struggle to define a comprehensive goalfortheir missions1 –wereallpartinformingthecurrentsituation.Thesocialstructures, tribal loyalties, the arbitrary drawing of national borders, economic reasons, a steady influx of weapons, opium production and consumption, widespread anal- phabetism, the presence of (transnational) militant networks of political Islam, 1Asomewhatnarrow“definition”ofsuccess,coinedbytheObamaadministrationwas sometimes worded as “disrupting, dismantling and defeatingal-Qaida”(Kipping,2010,p.1 and p.3). 4 and many other factors play into a regionally very diverse setofproblems. Still, some substantial and credible explanations for current processes might already be out there since quite a while. In my view, the genuine anthropological perspective applied in the ethnographic work which I am goingtobringinto bearing in this paper, allows for a thorough and worthwhile understanding of a multi-faceted, multi-level state of affairs. In no way do I want to insinuate that anthropology as a discipline holds all the answers to every problem. As I will show in the following chapters, some ethnographic observations might only give clues why certain strategies of Western involvement do not work the way they are supposedly intended to – depending on the given aim or perspective of various key stakeholders. The question why the vast fund of the anything but new anthropologic knowledge did not take a stronger hold in the general discussion about Afghanistan will not be discussed in a satisfactory fashion in this paper. Yet aspecificgoalof this paper is to ask what new light can be shed on certain developments in Afghanistan by anthropology. There could be many reasons coming into play for anthropologynothaving abiggerpartinpastattemptstounderstandPashtuntribalcultures: the above mentioned complexity, the comparatively small reception anthropology enjoys as compared to other disciplines (for example economics or political science) may be two of them. However, there is another possible reason that has to be mentioned in this context: a compelling case can be made that in the last decades many anthropologists have shied away from taking on issues like modern warfare and its political implications (Gusterson und Price, 2005, p.39). The anthropologic expertise misused by colonial powers to subdue so many peoples around the world might have contributed to this reluctance (see also Canfield, 1988, p.100). Yet, in recent years, quite some anthropologists have been engaged in con- sulting the British and the American2 armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as quite some private military companies (PMCs) on their counterin- surgency (COIN) strategies – adding yet another layer of complexity to the issues discussed. This „weaponization of anthropology“ hast triggered two reso- 2The US launched the so-called Human Terrain System (HTS) in February 2007, em- bedding anthropologists in combat brigades in Iraq and Afghanistan(AAA, 2007). It is run by the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) and aims at providing a better understanding of local socio-cultural conditions tothemilitaryandtherebyavoiding and reducing unnecessary violence. First suggested and designed by cultural anthropologists Montgomery McFate and Andrea Jackson the project was funded with $41 million(Kipp u. a., 2006). 5 lutions of the American Anthropological Association (AAA) condemning these kind of endeavours as unethical and potentially dangerous for other anthropolo- gists around the world and the persons they study (AAA, 2007; Gonzalez, 2007, p.17f). In this context, it is very important to clarify that the paperathandis,not on any account, intended to function as a guide on „how to win a war against Pashtuns“ by analyzing changes and adaptions in their organizational struc- tures over the past decades. In my opinion such an attempt would be destined to fail anyway. Conventional military approaches to a socialandculturalconun- drum are simply inappropriate to provide for societal changes like developing democratic structures and advancing human or women’s rights-which,nextto avenging acts of terror, seemed to be desired by Western nations. The only way amilitary“solution”couldeverachievethat,wouldbeatthehighcostofusing brutal force, bloodshed and subjugation which would not onlyrequireextensive manpower and treasure but is clearly not an option for Westernmilitaries.Nev- ertheless, the available ethnographic data can always be used or misused which seems to be the crux of not only this discipline. Various terms will need to be clarified. A short chapter defining the most important terms in this paper will be followed by an almost equally brief look into Afghanistan’s history. The vast scope of events and developments in the last hundred-fifty years alone dictates a very narrow focus on the most significant issues that have set the parameters for current events. The main question and focus will be directed at changes in Pashtun tribal structures since 1978. 1.2 Introduction This paper wants to examine the possibility and extent of structural societal changes in Pashtun tribal systems since 1978. The question I aim to answer is, in how far tribal structures have changed and what has triggered those changes. The relevance of this question lies in its potential to elucidate the societal and cultural dynamics at play in this conflict, as well as to determine some causes for the course of events in a persisting struggle. The underlying hypothesis is that influences like war, foreign interventions and the impact of militant political Islam have

Load more

  161

Copy Link