The notion that PTM embodies the sentiments of the entire Pashtun population in Pakistan prompts a nuanced examination of political representation and influence.
The relatively low turnout of 4,000 to 4,500 supporters at the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement’s (PTM) “Grand Jirga” in District Khyber in October, despite significant investment of resources and funding, raises doubts about the movement’s actual influence and popularity within the province’s larger Pashtun community of over 40 million people.
Notably, a considerable portion of the crowd at the Jirga comprised supporters of nationalist political parties such as ANP, JUI, and a small contingent of Pashteen’s associates. This observation underscores a potential disconnect between Pashteen’s assertive ethno-linguistic narrative and the sentiments of many Pashtuns who maintain a strong allegiance to the national framework of Pakistan.
Additionally, PTM faced another significant blow when 57 out of its 80-member committee chose to boycott the first formal follow-up meeting of the October Pashtun National Jirga (PNJ) on November 14. The 23 members who did attend were primarily from PTM’s ranks, suggesting an internal rift within the movement itself. Members who abstained from the Jirga indicated a desire to advocate for Pashtun rights within the context of Pakistan’s federation, while expressing concerns over the PTM’s direction, which they perceive as potentially divisive and harmful to the integrity of the nation.
Critics contend that rather than engaging constructively with Pakistan’s political framework, the so-called Pashtun rights activist, Manzoor Pashteen, often seems to promote an agenda that emphasizes cross-border Pashtun solidarity at the expense Pakistan’s national interests interests. The PTM’s visible display of Afghan flags during public demonstrations, alongside derogatory rhetoric aimed at Pakistan’s founding figures and its institutions, have raised alarm among many observers. Likewise, calls for the establishment of alternative Pashtun National Courts, replacement of Pakistan’s Army with PTM’s lashkar of 30,000 volunteers in KP and slogans of “Lar o Bar yo Afghan”, raise questions about the movement’s ultimate objectives.
Critics further add that a movement perceived as pushing for greater Afghanistan risks overshadowing the real needs of Pashtuns in Pakistan. It also raises questions as to why would the people of KP want to trade their relative socio-economic stability and political autonomy for the turmoil and suffering that comes with living under the repressive Taliban rule in Afghanistan?
Presently, Afghanistan faces severe internal issues. Following the Taliban’s 2021 takeover, the world witnesses a renewed threat of terrorism. The Taliban have failed to honor key commitments made in the Doha Agreement. Currently, 25 terrorist organizations operate from Afghanistan, threatening global security. Seventeen of these groups specifically target Pakistan.
Women’s rights have severely been trampled down in Afghanistan. Girls and women are barred from education, employment, and a free life. To make matters worse, the Taliban’s Ministry of Justice introduced a new Morality Law in August this year, further restricting various aspects of Afghans’ lives and imposing penalties for alleged violations.
Besides, the growing rift between the Kabul and Kandahar based Taliban leadership is also having far-reaching repercussions on the quality of Taliban’s governance. It raises concerns about the regime’s ability to maintain a unified front in the face of mounting challenges, including international isolation, economic crises, and growing resistance from rival groups.
With no signs of a better future in the offing, the people of Afghanistan are fleeing poverty, hunger, and the oppressive rule of the Taliban. Many risk their lives to escape, with some dying at borders or being detained in foreign countries.
Considering these grim trends in Afghanistan, critics point out the irony in PTM’s admiration for integrating the Pashtuns of Pakistan with a country whose citizens are desperate to leave it due to the failures of their own government.
In stark contrast, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa stands out as a thriving region in Pakistan, marked by rapid development and unprecedented progress. Here, people enjoy access to quality education, healthcare, and economic opportunities. Notably, women are empowered to pursue their aspirations, playing a vital role in driving the country’s growth and development.
The Pakistan Security Forces and government have invested around 383 billion rupees in ex-FATA’s development over the past 20 years, marking the dawn of progress and prosperity in the war-torn tribal districts. Notably, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s formerly notorious terrorist strongholds and no-go areas have been successfully cleared of militants through a series of decisive military operations.
Moreover, the influx of Afghans into Pakistan, driven by a desire for employment, business opportunities, quality healthcare, education, and other amenities, is a testament to their preference for Pakistan over Afghanistan as a destination for a better quality of life.
While the Pakistani state has consistently demonstrated its commitment towards uplifting its Pashtun citizens, however, the leaders of PTM, notably its co-founders, Mohsin Dawar, have increasingly come under scrutiny for failing to initiate any tangible projects that could benefit the local population, despite having access to development funds worth billions of rupees during their five-year tenure in the National Assembly.
In a nutshell, if PTM genuinely aims to serve the Pashtun interests, it should adopt a collaborative approach with the Pakistani federation, a sentiment widely shared by the majority of Pashtuns. This approach will help address the legitimate concerns of Pashtuns and prevent exploitation by hostile agencies.
