These days, international attention is singularly focused on the Israeli-Palestine conflict in Gaza, overshadowing the tragic eviction of 1.7 million Afghan refugees from Pakistan.
The current situation embodies not just the repatriation of illegal migrants; it is an expression of the Pakistani ruling establishment’s anger and frustration against former allies and friends, the Afghan Taliban. Consult any geo-strategist invested in the realist paradigm, and they will contend that this sudden expulsion of Afghan refugees is justified. After all, which country would allow such a huge influx of migrants in its country, especially those whose community, as argued by the caretaker Prime Minister Anwaar Kakar, are engaged in acts of violent extremism inside Pakistan?
Kakar claims that Afghans committed 15 acts of terrorism in October this year in Pakistan. Even if we were to entertain this information, which falls short of any transparency standards, one could not help but question why the caretaker government did not task its intelligence agencies, known for possessing a strong dataset, with zeroing in on the culprits instead of targeting an entire population. The larger case being built exposes the mediocrity of the overall leadership that has systematically struck Pakistan, especially in the last year.
The decision appears to be driven by emotion and falls short of several standards, ranging from human rights considerations to the service of Pakistan's strategic interests.
The ‘otherization’ of the Afghan people marks the beginning of greater tension in the society – to further polarization in the future. This tendency does not allow even educated people to see through the hollowness of their professed sensitivity to human rights, as their heart refuses to bleed for these impoverished Afghans
To start with, it is an act of cruelty to thrust innocent people out of their homes and into an uncertain future of suffering. With winter already underway, these Afghans face an uncertain future of poverty and hardship, a situation that led the UNHCR to declare it an emergency.
Unfortunately, as the global powers remain deeply engaged in the crisis in Ukraine and the Middle East, it appears they have little time or resources to address the situation in Afghanistan. The argument is not that Pakistan, like any other state, lacks the right to deny residency to non-citizens. It is the nature of the relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan that adds complexity. Those facing eviction fled their country after the Taliban takeover in 2021. These individuals are already under threat from the Taliban – and punishing those in Kabul through their eviction might not achieve the intended purpose.
Islamabad is also expelling Afghans who possess complete documentation. Despite statements by the caretaker foreign minister, claiming only illegal individuals are being expelled, the target is wider, and it is victimising children by throwing them out of schools. Clearly, Afghan refugees are no longer a profitable project that brought in millions of dollars back in the 1980s.
The security establishment and the ruling elite in various parts of the country appear to have little sympathy for the sufferings of the Afghans. The security narrative, in fact, seems to be overshadowed by an intense racist bias. Suddenly, Afghans, including historical figures who were once proudly owned as representatives of Muslim-Pakistani heritage distinct from Indian culture and civilization, are being discarded.
It's not merely about turning a new page, as journalist Absar Alam seems to be doing by suddenly expressing discontent with all forms of Afghans. It represents another form of the erasure of history, including the not-so-distant past when the Pakistani state named its weapons after conquerors from Central Asia and Afghanistan, including Abdali.
This distancing may not resolve the terrorism problem unless the state admits that many sources of violent extremism continue to thrive inside Pakistan. One wonders why there is little discussion about the systematic settlement of the TTP within the country, a plan conceived since 2016 and implemented by the Imran Khan government
Alam has sympathizers in Sindh who are loudly promoting similar racism, concealing their ethnic bias under the guise of state-sponsored national security.
The ‘otherization’ of the Afghan people marks the beginning of greater tension in the society – to further polarization in the future. This tendency does not allow even educated people to see through the hollowness of their professed sensitivity to human rights, as their heart refuses to bleed for these impoverished Afghans.
Anwaar ul Haq Kakar’s comments reflect his lack of strategic knowledge and immaturity in handling tense political situations. His statement marks a watershed moment in Pakistan’s Afghan policy, signifying a shift by the security establishment from its longstanding strategy of shaping and supporting militancy in Afghanistan back in the early 1980s. There seems to be a notable departure from an over-dependency on the Taliban to distancing from the Taliban-led Kabul.
Only a few weeks ago, Pakistan’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Munir Akram, was pleading a case for the Taliban even as the TTP carried out acts of terror. Likewise, former foreign minister Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari and former national security advisor Moeed Yusuf urged the international community to show leniency toward the Taliban government and provide financial assistance. Islamabad and Rawalpindi previously urged the world to overlook Taliban brutality and assist Afghanistan for the sake of its poor, starving, and helpless population. Ironically, the same argument now seems hollow in these cities.
This distancing may not resolve the terrorism problem unless the state admits that many sources of violent extremism continue to thrive inside Pakistan. One wonders why there is little discussion about the systematic settlement of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) within the country, a plan conceived since 2016 and implemented by the Imran Khan government.
The bigger issue is that such handling of Afghan refugees is not going to impress the Taliban into submission. Despite arguments from author Hassan Abbas in his latest book suggesting that the Taliban are controlled by Pakistan, the reality is that post-Doha, the Taliban has learned to establish transactional relationships with various countries, including China, India, Iran, and the US, indicating a reduced dependency on Pakistan.
In allowing its frustration to prevail, Rawalpindi is struggling to persuade Kabul that the cost of upsetting Pakistan is high. Regardless of Pakistan's decision on transit trade, the Afghan government has initiated discussions with Iran for alternative supply routes.
I am reminded of my 2014 research on Pakistan’s regional trade, titled Tealeaves for Tanks: Pakistan’s Trade with Iran, India and Afghanistan, in which many Afghan tradesmen spoke of their preference for Pakistan over Iran. The Afghans living for decades in Pakistan have made significant investments in the economy of Pakistan. This advantage is now at risk. Regionally, tables will turn, particularly in light of the treatment meted out to Afghan refugees.
Interestingly, despite being a Shia-majority country, Iran has handled the Taliban and various Kabul regimes with greater caution. It stands out as the only other country in the region that has hosted millions of refugees but managed their return differently from Pakistan.
I recall being told by a civilian contractor who was engaged in research for an important organisation within the security establishment that there was an acknowledgement that historically, the real threat had emanated from the north-west than the east. Despite many issues with this argument, it appears the state has pushed to make its apprehensions a reality. Sending these Afghans back with such humiliation is unlikely to resolve Pakistan’s Afghanistan problem but is more likely to exacerbate it.