Introduction

Afghanistan faces a herculean challenge of bringing stability and development after years of civil war and conflicts that have ravaged the country. This implies building not just political institutions and civil society groups but also providing rights to women and girls. It also involves providing schools, roads and hospitals. But above all this, providing all these to bring ethnic harmony is the most important in a multi-ethnic country that is vulnerable to ethnic fissures. When we talk of ethnicity, we indicate that groups and identities have developed in mutual contact rather than in isolation. But what is the nature of such groups? Ethnicity and religiously conservative country will always have difficulty for establishing democratic institutions and believing fully on that. While, the dominated ethnic and religious aspects suffuse the civic criteria in multi-ethnic and religious states, it can easily contribute to significant internal conflict, such as Afghanistan, Iraq or Bosnia. Undoubtedly, Afghanistan is one of the countries with a complex ethnic combination in the world. The country since its establishment as a political entity has witnessed period of both remarkable stability and violent turbulence. According to ‘mountstuart Elphinstone; any observer of Afghanistan would be surprised and may find it difficult to comprehend how a nation could subsist in such disorder; the changing combination of forces is not base on any principle; they simply represent the unfolding of old rivalries and new clashes of interests. Though, during the soviet domination of Afghanistan, a secular regime replaced the Afghan-tribal and patrimonial regimes, which goes back to Ahmad Shah Abdali, the founder of Afghan state in 1747, whose power was fundamentally personal and independent of any objectively rational goal; a model which is very close the weberian ideal of patrimonial rule. Despite the continuous patrimonial and tribal practices of power over 230 years, finally, on 1980’s the tribal based regime prompted the Marxist political ideology as a mean of creating a civic nation and greater loyalty to the state. The opposition the state comes primarily from the tribes and ethnic groups, as well as the urban middle classes, for whom an Islamic Identity has served has as a rallying point capable of unifying antagonistic ethnic communities and other groupings.

Although, in case of Afghanistan the feeling of ethnic attachment is stronger than that of Pakistan state that emphasized the importance of Islam as an identity. But still such competing claims of ethnicity, religion and the uses of each by political elites have had deep repercussion on Afghanistan nation building on one hand, and foreign policies on the other. In my paper “Ethnicity Identity and political reconstruction” is an attempt to define, the concept and practice of Ethnicity Issues tendencies of Afghan leaders causes challenges to the process of nation building and democratization in Afghanistan. My paper divided into four main section. The first focus on Ethnicity and second obstacles lied on way of a civic political representation of ethnic group in Afghanistan, third I explained ethnic representation and political parties in Afghanistan. Finally I will discuss that reconstruction of Afghanistan of karzai period. It has to be kept in mind that an ethnicization of the Afghan War occurred, but an ethnicization of the masses failed. The still not domineering importance that ethnicity has among the Afghan populace should be harnessed for political reconstruction, rather than being enforced by an ‘ethnical solution’. In his book, Clash of Civilizations, Samuel Huntington describes ethnicity as the identity of the Cold War era and religion as the identity and issue of conflict in the post Cold War era.Ethnicity can be defined as having a common name, shared historical and cultural linkages which deal with territorially-based descent rather than a religious content.¹ (Abraham 2013:6)

Ethnic Composition in Afghanistan

Afghanistan continues to occupy a pivotal position in global politics due to its geo-strategic location and historical tendencies of conflict and governance. However, the ceaseless civil war and turmoil in Afghanistan is a by-product of the Cold War, great power rivalries, Pakistan's dream of controlling the country in the name of ‘strategic depth’ and also the struggle between the ethnic composition of the country, the majority Pashtuns, on the one side, in an incessant flux to reestablish their dominance, and the other ethnic groups trying to consolidate adequate representation in the political functioning of Afghanistan, on the other. Therefore, to understand a country like Afghanistan, it not only becomes important to understand the region as a factor but needs a dissection of the varied dynamics of its society, mainly its ethnic constraint, which directly defines and deconstructs the political architecture of the country and its relations with regard to the world. Also, such an exercise, emphasizing and deciphering the importance of the Pashtuns and ethnicity in Afghanistan aims to help in conceptualizing a way out for India and the world in the restructuring of Afghanistan post the withdrawal of US forces.²(Abraham 2013:1–2)

Afghanistan has always been a multiethnic state, and like most postcolonial states, it has more than one ethnic group, speaks too many languages, and has multiple and multilayered identities. Ethnicity however does present a challenge for the state formation process by itself. It requires a different kind of politics that is integrative, culturally sensitive, and politically participatory.³ (Rais 2008) After 2001, the international community set itself the ambitious goal of bringing stability and even a more challenging goal of political and social modernization in a multi-ethnic country. The present political reconstruction has revealed those challenges. Ethnicity plays a very important role in Afghanistan where people carrying multiple identities are living together. The population of the country is divided into a wide variety of ethnolingusistic groups. Afghanistan particularly rural Afghanistan provides excellent example of a place where tribal and ethnic groups takes primacy over the individual. Afghanistan population is divided into a myriad of these groups at the local level. The most important of these by population are pastuns, tajiks, hazaras,uzbek and Turkmen. Their distribution in Afghanistan is as follows:

Sources: U.S. State Department and CIA World Fact book, 2010.

Political representation of Ethnic group

A historic look at various Afghan ethnic groups by Sven Gunnar Simonsen, a researcher at the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), showed that Muhammadzai and Durranis Pashtuns, followed by Tajiks and Uzbeks, have generally achieved positions of political influence. Simonsen further claims that the Hazaras have largely been excluded from government historically, having only minimal representation in public institutions. The representation of ethnic groups in government continues to be a contentious issue in Afghanistan. The Brookings Institution's Afghanistan Index 2011 shows that the number of Pashtun seats decreased by 16 in the 2010 elections, while Hazaras and Tajiks both made gains see Figure:

Figure-3.1 Ethnic Makeup of Afghanistan's Main Legislative Bodies

Figure-3.1.1Meshrano Jirga (House of Elders)

Figure-3.1.2Wolesi Jirga (House of People; Total members 246)

Ethnic Representation and Political Parties in Afghanistan

One of the key difficulties for parties in interviews proved to be in answering the question: ‘what is the current role of political parties in Afghanistan?’ The roles of many parties have changed since they were first formed, and re-defining these roles in the post-2001 context has been necessary.

Accommodation of marginalized ethnic groups and other sections

The available data on political representation shows a predominance of demographically dominant groups in representative bodies. There are a number of marginalized ethnic groups whose representation is minimal and is reflective of their peripheral position as far as power sharing is concerned. Some of these marginalized groups include the Hazaras who follow the Shia sect and suffer doubly because of the sectarian factor. Other smaller groups that are not prominent shareholders are Aimaqs, Pishais, Kuchis who are nomads and a number of Arabs. Kuchis have resorted to violent means with the help of tribal groups. Apart from the minority ethnic groups, the other most marginalized group is women. The historical gender discrimination has resulted in the problems of access to education and health facilities for women. Women have historically remained disenfranchised and several social restrictions have cut down their access to even literacy programs.

Analysis of Karzai Period and role of US

Recently, the Karzai Presidency witnessed high drama over the Bilateral Security Agreement that United States wished to sign with Afghanistan to finally arrive at an arrangement that could enable US to leave some forces in Afghanistan. United States accused Karzai of trying to stall the signing of the agreement by employing delaying tactics. Karzai on the other hand had several objections to the Agreement. One among the objections was the clause that exempted US soldiers from prosecution in Afghanistan. Karzai wanted approval by a Loya Jirga (grand council). Finally, the Loya Jirga approved the agreement in late November 2013. US Secretary of State John Kerry welcomed the assembly's suggestion that the document should be signed before the end of the year. The document remained unsigned in early December. Later Karzai was said to have made new demands like help in getting the talks with Taliban back on track and end of military raids on Afghan homes that violated their cultural sentiments. Stopping Drone strikes that killed civilians indiscriminately was also among demands. Another obstacle to agreement has been prisoner releases. The Afghan government took charge of all detentions earlier in 2013 but the release of some prisoners attracted criticism from US for they were alleged by latter to be responsible for attacks on NATO and ANSF personnel. The Afghan government however was not convinced.

Later, when NATO ministers expressed despondency by saying that the agreement will not be signed and that all troops will withdraw. The Pentagon, too, appeared to be making arrangements for complete withdrawal. However, US Secretary of State John Kerry said that an agreement would be signed. He said: “It will be signed by the way. Whether it's signed by him or not we obviously have serious reservations, but all six of the candidates for the presidency of Afghanistan have said that they will sign it”.

The debate surrounding BSA and the frequent acrimonious exchanges between US and Karzai were reflective of the narrow approach and short sightedness that did not take cognizance of the potential ethnic fissures. The agreement just concerned an arrangement for the withdrawal of US forces without providing a safety arrangement that could bring stability in the event of a failure of political system that is still in its infancy. Also, since Karzai belongs to predominant Pashtun community, certain things have been taken for granted. US probably is in no mood to touch the sensitive ethnic issue for fear of getting embroiled in things that it cannot have control over and can be messy.

The United States has funded extensive “reconstruction and relief” programs in Afghanistan since the war in Afghanistan began in 2001. As of September 2012 (the latest reliable data), allotments for those programs totaled about $79.6 billion.

The funding has largely come from the Department of Defense, although the Department of State, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and other government agencies also contribute. Reconstruction and relief efforts are generally separated into three categories: Security, Governance and Development, and Humanitarian. All funding for reconstruction and relief is independent of funding associated with Operation Enduring Freedom, the official name for the war in Afghanistan. As of September 2012, the costs associated with Operation Enduring Freedom were about $440 billion.41

Reconstruction ChallengesIssues of security and stability

Issue of security and its related are one of the most difficult challenges in the process of rebuilding and reconstruction of Afghanistan. Inadequate security provision on the part of government is a challenge which often hinders development and reconstruction activities. The Afghan National Army (ANA) is the strongest of these institutions which finds itself incapable dealing with emergency situations. The United States, Britain, and France have had the primary roles in training the army. Afghanistan is embarking on a myriad of reforms such as political, economic, educational and legal, among others. But analysts, aid workers and government officials are all in an opinion that none of the reforms will help Afghanistan without countrywide security. As President Hamid Karzai, observed that “Security is a big problem, not only in the city, but in the countryside. It's a big problem because of warlords. And so they have the power, and anything they want to do it, they can do it.” According to Habiba Sarabi, the Afghan minister of women's affairs, the humanitarian workers have also suffered from the tenuous security situation. Two aid workers from the Afghan Red Crescent Society and a driver for a U.S. aid agency, Mercy Corps, were killed in attacks in mid-August. An ambitious nationwide disarmament program, organized by the Afghan government and the United Nations, is planned to encourage an estimated 100,000 former combatants to turn in with their weapons in exchange for benefits or other incentives aimed at reintegrating the fighters into civil society.⁵(Hoch, 2003) The U.N. Security Council resolution establishing the mandate for an international mission should, as appropriate, describe and authorize development of specific elements of the judicial and law enforcement system in the post-conflict society.⁶ (Guéhenno, 2003:8)

Ethnic conflict

Afghanistan, the largest ethnic groups are Pashtuns at 40 percent and the Tajiks at 20 percent. Besides it, the rest groups are the Hazaras, Uzbeks and Aimaq. Ethnic diversity has not been a boon to the country. The ethnic conflict has spilled over on the borders what with many ethnic groups having transnational loyalty to their tribes.⁷ (Moghadam 1997). It already has a history of tribal ethnic strifes. It is important to see the ethnic dimension of the recently conducted elections. The current election scenario is fraught with several possibilities. It has thrown up a mandate which has not been wholeheartedly accepted by both the candidates. The two candidates Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani are locked over the results that have given a victory to the latter. The former strongly believes that the elections that the elections had been rigged in several places. Even as Afghanistan prepares to conduct a United Nations supervised and US brokered deal to recount the votes, the two candidates do show much signs of reconciliation. The whole world has focussed on the results and the future scenario in the event of recount showing a different result than earlier or declaring status quo. But the underlying political factors are more worrying. The election results could be a result of massive rigging in any country experiencing democratisation in initial stages. But what makes Afghanistan unique is the fact that both the leading candidates are Pashtun and this is the case after another Pashtun, Hamid Karzai, completed his two Presidential terms this year. In a country that has substantial Pashtun population, the two things referred to here should not raise eyebrows. But what do these indicate about a country that has to build nation and bring democracy to bring an all round development? Do these indicate that ethnic factors are still a challenge for the country that has already seen ethnic civil conflict? That Abdullah Abdullah, with a mixed Pashtun and Tajiki identity is able to attract Hazara and Tajiki votes and still loses twice only shows that votes are strongly divided along ethnic lines (even after taking into account the rigging factor).

Continuing Ethnic Imbroglio

Presidential Elections were held recently whose results got delayed amidst talk of ethnic fissures gaining prominence.The two leading contenders had received votes that saw cleavages along ethnic lines, with Ashraf Ghani garnering the votes of dominant Pasthuns and Abdullah Abdullah getting votes largely from Tajiks and the largely marginalised Hazaras. The play of numbers and the American diplomacy that took into consideration its own interests vis-a-vis Pashtun groups ultimately led to declaration of Ghani as the President. Abdullah Abdullah has settled for a less powerful role but the discontent simmers in Abdullah camp.

India and the Ethnic Problems of Afghanistan

Lately, Indian consulates and diplomatic institutions have come under attack from forces that are averse to increasing Indian role in the developmental activities in Afghanistan. India has channelized all its efforts in rebuilding Afghanistan in those spheres of economy that can provide that country with a sound footing for infrastructure growth in future. For instance, India has been active in building roads and setting up institutions of higher education. India's Sulabh International, the organization run by social and sanitation activist Bindeshwar Pathak has built toilets in several parts of the country. These are the activities that do not make a bang and are non military in nature. But these are spheres which directly affect the lives of common masses. India, which already is seen favourably there has been able to increase its soft power with the help of these projects. However, interests not favourable to India, like the Haqqani network, have been behind attacks on consulates and Indian engineers (Dhaka 2014).⁸ These attacks have caused India to avoid dealing with issues that can complicate the problems there, like the ethnic factors. India is cognizant of the fact that ethnic fissures might become more prominent now but it is desisting from engaging with issues proactively as it feels that its interests are safer with the present distant approach. In contrast to the US approach, Indians are wary on matters of military. But like Indians, Americans are wary of ethnic factors. The differences lie in the way both have approached the subject of negotiations with Taliban. India is not very favourable to negotiations with Pakistan backed Taliban elements, while Americans seem to have no qualms about it. But then that issue is not just confined to ethnic dimension.

Conclusion: The Way Ahead

The potential of the ethnic fissures to cause longtime instability is big. But the short sighted focus has taken away the attention of strategists from the ethnic rivalries. In a hurry to build a rough patchwork of democratic institutions, the Western powers have ignored the most important feature of Afghan polity. The results have therefore not been rosy. Despite provisions for elections, the system is tied to strong ethnic loyalties. Both USA and India need to take note of the fact that mere developmental efforts or dropping bombs cannot give a strong base for nation building to a country like Afghanistan which is multi-ethnic. Both countries can leverage the work of United Nations. For the last ten years, the United Nations has been, in principle, the leader of the international community in Afghanistan. Throughout the last decade the UN support for capacity building and the strengthening of Afghan institutions, as well as its role in humanitarian and reconstruction efforts have been crucial for the country, as it emerges from over thirty years of war and crisis. As Afghanistan continues to transition full responsibility for security, governance and development to the Government of Afghanistan, the UN will continue to play an important role in the coordination of international civilian activities and in support of the Government in the years to come. The next decade of the UN work in Afghanistan must be defined by effective support for Afghan leadership and ownership, which is central for building a peaceful, stable, and prosperous nation. However, it has to be kept in mind that UN efforts can pay off only if the process of reconstruction is inclusive. The excessive centralization of power and concentration of authority in the hands of the dominant majority can generate resentment among other ethnic groups. Indeed, the chances of national integration can be made better if a consensus-based democratic system, rather than the majoritarian system, is adopted in Afghanistan.

Ethnic identity and Political Reconstruction in Afghanistan