Issues in Tariq Ali's support for Brexit & Colonial narratives

Issues in Tariq Ali's support for Brexit & Colonial narratives 

Although regarding massive support of youth in favor of referendum proved right yet regarding turnout of voters and victory for Brexit he was reluctant. He had a fear of defeat regarding Brexit. On the one hand he liked  re-nationalization demands of labour party but he look disturbed due to support of labour party for Remain. Tariq himself accepted that there are similarities in his pro Brexit stand and stand of racist and rightist lobbies especially UKIP in UK. But it is not knew and if you read his article published in 2000 in New Left Review AFGHANISTAN: BETWEEN HAMMER AND ANVIL you will find similarities in his narrative and point of view of colonial writers especially regarding concocted thesis of buffer Zone ,  unconquered lands, Afghan Kings etc.Even you can find low tone regarding Talibans and also a hope for Taliban's bright future which make his narrative more Royal then the King. "If the Taliban had simply offered peace and bread, they might have won lasting popular support. " The article was written in 2000 in New Left Review 2, March-April 2000, a London base left journal. He used books of John Cooley, Unholy Wars, and Ahmed Rashid, Taliban but he should expand his thesis by using books like MI-6 Secret Intelligence history from 1900-49 so that one can understand about those who had coined Use of religion theory in late 19th century. 

Here you can watch his argument at Interview: Tariq Ali, British writer and commentator and read transcript too. He accepted in this talk support of Brexit from some retired Army officers and said ''In fact, several British generals recently retired came out for Brexit, saying it would strengthen Britain's security''  interestingly he is a critic of Pakistani generals but in London he shows no hesitation to reproduce statement of army generals just to make his point. 
When he criticize EU, he used hammer of class question, democracy but when he support Brexit he even used point of view of retired general and bank on security.  
He is an internationalist but he has serious concerns against the refugees which look strange. At this point he acts like an economic adviser and his main concern is bad economic position of the Empire. He neither talk about offshore money that is under threat in EU and neither mentioned the owners of Offshore who were supporting Brexit.
Will add more soon

Read it too and compare it with Tariq's article on Afghanistan mentioned above..
click and read Afghan experts should deconstruct Old Narratives first


Transcript of T A interview

JOHN BARRON, PRESENTER: Let's take you live London now, where Tariq Ali is joining us.
He's a British writer, filmmaker and commentator from the political left, who believes the UK should exit the EU.
Tariq Ali, welcome to Lateline.

TARIQ ALI, AUTHOR AND COMMENTATOR: Very good to be with you again. 

JOHN BARRON: Nice to have you there.

It's interesting: on this particular issue, you find yourself not only on the same side as Boris Johnson, which is a little unusual, but also of Nigel Farage and the UK Independence Party, a right-wing populist, some say anti-immigration party.

I assume it's safe to say that you've arrived at this point from sort of a slightly different direction, but why do you support the Brexit?

TARIQ ALI: Well, I support it not simply for Britain, where at least if Britain elected a government - say a Jeremy Corbin government, given some of the policies he wants to implement on Trident, essentially on re-nationalising the railways, et cetera: these would not be permitted by the competition laws of the EU.

So that's a particular reason: that at least here you would get a government which, if you don't like, you can get rid of and you have an alternative. With the EU as it is presently structured, we have an extremely undemocratic, bureaucratic organisation which is not accountable to the people of any country.

And secondly, I think it's for Europe, too. I'm an internationalist. I think the way the EU has treated small countries like Greece, which has been wrecked even as we speak; Ireland; Portugal; others: they deserve to be punished.

And we need a different type of an EU which will only come if this one is dismantled. So I see a Brexit as dismantling or helping to dismantle the current structures of the European Union.

JOHN BARRON: You talk about it potentially freeing the hand of Jeremy Corbin, the progressive Labour leader, to potentially institute some of his agenda. And yet he, as I understand it, is against the Brexit, at least in a slightly tepid way?

TARIQ ALI: Well, he is against the Brexit at the present moment. But he has said and others in the Labour Party have said that: "Once we are in power, Brexit would be a different thing. If it happens now, it's a different set of Tories will take over," which in my view is an incoherent argument. Because to go, to get out now would actually strengthen Labour for a variety of reasons - and strengthen the rest of Europe, too.

I think lots of people elsewhere in Europe are waiting to see what happens here, so they can commence the debate. This EU has been a total disaster in terms of interstate relations; in terms of relations between rulers and ruled; and in terms of geopolitics.

I mean, it is effectively governed militarily by NATO. All the NATO plans that take place are backed by the EU. You have a huge number of refugees as a result of NATO's wars, launched by the United States. And you know, just in the last week, 700 refugees drowned. And this is not unrelated to the EU and NATO.

JOHN BARRON: Does it concern you, Tariq Ali, that some of those who are advocating the same position as you say that one of the benefits of exiting the European Union is: "We will have less immigrants"; and that this is clearly one of the reasons UKIP, for instance, is drawn towards this policy? 

TARIQ ALI: Well, look: occasionally one has to vote on principle and regardless of the fact that others are voting for different reasons.

It was the same as some years ago, when there were votes on the European constitution in countries like France. Right and left, for different reasons, voted against the Constitution and were completely ignored after they won.

So this goes on because this is an issue that divides people for different reasons. The immigration debate largely is about cheap European labour coming into Britain. But the core of the problem is not the European migrants coming in; but the state of the British economy, which welcomes cheap labour and which will not allow even, in some cases, people to be coming in to be trade unionised.

So my position is that, in fact: leave or stay, the economic conditions in this country aren't really going to be affected.

And all this fear campaign that there will be a total disaster if we leave the EU: if it's going to be such a serious disaster, why did you go for a referendum in the first place?

JOHN BARRON: Well, David Cameron is making that point. He says that half of British exports go into the European Union at the moment, but this could knock tens of billions of pounds off the GDP, almost overnight?

TARIQ ALI: This is nonsense, actually. And this is really part of campaign fear.

Most serious economists, Europeans and non-Europeans, have said that there will be very little real change. There are European countries which are outside the EU and trade perfectly normally with the EU. They have no restrictions on entering the EU without visas.

So everything is being ratcheted up to frighten large numbers of people into voting the way the government wants them to vote. They did it in Scotland: they succeeded. And so they're trying it again now. 

JOHN BARRON: And unlike Scotland, though, there is also the spectre of another major European conflagration: another, potentially, a world war that could start in Europe if Britain is not part of the EU. What do you think of that? 

TARIQ ALI: I think that's just nonsense. I mean, what world war is going to start in Europe? They've again demonised Russia, which is a country trying to assert its sovereignty in saying that this represents new dangers.

In fact, several British generals recently retired came out for Brexit, saying it would strengthen Britain's security. So these arguments which are being used by Cameron and his cronies on the frontbench of the Conservative Party really have very little value.

The problem is that his opponents within the Conservative Party are not being as effective as they could. We on the left are very weak in this particular debate: completely isolated. But the Brexit campaigners are coming up with equally crude arguments. So it is a deeply unsatisfactory referendum. 

JOHN BARRON: And historically, of course, Tariq Ali, this has been almost an internal battle fought on the Conservative side, back to the 1970s, when a referendum was held on deeper ties with Europe as well. It seems this is now a proxy, "who's going to be the next prime minister between David Cameron and Boris Johnson" matter? 

TARIQ ALI: Well, this is absolutely true. And the fight is going on. I mean, if you read the Financial Times today and other newspapers, this has become a big fight in the Conservative Party.

And relations have so bad within the government and its backbenchers that many are now speculating that, win or lose, it doesn't matter. What is going to happen is that the Tory Party, as it exists at the moment, might well split.

I mean, it hasn't split so far, ever. But if this split were to take place as a result of the referendum, that would mark a huge, huge break in English politics.

JOHN BARRON: What do you make of the intervention from dozens of leading economists, Kristine Lagarde of the IMF, US president Barack Obama, among others: all advocating for Britain to stay within the EU: to reform it if and where necessary, but not to file for divorce - maybe just a more open marriage?

TARIQ ALI: Well, this is the global elite. You know, the very names you mentioned: Christine Lagarde, who is still being investigated for some financial, you know, misdoings in France; Obama, who is a lame duck president; and others like them. I mean, the elite is very worried and they're worried...

JOHN BARRON: Plenty on the left would listen to Barack Obama, I would have thought, though?

TARIQ ALI: I don't think so. I think Barack Obama blotted his copybook quite a long time ago. And the colour of his skin doesn't make him progressive. You know, this is a big mistake that people have made.

But I think that, effectively, what we are seeing is the European elite panicking because they feel - they don't care that much about Britain as such - but they feel that, if there is a Brexit, it will disrupt the functioning of the present EU and they might have to face serious problems.

Look, under the EU as it exists at the moment, we've seen a huge rise of the far right. Austria nearly had a semi-fascist president. Big rise of extreme right-wing groups in Germany, in France, in Scandinavia.

Why has this happened? You know, they are in the EU. So why is getting out of the EU going to make things any worse on that front?

I think this is a complete panic in order to try and protect and preserve the neo-liberal economy which the EU defends, because that's all it's become now.

It's a machine for neo-liberal capitalism - and that is what it pushes, time and time and time again. 

JOHN BARRON: Just finally, Tariq Ali: you compared this to the Scottish referendum. Do you think that, ultimately, that the status quo will prevail because there is a negative campaign raising these economic, even military concerns over an exit? Or is there time for the pro-Brexit case to get up? 

TARIQ ALI: I think, at the present moment, it is looking as if the 'Remain' campaign will win. I may be wrong.

Interestingly enough, the largest support for remaining comes from young people between the ages of 18 and 26. They have an idolised view of the EU. They think it's like the modern gold standard: we can't quit it.

So 70 per cent of those between 18 and 26 are for staying in, for all sorts of idealistic reasons. If they turn out to vote, then 'Remain' will win a huge majority. But will they turn out and vote? We don't know.

So a lot will depend on the actual numbers who come and vote. And, as we know in European elections in general, the voting is very low.

JOHN BARRON: Good to talk to you. Thanks for joining us. 

TARIQ ALI: Thanks.

Is Britain ready to follow Hitler?

Is Britain ready to follow Hitler?

100 years back it happened with Germans and in that game Britain and France were partners but this time it is English who opted a suicidal mission under the leadership of conservative cum racist lobbies. Cameron played double game but it proved counterproductive. There are lessons in post Brexit for South Asians who should be-aware from rightist and narrow nationalists and their suicidal missions. Read the piece published in Online Humsheri, Lhore

Link of the Article http://humshehrionline.com/?p=19486#sthash.7hGflEnP.dpbs

برطانیہ: ہٹلر کا پیروکار بنے گا؟

عامر ریاض

کیا برطانیہ کے ساتھ وہی ہونے جارہا ہے جو اس نے 100برس قبل جرمنوں سے کیا تھا؟ پہلی جنگ عظیم کے بعد جرمنوں کو ذلیل و رسواءکرنے میں فرانس، برطانیہ اکٹھے تھے کہ اس رسوائی کے ردعمل میں جب ہٹلر پیدا ہوا تو “فاشزم” کا لیبل لگا کر جرمنوں کو دوسری جنگ عظیم میں مزید رسوا کرنے کا سامان پیدا کیا گیا۔ مگر جو کچھ برطانیہ میں ہورہا ہے اس کا انتخاب خود انگلش قوم نے کیا ہے البتہ اس کا خمیازہ پورے برطانیہ کو بھگتنا پڑرہا ہے۔ 23 جون کا ریفرنڈم یوں الٹا پڑجائے گا اس بارے زیرک انگلش قوم دھوکا کھاگئی کہ زوال میں غصّہ بڑھ جاتا ہے اور سمجھداری گھاس چرنے چلی جاتی ہے۔ بس یہی کچھ آج کل برطانیہ کے ساتھ ہورہا ہے کہ سفارت کاری پر مان کرنے والے برطانوی تفاخر کے ہاتھوں مات کھاگئے۔ لندن میں ریفرنڈم کے چھٹے روز بڑا مظاہرہ ہوا کہ جس میں یورپی یونین میں شمولیت کے حق میں تقاریر کی گئیں۔ یہی نہیں بلکہ برطانیہ کی آٹو موبائل انڈسٹری کے نمائندگان نے بھی اک بیان جاری کیا جس میں یہ اقرار موجود ہے کہ برطانیہ کی کاریں بنانے سے وابستہ صنعت کو اس فیصلہ سے ازحد نقصان پہنچے گا۔ ریفرنڈم کا نتیجہ آتے ہی افتاد ڈیوڈ کیمرون پر پڑی اور انھوں نے بھاگتے چور کی لنگوٹی بچانے کی خاطر استعفیٰ دینے کا اعلان کر ڈالا۔ کیا ڈیوڈ کیمرون یورپی یونین میں برطانیہ کی شمولیت کا حامی تھا؟ بین القوامی میڈیا اور خصوصاً برٹش پریس پر نظر رکھنے والے جانتے ہیں کہ یہ حضرت درحقیقت یورپی یونین کو بلیک میل کرنے میں غلطاں تھے۔ وہ ایک طرف انتہائی چالاکی سے جعلی قوم پرستوں اور نسل پرستوں کو ہلاشیری دے رہا تھا تو دوسری طرف خود یورپی یونین کو یہ کہہ رہا تھا کہ وہ برطانیہ کو “سپیشل سٹیٹس” دیں۔ یہی وجہ تھی کہ حضرت نے اپنی کابینہ کو بظاہر کھلی چھوٹ دے رکھی تھی اور ان سے کہا تھا وہ ریفرنڈم میں اپنے “ضمیر” کے مطابق حمایت یا مخالفت کی مہم چلائیں۔ یہی وہ “ڈبل گیم” تھی جس کا خمیازہ آج سب بھگت رہے ہیں۔ مگر نتیجہ دیکھ کر انھوں نے اک اورپینترہ بدلا جو پہلے سے سوچا ہوا لگتا ہے اورتین ماہ بعد اکتوبر میں استعفیٰ دینے کا اعلان فرما دیا۔اگر مسلہ اصول کا تھا تو انہیں فوری مستعفی ہو جانا چاہیے تھا کہ یہاں بھی دال میں کالا صاف دکھائی دے رہا ہے۔ کیا یہ اعلان آرٹیکل 50 سے بچنے کے حیلے بہانے ہیں کہ یہ وہی آرٹیکل ہے جس کے تحت برطانیہ کو باقاعدہ یورپی یونین سے طلاق کی درخواست دائر کرنے پڑے گی۔ اس درخواست کے دائر ہونے کے بعد ہی یورپی یونین طلاق کے کاغذات کو حتمی شکل دینے کے حوالہ سے کارروائی شروع کرسکے گی۔

 گارڈین کی کالم نویس اور مشہور نوجوان صحافی جرمن نژاد ایلکس واں تنزیلمان کی کتاب “انڈین سمر” جس نے بھی پڑھ رکھی ہے وہ جانتا ہے کہ ٹھیک 100 سال قبل برطانیہ نے جرمنوں کے ساتھ کیسا بدترین سلوک کیا تھا۔ جو اس سے زیادہ تفصیلات پڑھنا چاہتا ہے وہ کیتھ جیفری کی کتاب “ایم آئی 6 ” پڑھ لے کہ برطانیہ نے کب جرمنوں کو دشمن نمبر ون قرار دیا تھا اس کی تاریخ معلوم ہوجائے گی جو 19ویں صدی کی آخری دہائیاں بنتی ہے۔

پہلی جنگ عظیم تو اُسی دشمن کو برباد کرنے کی اہم کڑی تھی کہ جرمن نژاد امریکی وزیر خارجہ ہنری کسنجر نے بھی اپنی کتاب “On China” میں اس بارے ذکر خیر کیا ہے۔ معاہدہ ورسیلز میں شکست خوردہ جرمنوں کو مزید ذلیل کرنے سے قبل برطانیہ میں 1917 کے سال اک حکم نامہ جاری ہوا تھا۔ یہ حکم نامہ ایلکس والاں تنزیلمان نے مستند حوالہ جات کے ساتھ کتاب میں شامل کیا ہے۔ اس حکم نامہ کے مطابق برطانیہ میں نسلوں سے رہنے والے جرمن نژاد شہریوں کو یہ کہا گیا کہ وہ اپنے جرمن نام بدل ڈالیں۔ ان جرمن نژاد برطانوی شہریوں میں جرنیل، بیوروکریٹ سیاستدان، آرٹسٹ، سائنسدان وغیرہ شامل تھے کہ جن کی حب الوطنی کسی شک و شبہ سے بالا تھی مگر 1917 میں یہ سب انگلش قوم کی نسل پرستی کی بھینٹ چڑھ گئے اور انہیں اپنے نام بدلنے پڑگئے۔ جرمنوں کو معاہدہ ورسیلز کے بعد اس قدر ذلیل کیا گیا کہ ہٹلر کی پیدائش مقدر ٹھہری۔ خود ماﺅنٹ بیٹن بھی انہی شرمندہ جرمن نژادوں میں شامل تھا اور بقول ایلکس واں، نام بدلوانے کی بدنام زمانہ مہم چلانے والوں میں ونسٹن چرچل جیسے جمہوریت پسند پیش پیش تھے۔ حیران نہ ہوں ڈیوڈ کیمرون بھی چرچل ہی کے مقلد ہیں اور انھوں نے بھی گھٹیا انگلش قوم پرستی کے زعم میں یورپی اقوام کو بلیک میل کرنے کی ناکام کوشش کی ہے۔ اس وقت صورتحال یہ ہے کہ ریفرنڈم کے نتائج پر برطانیہ میں ہر کوئی ایک دوسرے کو کوس رہا ہے۔ لندن جسے “عالمی مرکز معیشت” کا درجہ حاصل رہا، اب خطرے میں ہے اور برطانیہ کی بہت سی کمپنیاں اب یہاں سے رخصت لینے کی تیاریاں کررہی ہیں۔

ریفرنڈم کے نتائج اپنی جگہ سلطنت کی بے بسی کی تصویر ہیں کہ جیتنے یا ہارنے والوں میں فرق محض 4 فیصد سے بھی کم ہے۔ اگر ان نتائج کو نوجوان برطانوی شہریوں کے حوالہ سے دیکھا جائے تو نوجوانوں کی 72 فیصدی تعداد نے یورپ میں رہنے کو ترجیح دی جو معنی خیز ہے۔ قدامت پسند بزرگ برطانوی ان نتائج سے خوفزدہ ہےں کہ ان کی نئی نسل یورپ میں شامل ہونے کے لیے کسی بھی وقت نئے ریفرنڈم کا مطالبہ کر سکتی ہے۔ نوجوان برطانوی شہریوں کی آرا ءاس بات کا ثبوت ہیں کہ جو بیانیہ برطانیہ کے قدامت پرستوں نے بنا رکھا ہے اسے ان کی نئی نسل ماننے کو تیار نہیں۔ آئندہ 5 یا 8 برسوں میں یہی نئی نسل ہر برطانوی محکمہ و سیکٹر میں موجود ہوگی کہ سمجھدار کے لیے اشارہ کافی۔ برطانیہ میں رہنے والی چار میں سے دو اقوام یعنی سکاٹ لینڈ اور شمالی آئرلینڈ والے یورپ میں رہنے کے حق میں ووٹ دے چکے ہیں۔ مگر کیونکہ انگلش قوم برطانیہ میں 80 فیصدی آبادی پر مشتمل ہے اس لیے قدامت پرستی پر مشتمل نتائج یہیں زیادہ آئے۔ اس سب کے باوجود محض 4 فیصد سے بھی کم ووٹوں سے جیتے جانے والے ریفرنڈم کو نمائندہ کیسے کہا جاسکتا ہے؟

خود کو دوبارہ سے دنیا کی نمبرون سپر پاور بنانے کا خبط برطانیہ کو لے ڈوبا کہ تفاخر عقل کو کھا جاتا ہے والی بات 20ویں صدی کے برطانیہ پر صادق آئی۔محض ملکوں ملکوںملکہ کی سالگرہ منانے سے “عزت سادات” بحال ہونے سے رہی کہ برطانیہ کی اشرافیہ دوسری جنگ عظیم کے بعد اس خبط میں برابر رُجھی رہی ہے۔ اس خبط میں محض کیمرون مبتلا نہیں کہ جسے یقین نہ ہو وہ ٹونی بلیر کی کتاب The Journeyپڑھ لے۔ روس، امریکہ، چین اور ترکی انگلش قوم کا تماشہ بڑی متانت سے دیکھ رہے ہیں جبکہ جرمنی اور فرانس، برطانیہ کو جلد از جلد یورپی یونین سے نکالنے میں کمربستہ ہیں۔ مگر برطانیہ والے اس سب پر کسی باہرلے کو الزام نہیں دے سکتے کہ یہ سب کیا دھرا تفاخر و تعصب میں رُجھے ان کے اپنے نسل پرستوں اور جعلی قوم پرستوں کا ہی ہے۔ یورپی یونین میں سپیشل سٹیٹس کا خواہشمند برطانیہ 23 جون کے بعد اس خصوصی سٹیٹس سے بھی محروم ہوگیا ہے جو اسے معاہدہ اٹلانٹک (14 اگست1941) کے بعد امریکیوں نے دے رکھا تھا اور وہ مصاحب خاص تھا۔ اس تطہیر کا ہمارے خطوں پر بھی نمایاں اثر پڑے گاالبتہ جنوبی ایشیائی قوم پرست اور دائیں بازو والے ہمیں گھجل کرنے کو تیار ہیں۔ دائیں بازو کی انتہا پسندیوں نے برطانیہ کو جس دلدل کی طرف دھکیل دیا ہے اس میں دیگر اقوام کے لیے سبق موجود ہے کہ جعلی قوم پرستیوں اور نسل پرستیوں کا زمانہ لدچکا ہے اور یہ وطنی ریاستوں کے لیے عالمگیریت کے چل چلاﺅ میں زہر قاتل ہے۔ دائیں بازو کے ہرکارے دنیا بھر میں ان جعلی قوم پرستیوں اور نسلی تفاخروں کو بڑھاوا دے رہے ہیں کہ امریکہ سے جرمنی و فرانس تک ان کو دیکھا جاسکتا ہے مگر ان کے مخالفین بھی خاصے تگڑے ہیں۔ آخری نتیجہ میں یہ جعلی قوم پرست و نسل پرست خود سوزی کے سوا اپنی قوموں کو کچھ نہیں دے سکتے۔ برطانیہ مقیم پناہ گزینوں اور تارکین وطن کو اس ریفرنڈم میں جس طرح نشانہ خاص بنایا گیا اس سے دائیں بازو کے انتہا پسندیوں پر مشتمل ذہنی خلجان کو سمجھنا مشکل نہیں کہ یہی وجہ ہے ٹرمپ نے بھی اہل برطانیہ کو یورپ سے علیحدگی کے حوالہ سے گمراہ کن مشورے دیے۔ اب یہ برطانیہ کے لوگوں پر منحصر ہے کہ وہ “ہٹلر” پیدا کریں یا پھر اپنی غلط کاریوں سے سبق سیکھیں۔

Waving European Union flags and chanting "no Brexit", thousands gathered despite the pouring rain in central London on Tuesday to express their rage and dismay at Britain's vote to leave the EU.

LONDON: Britain's car sector on Wednesday said its growth depended on the country keeping "unrestricted access" to the European single market -- a situation thrown into doubt by Brexit.

Europe Meets Britain's Demands for Special Status

David Cameron's four key demands to remain in the EU revealed

Review Indian Summer

Anti German Campaign

1917 Britain’s King George V changes royal surname

Afghan experts should deconstruct old narratives first

Afghan experts should deconstruct

Old Narratives first

Various yet contradictory reasons to sign and accept D L A by signatories, Rise of Bismark, Tripartite agreement between Russia, France & UK, Suppressing various communities/tribes in Afghanistan especially Hazaras and Kafirs, controlling internal Pukhtoon infighting especially traditional rivalries of Sadozias and Barakzias and creation of 3-Duct policy in Afghanistan, FATA and KPK(NWFP) region 

Why various Afghan rulers signed and accepted Durand Line Agreement(DLA) since 1893 till 1947? Afghan elite and colonial masters had different reasons but instead of exploring those contradictory reasons our intellectuals are still in the state of denial. Ameer Abdur Rahman and his successors accepted D L A  in order to fix internal pressures yet Britishers had their own internal pressures in Europe where Bismark's Germany was ready to challenge the Empire. Keeping in view international politics of late 19th century and strategic importance of Pak-Afghan-Iran region  we should revisit old narratives for once. Here we can separate facts and perceptions first.
Just read an article Durand line or border written by a well read and balanced intellectual Rahimullah Yusufzai in the TNS about infamous Durand Line Agreement (DLA) and it instigated me to write this piece.
We often confront with misleading narratives especially coined during the Raj and we also found that even the opponents of Raj carried those narratives with little change. Construction of Hindu period , Muslim period,  Invader theory, Theory of Matrial Races ,  Warm Water ports theory, FATA and Afghanistan: The Unconquered Land theory are among various misleading narratives penned during Raj era. Through these misleading narratives they created a perception about Pak-Afghan-Iran region. In past i wrote some pieces in which i tried to challenge various narratives in this regard and i am sharing some links before you.

HALF TRUTH A Wrong Statement by Achakzai regarding Afghanistan Following the Wali Khan Legacy
Colonial masters & misleading Pukhtoon Prides Deconstructing colonial myths
Our anti-Punjab clamour — 1
Our anti-Punjab mayhem — II
Half Truth in NYTimes editorial Time to Put the Squeeze on Pakistan
When Pak and Afghanistan agreed on DLA
 Shah Shuja , Punjab and politics in Kabul 1838
Politics of trade routes & Pak-Afghan-Iran region
When English annexed Afghanistan
Confessions of a Pukhtoon Revolutionary
Roots of extremism in triangular region (Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan)
Rationality vs. State Craft Secret Affairs Use of Religion (Islam) in national & International Politics
Extract from Pakistan and Afghanistan by Riaz M Khan ex foreign secretary Govt of Pakistan
Tribal quarrels & weak Afghanistan: fighting between Sadozais & Barakzais
WHY UNITED STATES REJECTED SHAH IRAN IN 1970s
Anti German Syndrome of late 19th century :MI6: The History of the Secret Intelligence Service 1909-49 By Keith JefferyPublisher: Bloomsbury, 2011
When title mislead itself: A story of Word "KHAN"

There are two useful links to understand misleading narrative of martial races , a concept developed after the annexation of the Punjab including Peshawar and FATA. During 1840s colonial army fought against Punjabis, pathans, Kashmiries in three bloody wars and in historic Chilianwalla war son of Afghan King Dost muhammad Khan fought against Colonizers and supported Lhore Darbar army. In those wars Royal Bengal army was with colonizers yet there were some desertions and two purbya battalions joined Lhore Darbar army in 1846 war of Sabraoon. But after annexation of the   Punjab colonizers wanted not only to disband RBA but also needed new recruitment from the areas near Kabul and for that purpose the coined the martial race theory.
Martial races in India
Myth of martial races

The most interesting account regarding internal conflicts in Afghanistan is biography of Ameer Abdur Rahman written with the help of Ch Sultan Muhammad Khan (father of Faiz Ahmad Faiz) and you can download its pdf by clicking HERE

You can easily understand how grandson of Dost Muhammad Khan used the opportunity of DLA against Hazara and Kafirs. It is also a misconception that Abdur Rahman, a hand picked ruler for Afghanistan by the colonizers was against non-Pukhtoons. His first fight was against ruler of Kandhar in 1881 ans he had some Hazaras in his court too. If we read history of Pak-Afghan-Iran region along with European history of 1870s then we can understand the politics well. Russian advancements till Merv, Khanate and rise of Bismark were on cards and in 1881 and 1882 two tripartite agreements were signed one among Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy and the 2nd was in 1882 among Britain, Russia and France. The 2nd tripartite secret agreement is important regarding our lands and if you read Keith Jeffery Book it was the same time when Russia was replaced as enemy no 1  with Germans. Till 1879 under frontier forward policy colonizer had plans to capture whole Pak-Afghan-Iran region and ready to develop a train route from the Punjab,Sindh, Qandhar, Iran to Mediterranean yet till 1881 they had abandoned it.  Now they had a policy to convert the region into a conflict zone so no one can occupy it. They have plan to fix Germans first. It is genesis of infamous DLA. They strengthen Abdur Rahman and instigated him to capture northern parts first. It was part of three duct policy and those three ducts were Afghanistan, FATA and NWFP. For this they coined concept of unconquered lands. Without understanding misleading narratives we cannot develop a reasonably balance policy for this region.    

Another Review of Shahid Hammed autobiography

Another Review of Shahid Hammed autobiography

Gaye Din ki Musafat

Published by ILQA - An imprint of Readings, Lhore

Order your book online at

READINGS

The author`s intentions are unmistakable and he does not confine himself to any rigid conventions. He begins in the autobiographical mode but then goes on to describe life in the area, its customs and manners, even its topography.

There is a thoroughly detailed account of the crops grown in the area, harvesting, collecting and storage. The author has his story to tell and he does not seem to care if modern-day urban dwellers, such as myself, are likely to skip these pages. Meticulous to the finest details, this is the style Hameed has chosen. Even in the parts where I began to lose interest, I still kept admiring the photographic precision with which life in the world of yesterday has been described.

He describes the games young boys played, how they set traps for catching birds; the kind of teachers at his school, and even some of the lessons from the lovingly described textbooks. He cannot stop himself from spending a page on how mathematical calculations could be done quickly and mentally. Even more remarkable is the natural ease of his writing as he delineates the tremendous decline in values and the loss of human concerns from the time he is writing about to the time he is actually writing in.

For reading the review click http://epaper.dawn.com/DetailImage.php?StoryImage=26_06_2016_465_001 

Interview Shahid Hameed, review and extracts

Why We Went on Wrong Side after 1947 Interview of 88 year Old writer from the Punjab 

Jlandar to Lhore Looking Back @Pre-Partition Punjabi Times A memoir by Shahid Hameed (Some Extracts)  

Review Humshehri 

Review Saleem ur Rahman

• DAWN.COM
• DAWN URDU
• TODAY'S PAPER
• DAWNNEWS TV
• CITYFM89
• HERALD
• AURORA
• EVENTS
• DAWN RELIEF
• Sunday 26th June 2016 5:20 am

Recreating yesterday

     

  

by Asif Farrukhi | 6/26/2016 12:00:00 AM

EMEMBR ANCE of Things Past was the name given to Proust`s multi-volume novel when it was first translated into English. It is said that Proust himself was averse to this name, perhaps finding it too poetic. In a later translation, the novePs name was more accurately rendered as In Search Of Lost Time. The discarded title of Proust`s novel, but not the second one, would do well as a descriptive subtitle for Shahid Hameed`s detailed and fascinating, if somewhat meandering, remembrance of bygone days. Although he reminds me more of Stef an Zweig than Proust. The past, as it is said, is not only an era, but another country. For Hameed, the `country` of the past, and a country well remembered, is Punjab on the eve of Partition. This autobiography made me think of Proust not because of its length, but its novel-like opening. The time frame is not given immediately. The destruction of a village by the ravages of floods, and a new settlement nearby open the swift-flowing narrative; it is here that the narrator is born, and the story begins. The village was called Parjian, or Parjian Kalan, to give its proper name, and located in district Jalandhar of Punjab in undivided British India. If anybody might wonder as to why should one bother about the detailed history of such a place, the author builds in a very poignant sentence stating without resentment or complaint that no history is ever written describing `small towns` and nobody ever mentions the tribulations people living in such areas have to go through. For this small town, this complaint is effectively addressed. In fact this village, and its vicinity, is captured in these pages in a memorable manner and it would be hard to come up with the name of any other area in pre-Partition Punjab which is so vividly described and in such detail. Pinpointing the village on the map, he talks of the community feeling and harmony which existed among the people and uses the word `connectivity` to define the social dynamics. He explains that it was an `egalitarian` society with humane values, unlike the materialistic norms of today. The use of such terms highlights the author`s analytical streak; a trait which is never dormant and in fact, leads him to collect various odds and ends like a magpie lining its nest. The first few pages make it clear that this is not a run of the mill, straightforward autobiography. It is the opposite of sentimental accounts which harp on about interfaith harmony, and especially, if you are writing from this side of the divide, conjure up an anticipated journey to a `promised land`. It steers clear of such ideological underpinnings and sticks to facts, whereby the author lets his opinions be truly and clearly known. The author`s intentions are unmistakable and he does not confine himself to any rigid conventions. He begins in the autobiographical mode but then goes on to describe life in the area, its customs and manners, even its topography. There is a thoroughly detailed account of the crops grown in the area, harvesting, collecting and storage. The author has his story to tell and he does not seem to care if modern-day urban dwellers, such as myself, are likely to skip these pages. Meticulous to the finest details, this is the style Hameed has chosen. Even in the parts where I began to lose interest, I still kept admiring the photographic precision with which life in the world of yesterday has been described. He describes the games young boys played, how they set traps for catching birds; the kind of teachers at his school, and even some of the lessons from the lovingly described textbooks. He cannot stop himself from spending a page on how mathematical calculations could be done quickly and mentally. Even more remarkable is the natural ease of his writing as he delineates the tremendous decline in valuesand the loss of human concerns from the time he is writing about to the time he is actually writing in. A boy growing up in a village develops into a school-going adolescent who soon becomes aware of the socio-political milieu and the circumstances around him. As a young man he takes admission in Islamia College Lahore and there is a fine evocation of Lahore on the eve of Partition. The changing circumstances of the city are brilliantly evoked through the bookshops and their declining fortunes. With a flash forward he mentions meeting and striking up friendships with the city`s writers and poets, including Nasir Kazmi, Intizar Husain, Ahmed Mushtaq and above all, Muzaffar Ali Syed, whom he encounters as a bright student preparing for school exams, without any inkling that he would become one of the leading critics in Pakistan. These are the young writers who became known as the self-styled new generation in the early days of Pakistan but Hameed stops short of entering literary history. He describes his journey to Lahore just after Independence and then wraps up the tale. It is a pity that he does not recapture the early days of Pakistan with his characteristic recall as that too would have made a brilliant record. In a previous century, Shahid Hameed could have been an encyclopaedist. Everything is described in minute detail and nothing prevents him f rom slipping in barbed opinions. How Hitler was transformed by a prison sentence into a shrewd political tactician draws a comparison with Asif Ali Zardari. He reserves his sharpest criticism for Liaquat Ali Khan, whom he derides for coming up with the Objectives Resolution instead of a Constitution. Harsh comments but hard to refute. Similarly his brief comments about the looting and burning in Lahore during the 1947 riots are thought-provoking. The book is well served by the extraordinary command of language and expression the author displays. Local details are presented through local expressions and there is a wealth of Punjabi words employed by the author. He takes pains to explain and offer Urdu expressions but there are occasions when this seems to turn into nitpicking. This book establishes Hameed as a fine writer in his own right while he had until now been known as a translator only. He has tackled large projects such as rendering War and Peace and The Brothers Karamazov into Urdu. His other translations include Jane Austen`s Pride and Prejudice and the heart-rending Palestinian novella, Men in the Sun. Each ofhis translations is, as can be expected, fully annotated. Hameed has also spent many years developing an EnglishUrdu dictionary which promises to be one of its kind. It is easy to guess that the author of this book is a lexicographer by aptitude. He ends his book on a brief quotation from Sylvia Plath about her realisation of her limitations. It would be hard to say the same about Hameed, who has penned a spellbinding tale. E T he reviewer is a writer and translator. He teaches liberal arts and Urdu and is the editor of the literary journal Duniyazaad. [TOP]