3 ms·
This commentary gets a lot wrong. I think it's typical of authors who are not from the culture they're observing, where the analysis reads like an academic form
by wizwit999 4y ago
This commentary gets a lot wrong. I think it's typical of authors who are not from the culture they're observing, where the analysis reads like an academic formulaic amalgamation of points without understanding of nuance and subtext.
First, it's bayah or bayat (بَيْعَة), not bayt (which means house). Understandable given the local pronunciation.
For example, the bayah (allegiance) that he refers to is misunderstood. The bayah that religious scholars give is very different from a the bayah that Taliban maintained (and that sultans and caliphs took). The religious bayah between murshid and murid is symbolic and spiritual. For example, students often study at Darul Uloom Haqannia in Peshawar (origin of the famed Haqqani moniker). But to try to imply that this student when he returns to a village in Uruzgan has some formal chain of command back to the teachers in the madrassa is laughable and betrays the author's lack of cultural understanding.
Also, Karzai was not some foil to the Taliban. Did you know prior to 2001, he actually tried to join the Taliban, as their ambassador to the UN (they rejected as they didn't want his family to become too powerful). If anything, Karzai is a classic example of the fact, that there wasn't any fundamental disagreement between the sides in this civil war, as the Americans wished, just plain old jockeying for power. The rapid fall in August was the ultimate proof of this.
Also the point the author tries to make about "Pashtun honoring the living not the dead" is laughable and again shows the author's complete lack of cultural understanding. Martyrdom (Shahadah) is a basic concept instilled in Muslims, and especially in Afghans. Every single person knows the honor of a shaheed. The statement "no Afghan would ever kill himself for the sake of holy war" is so wrong that it makes the author lose any credibility.
Overall, a hodgepodge reading and summary of the stated books trying to make a point about something the author clearly doesn't understand.