By Asif Ashna
Dear Dr. Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai, Greetings!
Before referring to politics, I would like to wish you good health and prosperity and the ability to read this letter with patience because it is a clear political note. I can see you must be tired after going through two rounds of election campaigns.
Mr. Dr. Ghani!
Let me focus on the main point, “politics and destiny”. These two are confusing issues since long in this country. It is like quicksand… the more you try to get out, the deeper you sink. It is not simple for you to come up with a solution nor I can find a solution. Both of us know some facts about main issues and the public is also aware to some degree because politics since long is playing with the lives and the destiny of our people.
With the election campaign coming to an end tonight, the second round is going to decide our country’s destiny long mingled with incidents, tragedies and the subsequent massive sacrifices. The Afghans have a history of their deprivation of basic human, civil and political rights.
You and no one else can refuse word “citizen” is historically given a symbolic significance in our country and those tried to ensure citizens their rights got severely punished. Even you once told the media: “I have problem with the word “citizen”, It should be “compatriot” instead.”
Our political history tells us how rights of citizens were violated when tribalism ruled by force resulting in bloodshed, with brothers killing brothers, fathers and sons, uncles and nephews and tribes killing tribes.
And if we compare our political history with the current situation, the conclusion is: “we live in a country where the unit of length is meter and that of mass is kilogram. But how unfortunate is this that tribes, seeped in poverty and deprived of basic rights, are the unit of politics. Drastic reforms are needed to put this phenomenon to an end.
Reforms are possible if the rule of tribalism is ended and citizenship is institutionalised and civic and political rights are ensured.
I am so happy writing this letter to a person who besides running for the presidency is also a professor of anthropology. The word “professor” may not give value because you are deemed the world’s second top thinker and the so many honours, which you also used to woo voters during election campaigns. But still for several reasons, I am your critic.
From the list of your honors, I only accept: 1. you are PHD in anthropology. 2. A former World Bank economist. 3. Ex-Finance Minister. 4. Ex-Kabul University Chancellor. 5. The Security Transition Commission head.
You are running for the presidency and call yourself the most deserving one. Recently when Abdul Qayum Karzai announced he would support you, you told the gathering that “it is because of their wisdom and experiment that people support me”. By saying so, you humiliated millions of citizens who didn’t vote for you in the first round and will not do in the runoff.
One of those who didn’t vote for you was me, because you are a discriminator and you have no belief in democratic values because you are a populist.
Why you are a discriminator? In the public, your slogan is “equal rights for all Afghans”, but in politics, your activities are based on tribal discriminations. Let me cite some examples:
- Your stance on the Bagram prisoners is based on tribal prejudice. In your interview with 1 TV, you said 98% of the prisoners speak the same language, which is not fair.
Now explain if that is not tribal prejudice? And for balancing prisoners what should we do? Should we conduct Taliban-creating projects in stable areas? Also if there are crimes and violations, should we set tribe linage and language as standards for prosecutions?
- At the threshold of the 2009 elections, you wrote a book “path to the transparent government” on topics from effective government to improved economy, social development to international cooperation, rule of law and stability and with solution to the issue of you did not touch the issue of Hazara and Kuchi tribes. Your solutions are all based on ethnic discriminations. At a gathering on your book at the Arezo Hotel, you got nervous.
- You were defending the release of Bagram prisoners and once on campaign trial in Kandahar you said: “one and a half years back, I promised you the release of Bagram prisoners, which I had fulfilled.” If this is not an ethnic discrimination when you said that?
Why you don’t believe in democracy?
- I am starting from allying with Mujeddedi. What was the logic behind bringing this old man to use him for religious purposes against democracy and people’s will?
- What you have done with the Hezb-i-Islami Party? You introduced some individuals as prominent figures, but they don’t have membership of that party. What about the splinter group of Hezb-i-Islami Party that is registered with the government? Isn’t this act against the principles of parties in democratic society?
On the first not of meeting with the right and justice party, you were claiming that you four people were a team, and have a written commitment to work as a team. You were also emphasizing that Mohammad Hanif Atmar and Qayum Karzai should also join your team, and after that a team of six members would nominate one person for the presidential elections.
When I criticized your plan, what was your reaction? Do you remember? We were arguing that your four member team was acceptable to us (the right and justice party) and we were respecting your written agreement; but you should also accept us as a team. Qayum Karzai was not acceptable to us because Afghanistan was not in a situation to leave the power to another family member.
But your answer nervously was: “Qayum will make us stronger. He is a good personality in the country. Did I criticize when you visit Muheqdiq every day?”
Your answer had three major problems: 1. it was nervously and changed moral of the meeting. 2. You didn’t respect the right and justice party. 3. I was not representing from the ethnic aspect, but was there as a steering committee member of the party, but you tied me to Muheqqiq and accused me of meeting him daily.
- The second round of election will be part of our history in the future and the judgment would be based on democracy, aren’t you worried about the chapter of history?
Why are you a populist politician?
I will skip the joke of world second thinker’s title given to you, and will also not talk about Zahra Nadiri calling you “the political and ideology leader”. But when your PHD is in anthropology, why you call yourself an economist? In a country when there is no exact figure about its population, how could you talk about the exact number of trees?
I completely honor your religious performances, but why are you going to Haj during the election campaign?
Do you know the distance between your judgment and my documented critics on the transition of security responsibility, and the release of Bagram prisoners? What do you think, what were the results of your actions on security situation? What do you expect and what would be the decision of people on the voting day about you?
Then no need to prolong the debate, if wanted to answer my letter, I suggest to read my letter times and again carefully.
The final words, if you want to know better the meaning of thinking, there is need to read the famous book “Chuneen Goft Zartusht” the writer has a lot to tell you about governance and governors, scholars and ethics.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Pajhwok Afghan News’s editorial policy.