A Reckoning for Pakistan

On Duty Pakistan Air Force Wing Commander

The recent deadly clashes along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border have less to do with current events, and more to do with the fractured ethnic and political foundations of the countries. So, let’s look at the mounting instability threatening Pakistan’s internal cohesion.

Remember that the turmoil facing Pakistan is a broader trend. As globalization unravels, countries that rely upon foreign funding or have entanglements with outside powers will face a painful reckoning like this one.

Transcript

Hey, all Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from Colorado. Windy day today. Sorry about the sound quality. If it’s not great. Anyway, today we’re going to talk about what’s going on in Pakistan. We’ve had a number of clashes that have killed quite a few people on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. And to understand what’s going on, we need to look at the wider South Asian region to understand kind of the origins of this and how it’s likely to unfold. 

So, step one. Once upon a time, there was a people called the Punjabi who lived along the banks of the Ganges River in the Indus River and in a low saddle, a fertile land in between. But at one point an invading horde came through and converted half. Well, less than half some of the Punjabis religion, and so the majority, along with the Ganges, remained Hindu, and the minority over on the Indus became Muslim. 

And that subtle and in-between kind of got split down the middle. Time went by and eventually the Brits came, as they tend to and conquered the area as they tend to, and loaded everybody into the same political, unit, because that’s what the Brits do. They won. The British Empire fell apart after World War two, and independent India now had to deal with the consequences of these different religious groups being under the same roof. 

We almost had a Civil war, and it was solved with the territory of the force known locally as partition, in which independent Pakistan emerged from the old British Raj of India, giving birth to the two states that we now know today, more or less. Basically, the best way to think about it is that the Indians and the Pakistanis, especially the Punjabis, are all part of one family. 

And as we all know, family arguments are the worst. I can already hear my Indian and Pakistani friends like, no, we’re not family. But you know, it’s like saying American. So we’re all family. Democrats and Republicans are all family. And so of course, we argue the loudest with the people we know the best. Anyway. 

In independent India and smaller post partition, India, the Hindu Punjabis are far and away the largest ethnic group. And so while it is still a multi-ethnic state with different religions and different ethnicities, the Punjabi Hindus have pretty much always been large and in charge. And I don’t mean to suggest that it’s perfect. From time to time. 

Somebody from one of the minorities kills a prime minister. So it’s not a perfect setup, but for the most part, India has managed since partition with a surprising grace and has managed to keep their democracy mostly intact, which is quite an achievement in my opinion. Hasn’t gone that way in Pakistan because in Pakistan, well, the Muslim Punjabis of Pakistan are the most powerful group and the most numerous group. 

They’re not a majority. There’s somewhere between 40 and 50% of the population. And so they think that they should be in charge all the time, but they lack the numbers to achieve the sort of regular electoral victory that, the Punjabis and India can generate. So you get these bursts where they try democracy for a bit, and then it gets a little too rowdy with all the minorities. 

You get a military coup because the military is pretty much controlled by the Muslim Punjabis. And so you have this in and out, and it’s one of the many reasons why Pakistan is much less stable and has not grown economically nearly as much as India since partition. All right. Here’s the backdrop. Now, within Pakistan. 

we have a different problem because it’s a plurality, 40 to 45, 50% of the population. It’s also geographically concentrated. You’ve got sins in the south, you’ve got Baluch. She’s out west. And most importantly for today’s story, you have pushed to or Pashtuns, that are in the northwest part of Pakistan, in the rugged area up against the border with Afghanistan. 

Now, some of you may remember push to. As part of the Afghan story and you’re remembering correctly because about a generation after partition, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. And the push to of Pakistan made common cause with the push to of Afghanistan and fought alongside American support, the Soviets in Afghanistan. 

And for those of you who want to come across a really good historical documentary of how that broke down, I would point you towards Rambo three. Anyhow, a few years later, the Soviets were gone and the Americans decided it was their turn to be in Afghanistan. And once again, the pashtu of Afghanistan, popularized by the group known as the Taliban and the past. 

Who of Pakistan, who had their own group called the Pakistani Taliban really creative. They’re made common arms against the Americans. They did a quite a good job of it, in part because America’s supply lines into Afghanistan just go through Pakistan. They went through the push to part of Pakistan. Real logistical nightmare. I’m going to cut until we get out of the wind. 

Where was I before? The women are up to. I can’t stand. So, less than a generation after the Soviets got kicked out, the Americans went in, tried to reshape it to their whims. And once again, the push to on the Pakistani border came to the aid of the brethren on the Afghan side. And by the way, the, pashtu on the Afghan side, a lot of people know them as the Taliban and the Pashtu on the Pakistani side. 

A lot of people know those folks as the Pakistani Taliban. You can see how they get along so well. Anyway, eventually they were successful for a number of reasons, a number of ways, with a lot of contact and history and baggage getting the Americans to leave, too. So during this entire process, going all the way back to partition, the Punjabi Muslims of central Pakistan, you know, the powerbrokers, the people who control the military have always tried to use the Pashtun as a lever to extend their influence beyond their own borders, not just against the Soviets and the Americans. 

It’s an ongoing strategy. But the thing is, is, unlike the Democrats or Republicans, these guys are not family. These are different ethnic groups with different interests who see the world through different lenses. And the primary difference is that the pashtu, see themselves as divided by an artificial border, whereas the Punjabis of Pakistan see themselves as large and in charge, and their brethren on the other side of the Indian border have their own state. 

So it’s a different sort of clash. 

Well, what’s happening here is what you would expect to happen when you have deliberately militarized and agitated one of your minorities for use in a war on the other side of an international boundary. When that war ends, the people stay radicalized and armed. And so we’re now in a situation where the pashtu of Pakistan and the pashtu of Afghanistan are cooperating against what they see as a colonizing force, which is at this time, instead of being the Soviets or the Americans, it’s the Pashtu Pakistanis own code nationals within Pakistan. 

And if they had their way, we would be seeing another partition here with Pakistan being split now, is that going to happen? Who knows what can happen in history, especially history that hasn’t been written yet? And the Punjabis certainly aren’t going to go down quietly. But what we’re seeing now is the built in tension of the Pakistani state, finally being laid bare for all to see because the colonial wars, at least for the moment, are now over. 

Does this matter beyond Pakistan and Afghanistan in the short term? Not really, but in the long term, you need to consider a couple of things. Number one, we are moving into a globalized world where the rationale for states is going to evolve and the economic models are going to change and trade patterns are going to mutate drastically, which means that every nation state in the world, every government in the world, is going to have to recalibrate and re justify or change the circumstances of the social contract by which their population infuses with their state. 

In Pakistan, that’s probably gonna be pretty rough. And we’re seeing the early stages of that right now. But that doesn’t mean that’s the only place that’s going to happen. Any place where the economic, social and political order are based on broader international conditions. You’re going to see this sort of shift. And I would expect it to be most dramatic in places that really benefited from the old system. 

I put Germany at the top of that list. Iran might be up there two, moving forward, we should expect to see a lot more Pakistans than we do India’s places that are more consolidated. Keep in mind that India never bet its economy on globalization. It was, if anything, on the Soviet side. And so it doesn’t have nearly as far to fall when globalization goes away, whereas Pakistan has basically been paid by someone, most recently, the Americans, to exist in its current form in order to succeed in a war in a different territory that’s over Pakistan now has to figure it out on its own. 

And not all Pakistanis are of the same mind as to how that should go.

China’s Energy Problem and Dealing with the Taliban

When one of your best options for securing an energy supply route is with the Pakistani Taliban, you know you’ve got some problems. So go ahead and add that one to China’s ever-growing list of ‘shit to figure out.’

The issue China faces is that securing a safe and reliable energy supplier is practically impossible no matter where they turn. Given their geographical position, the Chinese have to go through Pakistani Taliban territory, deal with rivals like India, go over treacherous terrain or a combination of all those.

China’s energy will remain vulnerable until they can sort this out, but at least they have a stockpile of low-quality coal to keep the lights on until then.

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

The US Settles a Score

The United States announced August 1 that it had killed the ideological head of al Qaeda, Ayman al Zawahiri, in a drone strike, over the previous weekend. Reportedly battling a long-time illness, al Zawahiri’s actual level of control over al Qaeda (and its regional affiliates) is debatable. His role in the September 11 attacks against the United States in 2001 and in inspiring campaigns of militancy that killed thousands is decidedly less so.

I do take note of al Zawahiri’s presence in a home inside Kabul. The US–primarily its intelligence agencies–still maintain considerable capabilities in a country with no formal military presence. And they are more than happy to remind any number of bad actors of the fact.


Where in the World: Split Rock, and Afghan Minerals

Speculation over Afghanistan’s potential mineral wealth is just that–speculation. What we do know about the hard reality of the country’s geography, infrastructure and development profile readily explains why we’re still talking about Afghan mineral wealth in the realm of potential trillions–it might certainly be there, but no one’s done the hard, serious work to find out for sure. 

And China is certainly not going to be the one to do it. Chinese involvement in Afghanistan isn’t going to be fueled by a desire to do serious survey and exploration work, building out roads and rail lines, developing a meaningful power grid, and then getting into the serious work of mining. In a land-locked country. Is China then going to truck ores and minerals into Pakistan and/or Iran for shipment? Or up and over the Hindu Kush to its sparsely-inhabited Western frontier? While battling militants and tribal war lords all along the way? Very likely not.

America did not leave behind a golden goose in the mountains of Afghanistan for the Chinese–or anyone–to come along and scoop up. Instead, China’s interests in Afghanistan lie in the same bucket of all of the neighboring states’: security, limiting cross-border militancy, and working toward some hope of containing refugee and militant flows. 


If you enjoy our free newsletters, the team at Zeihan on Geopolitics asks you to consider donating to Feeding America.

The economic lockdowns in the wake of COVID-19 left many without jobs and additional tens of millions of people, including children, without reliable food. Feeding America works with food manufacturers and suppliers to provide meals for those in need and provides direct support to America’s food banks.

Food pantries are facing declining donations from grocery stores with stretched supply chains. At the same time, they are doing what they can to quickly scale their operations to meet demand. But they need donations – they need cash – to do so now.

Feeding America is a great way to help in difficult times.

The team at Zeihan on Geopolitics thanks you and hopes you continue to enjoy our work.

DONATE TO FEEDING AMERICA

Where in the World: Grindavíkurbær, and Taiwan

The challenges of the United States’ Afghan withdrawal have caused many to question Washington’s commitments to its allies and others who have found themselves under the American security blanket. The issue of US commitment to Taiwan in particular is one I have been asked in recent weeks.

Putting aside the issue that disentangling from Afghanistan and the Middle East means that the US can focus even more on China, Taiwan itself is no slouch. Chinese ambitions must be evaluated against Chinese and Taiwanese and Japanese capabilities. In short, the idea that the US is the only power interested in a free and democratic Taiwan is laughable, as is the assumption that the Chinese would have an easy time in sailing a fleet across the strait absorbing Taiwan.

Even if China did manage to successfully invade Taiwan, there’s little reason to assume Beijing would be able to effectively take control and replicate Taipei’s success in managing the world’s most advanced chip manufacturing. Most of the design process for the chips happens outside Taiwan (such as in the US), and Taiwan’s workers are highly skilled individuals. Not the sort of people who perform at their best at the other end of a gun (or the type that stick around and wait to get captured). 

In short, of all the possible unintended consequences of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, a successful Chinese invasion of Taiwan is not very high on my list.

[And please forgive the wind; the side of a volcano is an exciting, albeit noisy, backdrop.]


If you enjoy our free newsletters, the team at Zeihan on Geopolitics asks you to consider donating to Feeding America.

The economic lockdowns in the wake of COVID-19 left many without jobs and additional tens of millions of people, including children, without reliable food. Feeding America works with food manufacturers and suppliers to provide meals for those in need and provides direct support to America’s food banks.

Food pantries are facing declining donations from grocery stores with stretched supply chains. At the same time, they are doing what they can to quickly scale their operations to meet demand. But they need donations – they need cash – to do so now.

Feeding America is a great way to help in difficult times.

The team at Zeihan on Geopolitics thanks you and hopes you continue to enjoy our work.

DONATE TO FEEDING AMERICA

Where in the World: Drangsnes, and the Kabul Bombing

News arrives a little more slowly here in northern Iceland. But as the details of the horrific attack against US service members and Afghan nationals came in across my phone, so too did many arguments that these are exactly the same sorts of individuals the US should remain in Afghanistan to combat. 

Perhaps. 

And perhaps not. Groups like the Khorasan Province offshoot of ISIL are going to attack when and wherever they find that they have operational capacity. The real question is, do they pose a direct threat to the Americans’ homeland and core strategic interests or a bigger one to the Taliban and its regional neighbors? Expect the US to pursue retribution against any and all groups and individuals that target US citizens and strategic interests, but don’t expect these attacks to trigger a shift in US policy that will see Washington cleaning up a group that places the Taliban and Iran near the top of its most-hated list.


If you enjoy our free newsletters, the team at Zeihan on Geopolitics asks you to consider donating to Feeding America.

The economic lockdowns in the wake of COVID-19 left many without jobs and additional tens of millions of people, including children, without reliable food. Feeding America works with food manufacturers and suppliers to provide meals for those in need and provides direct support to America’s food banks.

Food pantries are facing declining donations from grocery stores with stretched supply chains. At the same time, they are doing what they can to quickly scale their operations to meet demand. But they need donations – they need cash – to do so now.

Feeding America is a great way to help in difficult times.

The team at Zeihan on Geopolitics thanks you and hopes you continue to enjoy our work.

DONATE TO FEEDING AMERICA

The Return of American Narcissism

On New Years Eve, just minutes before the dawn of 1992, the Soviet flag was lowered from the Kremlin for the last time.

Arguably the Cold War had been over for a few years already. Glasnost and perestroika had defanged the thorny grip of the KGB and made Soviet citizens less afraid of their own government. Summits – first with Ronald Reagan and later with George HW Bush – started both the Soviet Union and the United States down the path to massive nuclear disarmament. The Soviets started pulling troops out of Central Europe in 1989. In 1990 Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev blessed the American military effort to eject Soviet-backed Iraq from Kuwait. In 1991 constituent members of the USSR seceded – peacefully – from the Union.  

But flags matter. And the real date it was all over – truly over – was December 31, 1991.

In America the Cold War’s end was met with a bit of a jubilant shrug. We went on with our day.

From a long-view perspective, the inward turn was a return to the norm. Americans have always been a bit self-absorbed. Having the richest part of a rich continent, far removed from the hustle, bustle, war and pain of the Eastern Hemisphere, does that to you. We settled things with our only two neighbors – Canada and Mexico – well before our first centennial and immediately got down to the more serious business of arguing amongst ourselves. More Americans died in the Civil War than in all our military conflicts with all our adversaries throughout all our history, combined.  

With the Cold War relegated to the past, Americans quickly moved on. We started caring about things that during the Cold War were simply too minor and esoteric to blip on our collective radar while we were staring down the threat of nuclear Armageddon: Haiti, Palestine, Panama, Kosovo, Bill Clinton’s cigar habits. By the late-1990s the rest of the world was so out-of-mind that 60% of Americans couldn’t even locate the United States on a world map. American narcissism was again the norm…

…until the events of September 11, 2001, shocked us out of our naval-gazing and thrust us back into the world against a new foe.

America’s original goal in Afghanistan was to hunt down al Qaeda. America’s original goal in Iraq was to terrify Iraq’s neighbors – Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia – into hunting down al Qaeda affiliates for us in order to deter an American invasion of Damascus, Tehran and Riyadh. Both missions were successful, and wildly so. At first. But after al Qaeda was gone, the reality of the region set in. The concern – the reasonable concern – became will the local government we’re establishing survive an American exit? Can we prevent the entire region reverting to old habits? Can we establish institutions that will outlive the American presence? Can we make it look like Wisconsin?

The answer to all those questions ended up being “no, we cannot”.

In was only July 9 when Biden announced that the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan would end on August 31. Nearly immediately, U.S. forces stopped spearheading Afghan military efforts against the Taliban, and stopped carrying out airstrikes to support those U.S.-led missions. The Afghans didn’t launch their own. In nearly every case, when Afghan forces met the Taliban in battle, they did not crumple, they simply dissolved – in many cases handing over their American-made and -supplied weaponry directly to their adversaries.

In just two weeks, cities that had stood as independent bastions for not so much years, but centuries, fell to Taliban control: Kunduz, Mazar-i-Sharif, Herat, Jalalabad.

Many have criticized the Biden administration for “losing” Afghanistan. To them I have four responses:

  1. If after twenty years of effort and literally trillions of dollars of assistance the Afghan military cannot hold its country together for two weeks, then another year, another decade, another 10,000 American combat deaths, will achieve nothing.
  2. The goal of the American presence was to prevent the return of hostile militant groups like al Qaeda, the radical Sunni terror group that carried out the September 11, 2001 attacks. Good. Fine. But al Qaeda has inspired more capable copy-cats in Pakistan, India, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, Niger, Nigeria, Mauritania, Mali, Somalia, the Philippines, Indonesia, France, Belgium, Russia, and I probably missed a few. So we are going to, what, occupy them all??
  3. Our greatest allies in the Afghan operations fell into two camps. The first are the Hazaras, an Afghan tribe in the central highlands. They’re badass. Love those guys. Wish we could bring them all to the United States for settlement. Unfortunately, they stayed in their central highlands and only fought the Taliban defensively. The other camp – the ones willing to take the fight to the Taliban in the lowlands which wrap around Hazara territory like a giant U – is comprised of a dark web of opium smugglers and serial child abusers. If that’s the best ally we could find, you’ve gotta wonder if it’s all worth it.
  4. It isn’t worth it. It was never worth it. When I look at Afghanistan, I think similar thoughts to when I think of Syria or China’s Belt-and-Road program: at the end of the day, what does the winner get? Afghanistan is landlocked and oil-free. It is among the poorest countries on the planet and has been for most of recorded history. It is on a path to nowhere. Getting in and out requires deals with either Pakistan (wildly untrustworthy), Iran (problematic to say the least), China (heh, no), or Russia (stupid stupid stupid STUPID).

This was never going to last. I even have a hard time criticizing the Biden administration for its bungling of the withdrawal. I’ve been saying for the better part of three years than whenever U.S. left Afghanistan, the Afghan government would fall, but I was thinking in terms of seven to twelve months. Not fifteen days. The evacuation authorities think they can have everyone associated with Western governments out of the capital of Kabul within another fifteen days. They will need to work faster. As of the time of this writing August 15, the Taliban already has entered Kabul from all points of the compass. The only thing preventing a bloodbath is the Taliban’s desire to capture Kabul, not raze it. With the Afghan president’s decision to send all government workers home, the rump Afghan government has already been functionally dissolved. The flag wasn’t so much lowered as the flagpole fell over.

Rivals of the United States – and no small number of critics within the United States – seem to be getting worked up at the prospect of the blow to American credibility. As the line of thinking goes, if the United States is abandoning its Afghan ally, then they are likely to abandon other allies as well.

People are worrying about the wrong thing.

First of all, Afghanistan was not an ally. It was an occupation. Anyone who is anyone in the field of international relations saw Afghanistan as a drain on American attention and resources – not a springboard to greater things. The Americans being out frees up the possibility of more action, not less. For rivals of America, that’s a problem. For allies of America, that’s an opportunity.

Second and far more importantly, fixating on Afghanistan and its aftereffects is focusing on absolutely the wrong thing. It isn’t so much that the United States is pulling completely out of Afghanistan, but instead it is pulling completely out of the world.

America’s rivals want the Americans to make the world safe for Iranian and Russian oil shipments and for Chinese merchandise trade, but for the Americans to not muck about in their neighborhoods. Sorry, but that’s not what full withdrawal looks like. The Americans are leaving everywhere which will free up the entire American military to do whatever the hell the Americans decide to do, whenever they decide to do it. In the meantime, say goodbye to the primary economic pillars which support all the countries that dislike America. So, yeah, America is leaving, and America’s rivals are about to get what they wanted. Good and hard. The idea that Iran and Russia and China can survive without American-guaranteed international trade is statistically hilarious.

As for the Americans, bereft of significant international threats and presences, they will do the same thing they did in the 1990s and turn back to their internecine arguments.

The internal American reality is a bit uglier compared to 1992. Social media has made us hate one another. The reliably destructive bile of absolute morons like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Cory Bush, Laura Ingraham and Rachel Maddow have become daily fare, poisoning our capacity to think rationally about anything. And the fact that we’re arguing over whether masks inhibit the spread of a respiratory disease suggests to me that perhaps we’ve gotten a head start on this particular chapter of the culture war.

As an American, this…thrills me. Not the cultural war part. That’s equal parts petty and embarrassing. But instead the fact that the world is shifting in a direction that doesn’t really involve the United States. A global system that is simultaneously distant, dissolving and consumed with local grievance is one in which the United States has the luxury of narcissism. It enables the United States to absorb the lessons of the Forever Wars, retool its national security agencies and military and start looking at the horizon again. Narcissism can be unsightly, but it also enables one to focus on different things more relevant to the population.

It won’t last forever. Narcissism ends two ways.

Option one is at some point a decade or three from now the Americans decide to once again venture out and (re)discover their world. They’ve done this before, with the period after Reconstruction probably being the best example.

Option two is some idiot decides to poke the Americans when they’re not paying attention: the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, September 11. In those examples the full power of the United States – unfettered by any meaningful international commitments – slams into said poker and removes it from history.


If you enjoy our free newsletters, the team at Zeihan on Geopolitics asks you to consider donating to Feeding America.

The economic lockdowns in the wake of COVID-19 left many without jobs and additional tens of millions of people, including children, without reliable food. Feeding America works with food manufacturers and suppliers to provide meals for those in need and provides direct support to America’s food banks.

Food pantries are facing declining donations from grocery stores with stretched supply chains. At the same time, they are doing what they can to quickly scale their operations to meet demand. But they need donations – they need cash – to do so now.

Feeding America is a great way to help in difficult times.

The team at Zeihan on Geopolitics thanks you and hopes you continue to enjoy our work.

DONATE TO FEEDING AMERICA