Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Beaten or not, the british with their conniving nature did manage to get the afghans to sign away any claim to balochistan and KP by the durand line agreement. In that sense, I now have to agree with analysts at another forum that british did "win" after all in the end.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
^ here’s one article I’ll try finding the 1940’s article
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
BBC News - Afghanistan’s ‘graveyard of foreigners’
Afghanistan’s 'graveyard of foreigners’9 June 2012 Last updated at 11:29 GMT By Andrew North BBC News, Kabul
Few countries in the world have been invaded as often, and by so many other nations, as Afghanistan, where many soldiers and civilians of various nationalities are buried in Kabul’s Kabre Gora, or “graveyard of foreigners”.
There is an odd kink in Martyrs Road in the Sherpur district of Kabul. It forces the traffic - from cyclists to rattling yellow taxis - to slow down suddenly, in what looks almost like a mark of respect.
But no-one looks up at the weathered metal sign on the wall on the bend which reads “British Cemetery”.
It is a high wall. From outside you cannot see in and, once inside, it muffles the sounds of Kabul.
When you pass through the wooden gates into the small, tree-lined graveyard you have a feeling of entering another world - and another era.
The cemetery was created in the 19th Century, during Britain’s past wars in Afghanistan.
Afghanistan has been invaded by foreigners so many times
Some 160 soldiers from that period are thought to be buried here, although that is just a small fraction of the casualties from successive battles fought to keep Kabul in British hands.
They first took the city in 1839 with little trouble.
It was a straight land-grab to stop Russia getting in first. But an Afghan uprising soon began and, two years later, the British were forced out in a now well-chronicled disaster.
Nearly the entire Kabul garrison of 16,000 British and Indian troops, their families and servants, were slaughtered by Afghan forces as they tried to retreat.
British troops marched back in the same year, razing much of Kabul to the ground in revenge.
But they tried to learn their lesson - that while invading may be relatively simple, occupying Afghanistan was impossibly costly - and initially they adopted a hands-off approach from their bastions in British India.
Yet three and a half decades later, they were invading again and the second British-Afghan war was under way.
Most of the soldiers buried here are from that time, and the remains of their original headstones are now set into the southern wall, shaded by nearby trees.
Glass-covered displays record their stories.
There was Lieutenant John Hearsey, of the 9th Queen’s Royal Lancers, shot through the heart in December 1879. There is also a mass grave for dozens of unnamed infantrymen from the 67th Foot Regiment, mown down by Afghan fire as they tried to storm a strategic hill.
The British did retake Kabul but the war lasted several more years and they were back again in 1919, before London finally decided Afghanistan was just too much trouble. Britain signed a treaty accepting its empire would never stretch beyond the Khyber Pass and granting the Afghans their independence.
After several attempts, the UK decided Afghanistan was too much trouble
At the other end of the cemetery’s southern wall, there are 10 newer marble plaques.
They bear the names of scores of service men and women who have given their lives in the fourth British war in Afghanistan - the current one. And 10 plaques, it seems, are not enough.
Many of those who have died since the US-led invasion in 2001 have yet to be recorded here.
But it is perhaps more appropriate to use the Afghan name for this place - Kabre Gora or graveyard of foreigners. There are ad-hoc memorials here for soldiers from the US, Germany, Italy and many other nations of the Nato alliance who have sent forces.
But it is not just a military cemetery. I have come here with Norine Macdonald, an enterprising Canadian researcher and lawyer, who is helping the British embassy to look after the graveyard (prompted by the burial here of a friend, an American eye doctor shot dead in 2001).
On my last visit several years ago, the graveyard looked very neglected but now the flower beds are well-tended.
The grave of a Cossack who fled the 1917 revolution in Russia
New wooden benches have been brought in and this peaceful garden of graves has become a symbol of Afghanistan’s extraordinary history of conquest, superpower intrigue and strategic value.
From Alexander the Great to Genghis Khan, to the empires of the Mughals, the British and the Soviets - and now the many nations of the US-led coalition - few countries have been invaded so many times by so many others.
And there are also aid workers, journalists and even hippies from the 1960s interred here.
Norine shows me the graveyard’s best known residents - Sir Aurel Stein, a British-Hungarian archaeologist, and Henning Christensen, a famous Danish explorer, who both died here in the 1940s.
We pass another grave with Russian script, although it is not someone linked with the Soviet invasion. It turns out to be a Cossack who fled here in the aftermath of Russia’s 1917 Bolshevik revolution.
Eventually, I open the wooden gates and step back into 21st Century Kabul.
As I walk away, I pass a convoy of heavily-armoured American vehicles, wheezing their way through gridlocked traffic.
Afghanistan’s latest invaders may be tiring now, but few Afghans believe they will be the last to step on their soil.
**How to listen to From Our Own Correspondent:****BBC Radio 4: **A 30-minute programme on Saturdays, 11:30 BST.
Second 30-minute programme on Thursdays, 11:00 BST (some weeks only).
Listen online or download the podcast
BBC World Service:
Hear daily 10-minute editions Monday to Friday, repeated through the day, also available to listen online.
Read more or explore the archive at the programme website.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Thing is with Gora armies in those days... even when they lost big time they were the ones that wrote the history books and treaties.
Same happend in the USA early on in its Western History army after blue-coat army was beaten by rag tag Indians and the only way the US government could hope to beat them was by using clever trickery in the form of "peace treaties" which were just licenses to build in roads, rail links and so on under civilian pretence only to become the supply routes of armies and fortifications.
Good old Colonialism eh, trouble is so long as education in the poor remains at a low just about any written treaty will always favour those who draw it up. Ussualy the Colonail powers lose on the battlefield but win at the table. Its true how else do you suppose so many armies led by great men lost in the end. Through treachery and treaty we probably lost more territory tha any major battle.
Thing about Afghainstan is that they still cant give a damn about the political aspects most regional Afghan chiefs just want to keep the status quo and fight to protect thier fiefdoms if they ever came together they would be a lot more effective but the just cant be asked. If anything Southern Afghanistan is a drug turf war with the US and Britian being referees between pro governemnt and anti governemnt drug barrons.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
My family folklore also talks about Pashtoon bravery, my great grandfather died in Battle of Saragarhi near the durand line:(, But still pathans are one of the bravest rival one can ever have:k:
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Thing is most Asians still favour and value old school millitary and honour codes, few care about strategy or tactics especially the under hand ploys, most true men still think of fighting face to face.
Whereas in the West there used to be codes and conventions but now they just believe in winning by any means, the artistic nature has been lost war is business now. Few Asian peoples ever looked to war as a form of business not even Pathan or Rajput bandit chieftains.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
If it is Rajput style of fighting then it is one on one and battlefield decides the things, if chankya is involved it is all trickery and that strategy expands war into political,spying,misinformation,honey trapping, deceit and millitary adventure. Every homework and grand work is done before going to actual war:)
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Here’s telegraph-herald from 1941, and its so strange that nothing much has changed.
The Telegraph-Herald - Google News Archive Search
Restored attachments:
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
If it is Rajput style of fighting then it is one on one and battlefield decides the things, if chankya is involved it is all trickery and that strategy expands war into political,spying,misinformation,honey trapping, deceit and millitary adventure. Every homework and grand work is done before going to actual war:)
But Chankya represented all that was evil in the total war philoshophy.
Was Manu the great before or After Chankya? I remember Manu making an edict which banned "use of trickery and evil wepons" like poisoned arrows and guerilla warfare cutting supplies and starving people or throwing dieased corpses over walls etc all tactics one expounded by Chankya.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Facinating stuff, it really does bring home the issue in graphic detail as how the modern invaders are facing the same challenges and being daunted by the task before them.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
^ History is very important and no one pays any attention to it...
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Yeah its a great shame people look at the past and dont relate to thier forebears these days.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Yeah its a great shame people look at the past and dont relate to thier forebears these days.
Thats why history (the bad one) keep on repaeting itself.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Two tribes of Pathan were in state of war and the ultimate beneficiaries were the outsiders like Mughals, etc.Anyone knows what was reason of conflict? How the things settled down?
Not only yousafzais and khattaks, almost every tribe of present day KP were fighting with each other. All the inter-tribal wars were for lands.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Not only yousafzais and khattaks, almost every tribe of present day KP were fighting with each other. All the inter-tribal wars were for lands.
Yes lands seems the major reason for fight between the tribes. In fact, it has been reason of fight amongst all the communities. In Punjabi, there is the concept of Shareeka (neighbor) and a Shareeka confiscating others land was considered as Mard as per the old tradition.
PS: Welcome back marwati to GS :)
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
But I know few Pashtoons Hindus as well, Hindu titles of Sindhis, punjabis and Pashtoons are very common, A kapoor can be sindhi, pashtoon or punjabi? Lost tribe is very easy execuse, I think even japanese are lost tribe of Israel.I always used Pakhtoon and Pashtoon interchangibly, never though it can be different. Pashtoons of Pakistan are very tall but Pathan caste in India is of every height and skin tone:)
Pashtuns are by defination muslims. Hindus and sikhs settled in pashtun lands from hindostan as traders. Kapoors were originally from punjab.Also in old times blood was not as much as important as character to be defined as a pashtun. Members of any pashtun tribe belonging to certain professions, who did'nt follow pashtunwali, were labelled non-pashtuns even though they were ethnically pashtuns, these include damans, mullahs, chamar, hajam, trakan, etc
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
I think we have various Khans and people from KP as well on the site, but I doubt if they visit this section:)
Hi i am pashtun from KP, i know some history of my people. You can ask any question about pashtuns from me.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
Pashtuns are by defination muslims. Hindus and sikhs settled in pashtun lands from hindostan as traders. Kapoors were originally from punjab.Also in old times blood was not as much as important as character to be defined as a pashtun. Members of any pashtun tribe belonging to certain professions, who did'nt follow pashtunwali, were labelled non-pashtuns even though they were ethnically pashtuns, these include damans, mullahs, chamar, hajam, trakan, etc
So Pashtunwali was religiously followed in past? is it still followed in same way?
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
just three tribes, I thought there are others as well like Qizlbash,Zadran etc, and I also heard that they marry within their subtribe, is that true?
There are atleast 60 major tribes. Largest pashtun tribes are durrani and ghiljay.
Re: Conflict between Khataks and Yusuf Zais
So Pashtunwali was religiously followed in past? is it still followed in same way?
it depends upon location. In villages it is strongely followed while in urban centres pashtuns are just like other regular urban people of pakistan.
