Dr. Niaz Murtaza
I was in Afghanistan last week. I have worked in many rebel-held areas globally. But it was eerie being in a whole state ruled de facto-by a group we aided that shuns modernity. But I felt more eerie and guilty as my callous state is evicting poor Afghans cruelly.
Long poor, decades of war we too stoked and now foreign economic and internal medieval bans have hurt it more, with nature inflicting drought and quakes too recently. Two-thirds of Afghans need aid, half urgently. Food, medicine, water and aid are short. Women and many men face state abuse. Into this crisis, we are cruelly pushing innocent people, many living for decades or even born here. Images of misery and abuse across borders now abound.
As often, our logic is bad-legally, morally, economically and politically. We say we only evict illegals. This is sorry state spin to criminalize and dehumanize them. Refugees globally cross borders sans visas. But host states still issue refugee papers. Afghans coming on foot didn’t need visas. Illegality just means some refugees lack or are refused paper. The simple fix is giving papers. By not asking “legal” ones to go, we are also oddly saying it is safe for some to go but not others. To strip them of all empathy, we pin some terrorist acts on them. Which ones, we aren’t told. I don’t recall Afghans named right after a recent one and doubt such later claims. Even if some did so, can we collectively punish millions, like Israel? We may push Afghans into open enemy arms.
Like US hawks, some say they are an economic burden. But global studies show that even “illegal” migrants boost economies as they have not just mouths to feed but also hands to work, skills to apply and money to invest. Since 1980, three million Afghans have settled here but our numbers have tripled by 160 million; millions of us went abroad. We rightly rue the harm from huge emigration yet oddly see smaller inflows as harmful too. But migrants often fill the gap left by emigrants. UN gives us tens of millions in refugee aid, helping our suppliers and staff too.
Sindhis and Baloch fear migrants-internal and foreign, new and old, legal and “illegal”- may make them minorities at home, like Palestinians and US natives. Indigenous rights are critical. These two also lag others in army, bureaucracy and business. Census data shows the ratios of Sindh and Balochistan in our population went up by 5pc and 2.5pc from 1951 to 2023. Punjab’s fell by 7pc. But Sindh’s increase is mainly in flows to Karachi, which went from 3 to 8pc nationally and 18 to 36 pc in Sindh. So, provincial political hold matters too.
Sindhis have seen the most change. Their ratio in Sindh assembly fell roughly from 90pc in ’47 to 80pc in ‘70 and 68pc in 2002 but is stable since then. Controversial state-aided big inflows and land awards, e.g., after ’47, cut but didn’t end this supermajority given usually high rural fertility rates. Inflows gave some economic gains too. Big industrial classes exist only among some ethnicities due to their unfair state hold, initially of Mohajir and then Punjab elites, that other groups have never had. Sans Sindh inflows, most of our industry may have been in already-dominant Punjab. The gains ignored poor Sindhis, but due to the selfish policies of national and local elites. Recent inflows have also made rival Mohajirs a minority in Karachi. PPP now even runs it, aided by forced PTI cracks.
Baloch won about 70pc seats in 1970 and 2018. Gwadar, still a damp squib, won’t change ethnic mix much, as Baloch fear. Baloch militants sadly kill poor migrants though so many Baloch have lived safely in other regions for longer. Most very poor districts are Baloch ones. But elites cause Baloch misery, not migrants. Victims mustn’t fight each other to help elites but jointly fight them. Punjabis won about 75pc seats in Punjab and Pakhtuns 87pc in KP (up after FATA union) in 2018.
So, all majority groups have stable supermajorities and won’t see the fate of US natives etc. Poor migrants don’t change things like conquests or state-aided inflows. KP has 52pc of 1.3 million legal Afghans, Balochistan 24pc, Punjab 14pc and Sindh 5pc says a new UN survey. The numbers on “illegal” ones are mere guesses. Even if long-term Afghan and other migrants get citizenship, it will just cut the supermajorities by 2-3pc one time (Pakhtuns will gain a bit). High rural fertility may soon erase even this cut. Actually, minorities (Seraiki, Hindko and Mohajir) will lose a bit more than majority groups. Even this won’t occur if they just get work rights and fake CNICs are nixed.
We must not send migrants to certain and instant risks for our unreal, distant fears. Migrant fears must not conservatively create ethnic silos and edge but liberally seek win-win ideas for all victims.
The writer is a Political Economist with a Ph.D. From the University of California, Berkeley.
murtazaniaz@yahoo.com; @NiazMurtaza2.
Comments are closed.