Pashtuns, comprising 42% of the population, form the largest group, followed by Tajiks 27% , Hazaras 10% Uzbeks
10% and others like Aimaqs, Turkmens, and Baloch.
Yet, the Taliban are overwhelmingly Pashtun in leadership dominating 95% of senior roles and key ministries has consolidated authority along ethnic lines. Non-Pashtun groups face systemic marginalization: limited cabinet representation, purges in security apparatuses and exclusion from important portfolios. This has fueled perceptions of an occupying force in Tajik, Hazara, and Uzbek heartlands, where local tribal governance offers only partial autonomy.
Afghanistan remains predominantly rural, with about 80% of its people in rural countryside areas reliant on traditional governance structures. The Taliban's rule through coercion and fear echoes patterns seen accross the borders where one dominant ethnicity often exceeding 60% in other nations grips national power, sidelining others and stifling genuine inclusivity.
True stability demands power-sharing that reflects Afghanistan's diversity, not ethnic hegemony. Without it, resentment simmers, risking renewed conflict in a fragile land.Demography is one factor but there are other key causes of conflict .pashtuns are sunnis . and hazaras are shias while , tajiks etc are sunni/ shias mix .There is sectarian sectarian fault line in Afghanistan . Another stark difference is language . Pashtuns speak pushto while others are farsi speaking clans . Then wealthy areas where precious stone mining is ,always with non pashtuns, like panj sheer valley . Afghanistan is conflict prone from centuries.
DRMUFTIPAKVISION
Friday, 27 February 2026
Re: Anatomical Demography of Afghanistan
Pakistan -Afghanistan Armed Conflict- The Fourth Round of Great Game
We are perceiving Pakistan-Afghanistan relations only through the lens of border skirmishes, refugees, and the TTP, but this is merely the surface level of the issues.
In the depths, a global strategic game is underway, in which India, China, Russia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States are all moving their own pieces.
Marvin Weinbaum, a former analyst for the US State Department, says that the Pakistan-Afghanistan relationship cannot be viewed in isolation; both are part of a broader regional chessboard.
In 1904, at the Royal Geographical Society in London, the British geographer Sir Halford Mackinder said, "Who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; who rules the World-Island commands the world."
This statement rings just as true today in 2026. Afghanistan is the gateway to this "Heartland," and Pakistan is the gatekeeper of that door. But this time, the conflict is beginning between the household and the gatekeeper, and perhaps neither knows what is going to happen to them in the future?
The "Great Game" being played in Afghanistan is a contest whose first round (1830-1907) began between Britain and Russia on January 12, 1830, when London ordered the establishment of new trade routes to India.
Britain feared that Russia would reach India, and Russia feared that Britain would occupy Central Asia.
The core of the game was espionage, map-making, and bribing local rulers. Back then, Afghanistan became the center of this entire chessboard. Britain attempted to make Afghanistan a "buffer zone."
This game formally ended with the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, but it left behind a devastated economy, quiet political movements, and millions of innocent deaths.
The second round (1979-1989) was between the Soviet Union and the United States.
The Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 marked the return of the Great Game. The US, Western countries, and Israel armed the mujahideen through Pakistan, leading to the Soviet Union's defeat.
According to the East Asia Forum, the third round (2001-2021) began with America's failed war.
In 2001, the US invaded Afghanistan, which became the longest war in American history. Like the British and Russian empires, America became mired in a frustrating stalemate.
With America's defeat and the arrival of the Afghan Taliban, the fourth round of the Great Game has already begun, and with new players too. Pakistan may target Kabul again in the coming days. If this conflict spreads over time, you could also call it a "new twist in the fourth round of the Great Game."
China's re-emerging power and Russia-China cooperation have revived the Heartland theory. After the US withdrawal, "Russia, China, Pakistan, and Iran are coming together in the next chapter of the Great Game."
The Friday Times writes, "The concept of strategic depth has backfired; Pakistan is falling victim to cross-border attacks by the very groups it once nurtured." In other words, secretive external powers competing in the fourth Great Game are entering the field and pulling the Afghan Taliban, including the Pakistani Taliban (TTP) – who are capable of creating chaos – towards their side.
However, like the rulers of the past, the Afghan Taliban are now trapped in this fourth Great Game; they must decide their direction at this crossroads. They have to choose between a new war or the development of their country, and both of these decisions are linked to their relationship with Pakistan.
It's not that Pakistan will remain unharmed; it will be harmed. In fact, Pakistan also needs peace in Afghanistan, not war, for its own development. According to the think tank Chatham House, "Pakistan's development depends on CPEC, and CPEC depends on the stability of its western border, which is connected to Afghanistan."
How tense the situation between Pakistan and Afghanistan could become can be gauged from the fact that in January 2026, the International Crisis Group (ICG) in Brussels listed Pakistan-Afghanistan relations among the "ten most dangerous conflicts of 2026."
The ICG's most startling revelation was, "The Taliban publicly deny any link with the TTP, but behind the scenes, they themselves admit that due to ideological and tribal connections, they cannot take decisive action against the TTP."
And an even greater danger is this: "If the Taliban cracks down on the TTP, its members will join ISIS-Khorasan, which is a far more dangerous and global organization."
According to the Lowy Institute (Sydney), Afghanistan is on its way to becoming a "global narcotics hub" by shifting from opium to methamphetamine, while Russia just days ago reported the presence of thousands of foreign jihadists in Afghanistan. This means everything needed to destabilize the entire region is present in Afghanistan.
According to the East Asia Forum (Australian National University), for peace on the Pakistan-Afghan border, "a purely military strategy will not work. Political engagement in the Pashtun border areas is essential. Without sustainable security cooperation, these two countries will remain trapped in a cycle of conflict for a long time."
India is rapidly establishing a foothold in Afghanistan, China has its eye on Afghanistan's three trillion dollars' worth of minerals. President Trump is also searching for rare metals, while Russia wants to benefit quietly.
In the event of conflict, Afghanistan will continue to receive external allies and behind-the-scenes support over time, the people will continue to die, and the region will remain plagued by instability. A single question stands before both: do they want to trade in corpses or in vegetables and fruits?
If Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban view the situation in a broader context, the lives of the people in both countries, along with the region, could be transformed. The world order is changing; this is a time for agreements on the eastern and western borders, not for war. Other countries have nothing at stake; they will only pour weapons and money into this Great Game – it is your blood that will be spilled.
Friday, 2 January 2026
The Coming of New World Order by Dr Adil Mufti
As a student of Futurism / Agent of Change and follower of Alvin Toffler I'm of the opinion that for centuries, inequality has been the defining fault line of our world. It did not arise by accident. It is the legacy of two forces:
1. Uneven Development of Civilizations – Humanity moved at different speeds from the Stone Age to the Agricultural Age, to the Industrial Age, and now the Information Age. Some societies surged ahead while others lagged behind.
2. Colonization and Exploitation – The wealth of less-developed nations was systematically extracted by stronger colonial powers. The aftershocks of that looting are still visible today.
After the Second World War, world leaders attempted to bring order to this unequal landscape. The Bretton Woods framework, the IMF, and the World Bank were meant to stabilize economies and guide cooperation. For a time, it worked. But we now live in the Information Age, and this post-war world order is cracking.
Nationalism, Populism, Anti-Globalism: Leaning towards Far right . The New Currents
What Donald Trump began in America is not an isolated experiment. It is part of a global wave. Whether acknowledged by economists or not, leaders are responding to the same underlying pressures: economic insecurity, cultural identity, and rejection of globalization.
As a futurist turned Agent of Change, I have observed these trends crystalizing across nations:
• United States – Trump embodies Nationalism, Populism, and Anti-Globalism , Far Right Politics
• United Kingdom – Brexit was the clearest Anti-Globalist referendum.
• France – Marine Le Pen rides a wave of Nationalism and anti-immigration sentiment and fully committed Far right
.
• Italy – Giorgia Meloni & Matteo Salvini echo Nationalist and Anti-Globalist calls.
• Germany – AfD channels anger into Anti-EU and nationalist rhetoric.
• Hungary – Viktor Orbán: unapologetically nationalist and populist.
• Poland – PiS thrives on Nationalist and Anti-Globalist politics.
• Brazil – Jair Bolsonaro embraced Nationalism and Anti-Globalism.
• India – Narendra Modi fuels Hindu Nationalism.
• Turkey – Recep Tayyip Erdoğan fuses Populism with Nationalism.
• Russia – Vladimir Putin positions himself as champion of Nationalism, Anti-Globalism.
• Argentina – Javier Milei channels right-wing Populism, rejecting old globalist models.
The 21st Century Shift
The 21st century will not be defined by globalization in the way the 20th was. Instead, we are entering an era where nations reassert sovereignty, identity, and self-interest over global integration.
The institutions born out of Bretton Woods—the IMF, the World Bank, and the architecture of global monetary policy—will not remain untouched. They will either be reshaped, amended, or replaced as this New World Order emerges.
Final Thought
The tides of history are shifting. Nationalism, Populism, and Anti-Globalism are not passing trends—they are building blocks of the future. The leaders who recognize this early, and adapt wisely, will shape the balance of power for decades to come.
The New World Order is not something to be feared—it is something to be understood.
📧 Contact: drmufti@icilpk.com
Friday, 12 December 2025
Sunday, 30 November 2025
The Coming of New World Order by Dr Adil Mufti
As a student of Futurism / Agent of Change and follower of Alvin Toffler I'm of the opinion that for centuries, inequality has been the defining fault line of our world. It did not arise by accident. It is the legacy of two forces:
1. Uneven Development of Civilizations – Humanity moved at different speeds from the Stone Age to the Agricultural Age, to the Industrial Age, and now the Information Age. Some societies surged ahead while others lagged behind.
2. Colonization and Exploitation – The wealth of less-developed nations was systematically extracted by stronger colonial powers. The aftershocks of that looting are still visible today.
After the Second World War, world leaders attempted to bring order to this unequal landscape. The Bretton Woods framework, the IMF, and the World Bank were meant to stabilize economies and guide cooperation. For a time, it worked. But we now live in the Information Age, and this post-war world order is cracking.
Nationalism, Populism, Anti-Globalism: Leaning towards Far right . The New Currents
What Donald Trump began in America is not an isolated experiment. It is part of a global wave. Whether acknowledged by economists or not, leaders are responding to the same underlying pressures: economic insecurity, cultural identity, and rejection of globalization.
As a futurist turned Agent of Change, I have observed these trends crystalizing across nations:
• United States – Trump embodies Nationalism, Populism, and Anti-Globalism , Far Right Politics
• United Kingdom – Brexit was the clearest Anti-Globalist referendum.
• France – Marine Le Pen rides a wave of Nationalism and anti-immigration sentiment and fully committed Far right
.
• Italy – Giorgia Meloni & Matteo Salvini echo Nationalist and Anti-Globalist calls.
• Germany – AfD channels anger into Anti-EU and nationalist rhetoric.
• Hungary – Viktor Orbán: unapologetically nationalist and populist.
• Poland – PiS thrives on Nationalist and Anti-Globalist politics.
• Brazil – Jair Bolsonaro embraced Nationalism and Anti-Globalism.
• India – Narendra Modi fuels Hindu Nationalism.
• Turkey – Recep Tayyip Erdoğan fuses Populism with Nationalism.
• Russia – Vladimir Putin positions himself as champion of Nationalism, Anti-Globalism.
• Argentina – Javier Milei channels right-wing Populism, rejecting old globalist models.
The 21st Century Shift
The 21st century will not be defined by globalization in the way the 20th was. Instead, we are entering an era where nations reassert sovereignty, identity, and self-interest over global integration.
The institutions born out of Bretton Woods—the IMF, the World Bank, and the architecture of global monetary policy—will not remain untouched. They will either be reshaped, amended, or replaced as this New World Order emerges.
Final Thought
The tides of history are shifting. Nationalism, Populism, and Anti-Globalism are not passing trends—they are building blocks of the future. The leaders who recognize this early, and adapt wisely, will shape the balance of power for decades to come.
The New World Order is not something to be feared—it is something to be understood.
Listen to David Hearst -Editor in Chief of Middle East Eye
📧 Contact: drmufti@icilpk.com
Wednesday, 22 October 2025
Fwd: Unconscious know the True Consciousness
That's a deep and fascinating statement — "Unconscious know the True Consciousness."
Let's unpack it a bit:
1. Philosophical View
In many spiritual and philosophical traditions, the unconscious mind (or the deeper layers of awareness) is seen as the bridge to true consciousness — the pure awareness that exists beyond thoughts, ego, and sensory perception.
• Eastern philosophy (Vedanta, Buddhism): True consciousness (Atman, Pure Awareness) is ever-present, but the surface mind and ego obscure it. The unconscious—where intuition, memory, and archetypal symbols reside—can hint at this deeper truth when the surface mind is quiet.
• Western thought (Jungian psychology): Carl Jung saw the unconscious as containing not only personal repressed content but also collective wisdom — archetypes and truths that, when integrated, bring one closer to wholeness or Self, which parallels true consciousness.
2. Neuroscientific View
From a modern perspective:
• The unconscious mind processes far more information than the conscious one—most of our perceptions, emotions, and even decisions arise from it before they reach awareness.
• Thus, our "consciousness" is only a small island in a vast sea of unconscious knowing.
Some neuroscientists suggest that "true consciousness" might emerge only when the unconscious and conscious layers align — when the noise of surface thought subsides and awareness perceives itself.
3. Mystical Interpretation
In mystical language, your phrase could mean:
The unconscious — when purified of fear, desire, and illusion — remembers or recognizes the True Self, the timeless awareness that is consciousness itself.