Dear Auntie,
I hope you are well. I am writing this to you with a very heavy heart. I met a guy online two years ago and we got along remarkably well. He did my assignments, offered to pay for me etc. He was 20 at that time and I was 23. Now, he is 23 and I am 26. He lives in another province. Because we are not stable, we decided that we will not get into a relationship. However, over the course of time, he won me over.

After one year, he broke up with me several times, saying that he was not stable and I deserved better. But I would always convince him to stay. However, this year, his father passed away. Before his father’s passing, he had promised to marry me and talk to his parents about me. He also mentioned that day that his father wanted him to marry his friend’s daughter, who was religious.

After his father’s death, he ghosted me for a week. After I sent him several messages, he finally told me that now he had responsibilities and couldn’t pursue me any longer. Still, I convinced him but, after a few days, he broke up with me again, saying his parents want him to marry after two years, along with his brother. They have chosen his father’s friend’s daughter for him. This was the final straw for me.

He also said that he will find me if Allah wills it. Recently, he unblocked me after two months of our break-up. I am getting proposals but my heart is still with him. I have blocked him everywhere.

‘Should I Wait for a Man Who Keeps Leaving Me?’

I don’t know how to detach myself from him. Shall I give him another chance if he comes back?
Heartbroken

Dear Heartbroken,
You’ve been through a lot while waiting and trying to hold on to something that mattered a lot to you. But from what you’ve written, it seems like this man keeps pulling you in and then letting you go. Each time he does that, you end up feeling worse.

You’ve already done the hardest part by blocking him and trying to move on. The thing is that, if someone really wants to be with you, they will let you know. They don’t disappear or keep you guessing. His unblocking you after two months doesn’t mean he’s ready. It just means he’s thinking about you again. And that, my love, is simply not enough.

So no, don’t give him another chance unless his actions show something solid. Talk is cheap and people can say whatever they want, without really meaning it. The important thing is the follow-up action after all the talk. In the meantime, keep your heart open to the proposals coming your way. You deserve someone who doesn’t keep you hanging and offers you something solid.

It will take time, but you will move on from this situation. Start by accepting that the version of this man that you loved does not exist anymore. Sometimes, letting go is the best and healthiest thing you can do for yourself.

Disclaimer: If you or someone you know is in crisis and/or feeling suicidal, please go to your nearest emergency room and seek medical help immediately.

Auntie will not reply privately to any query. Please send concise queries to: auntieagni@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, EOS, October 26th, 2025

Source link

Recently, Pakistan went to war against Afghanistan. From the Afghan side, one began hearing the old trope that “Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires”. First of all, Pakistan is not an empire, and secondly, the trope is mostly a myth.

In an August 2021 speech, delivered during the withdrawal of US military forces from Afghanistan, former US President Joe Biden said, “The events we’re seeing now are sadly proof that no amount of military force would ever deliver a stable, secure Afghanistan that is known in history as the graveyard of empires.” The researcher Alexander Hainy-Khaleeli wasn’t impressed. He wrote, “Biden labelling Afghanistan ‘the graveyard of empires’ is historically illiterate.” Truth is, the phrase has nothing to do with any grand historic narrative or fact. 

According to Hainy-Khaleeli, the phrase (in the context of Afghanistan) first appeared in a 2001 article written for the magazine Foreign Affairs by the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) former Pakistan Station Chief, Milton Bearden. The article was titled ‘Afghanistan: Graveyard of Empires’. There is scarce evidence of this phrase being used before Bearden’s article.

In 2001, when US forces were readying themselves to invade Afghanistan to dislodge the Taliban regime and hunt down the Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden, Bearden cautioned the US government, claiming that major armies across history had tried to conquer Afghanistan but had run into trouble in their encounters with the unruly Afghan tribes. Bearden named the armies of the ancient Greek king Alexander, the ferocious Mongol warlord Genghis Khan, the British Empire and the Soviet Union that were all ‘defeated’ by the Afghans. 

The phrase ‘Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires’ is perpetuated by the Taliban as a way to mythologise the image of the ‘invincible’ Afghan, while non-Afghans use the trope as a way to rationalise defeat. But does this phrase make any historical sense?

But according to Hainy-Khaleeli, “Bearden’s argument is utterly at odds with the realities of history.” Alexander and Genghis Khan not only conquered Afghanistan, their successors ruled it for centuries after them. The ‘graveyard’ narrative also overlooks the fact that many empires — such as the Achaemenids, Kushans, Mughals and others — successfully ruled large parts of Afghanistan for extended periods. 

Indeed, in the 19th century, British armies did suffer defeats in Afghanistan (after conquering Kabul), but this hardly dented the British Empire as a whole. The Empire remained one of the largest and most powerful in the world till its disintegration from the mid-1940s onwards. This was mainly due to the impact of World War II and the period of decolonisation that followed. Afghanistan had absolutely nothing to do with this. 

Yet, many military experts do agree that Afghanistan is a tough nut to crack. However, their views in this regard have little to do with the mostly romanticised and idealised notion of the ‘legendary fighting spirit of the Afghans’ that turns empires into dust.

According to Patrick Porter, who teaches defence studies at Kings College in London, it is Afghanistan’s geography that makes it a tough country to conquer and keep. It is a country of mountains, deserts and severe winters that make it difficult not only to fight in but also to operate logistically. It limits mobility and it is difficult for an invading force to project power.

The phrase “Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires” is likely to have been extracted from Bearden’s experiences as a CIA man during the anti-Soviet insurgency in Afghanistan in the 1980s. The CIA and Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency, the ISI, were working together to finance, arm and train Afghan groups (the mujahideen) to fight against Soviet troops that had invaded Afghanistan in December 1979.

The mujahideen were also provided narratives to rationalise their insurgency. The fight was explained as a ‘jihad’ against an ‘atheist invader’ and a war of liberation. From within these macro-narratives also emerged many micro-narratives based on mythologised portrayals of the ‘historical warrior ethos’ of the Afghans. 

American and Pakistani governments strengthened these portrayals. Popular culture tools were also employed to solidify them. Examples include the Hollywood blockbuster movie Rambo 3 and the Pakistan TV play, Panah. A 1985 pamphlet published in Peshawar by an anti-Soviet jihadist group claimed that the mujahideen had begun to blow up Soviet tanks by simply standing in front of them and shouting “Allah-o-Akbar [God is great]!”

One can therefore assume that the “Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires” myth, too, could’ve been circulating as one of the many micro-narratives at the time. But it was mainstreamed by Bearden in 2001. It most certainly has immediate roots in the anti-Soviet insurgency. But there are scholars who claim that the story of the mujahideen single-handedly defeating the Soviet military with American weapons is also a myth.

In his 2011 book Afgansty, British diplomat Rodric Braithwaite wrote that the war between Soviet troops and the mujahideen actually ended in a stalemate. The Soviet Army successfully controlled major cities and infrastructure, while the mujahideen controlled the countryside. According to Braithwaite, Soviet withdrawal (in 1989) was driven more by domestic Soviet politics and a desire to end a costly war than by a decisive military defeat. 

The ‘graveyard’ narrative has often been worked in two ways. The Taliban began to use it from the early 2000s as a warning to invaders and as a way to further fortify the mythologised image of the ‘invincible’ Afghan. On the other hand, non-Afghans use the trope as a way to rationalise a defeat: everyone loses here, so did we. Biden was doing exactly that in his speech. 

Either way, it is a simplistic trope that trivialises the geopolitical complexities that have shaped Afghanistan and the wars that have been fought there. As the Serbian historian Nemanja Jovanovi noted in 2022, despite its scarcity and lack of any desirable resources, Afghanistan has stood as an important geopolitical position for millennia. This made it a constant target for others to invade. Jovanovi suggests that it would be more apt to call Afghanistan a “battleground of empires” instead of ‘graveyard of empires.’ It is a place where major powers clash in their search for global/regional domination. 

Attacks by India-backed Islamist militants on Pakistan from Afghanistan are, therefore, treated by Pakistan as a threat to Pakistan’s growing reputation of becoming a rising power in South Asia.

Published in Dawn, EOS, October 26th, 2025

Source link

With Halloween round the corner, we delve into a playlist that fits the mood. Whether you want to indulge in a blend of American history, blues music and vampires, a fictionalisation of the story of one of the most macabre psychopaths in the US or an Indian series that brings together supernatural dread and social commentary about the social place of women, we’ve got you covered.

Together, these stories prove that the scariest monsters are often the ones closest to home.

Sinners (2025, HBO Max)

I first saw this when it hit cinema screens in Pakistan. And I was left in awe.

Now streaming on HBO Max (which only recently became available in Pakistan), Sinners is an audacious genre mash-up that weaves horror, music and social commentary into one bold tapestry.

From gothic blues and real-life monsters to haunted hostels, this Halloween’s streaming line-up offers a different kind of scare… one that gets right under your skin

Directed by RyanCoogler and starring MichaelB.Jordan in dual roles, the film was born out of Coogler’s desire to make something original, free of franchise constraints, and to explore Black American history, blues music and supernatural horror, all at once.

Set in 1932 Mississippi, the story follows twins Smoke and Stack, who return home after years away to open a juke-joint for Black sharecroppers dreaming of freedom and escape. But their ambitions are threatened by an older evil — a clan of white vampires with sinister designs. As the bar opens and the live blues performance pulses through the night, the true horror begins.

Visually, the film is stunning: sweeping camera work, dusty Southern sets, flickering candle-lit interiors, and a soundtrack that pulses with blues-infused dread. At the same time, sometimes it feels like its pacing sags in the early act and that the horror payoff is uneven.

For Halloween, Sinners delivers more than jump scares — it offers a hypnotic, visceral experience, where music, myth and mortality collide under a heavy Southern dusk. If you’re in the mood for something rich, dark and off-beat, this one is a perfect fit for you.

Monster: The Ed Gein Story (2025, Netflix)

This one is impossible to miss but hard to watch. Streaming on Netflix, it has a chilling veneer but ultimately it leaves a mixed impression.

The series delves into the life of EdGein, the notorious grave-robber and murderer, whose bizarre relics and macabre obsessions shocked the world, and whose legacy has haunted horror cinema ever since his story came to light.

Gein, known as the “Butcher of Plainfield”, was a Wisconsin farmer whose gruesome crimes in the 1950s shocked America. After his mother’s death, Gein exhumed corpses from local graveyards, fashioning furniture, masks and clothing from human remains. When police arrested him in 1957 for murder, they discovered his horrifying collection, revealing a psyche twisted by isolation, maternal obsession and delusion.

Though convicted of only two murders, his macabre acts inspired some of Hollywood’s most infamous horror icons — Norman Bates (Psycho), Leatherface (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre) and Buffalo Bill (The Silence of the Lambs).

From the outset, the show leans heavily into its own mythology rather than being a strictly factual biopic. The visuals are polished, performances intense, and there’s no shortage of gore and surreal sequences. On the downside, the series has somewhat of a sprawling narrative, the filmmakers take dramatic liberties, and it has a pacing that sometimes feels aimless. It’s as if the creators were torn between documenting a true crime legend and crafting a full-blown horror myth.

So yes, as a Halloween watch, it offers plenty of visceral moments and a deeply unsettling undercurrent of “this actually happened.” But if you’re seeking clarity or a tightly focused retelling, proceed with caution. The truth is distorted, the horror is amplified, and the result is more a psychological shock-fest than a clean true-crime documentary.

Khauf (2025, Amazon Prime)

This series makes for a compelling, eerie watch, especially if you prefer watching something that’s rooted in psychological tension rather than just cheap jump-scares.

The plot centres on Madhu (Monika Panwar), a young woman who relocates from Gwalior to Delhi, seeking a fresh start, only to end up in room 333 of a women’s hostel, where whispers of past violence sulk in the shadows. Madhu (and consequently us, the viewers) are driven mad trying to unravel what’s haunting her.

Panwar’s performance is a standout: her quiet desperation and gradual unravelling anchor the series emotionally, which helps give the horror more weight.

What I love about this series is how it slowly builds fear around real-world vulnerabilities — trauma, isolation, gendered threats — rather than relying solely on spectral apparitions. Visually and atmospherically, Khauf scores well. The hostel itself serves as a tight, claustrophobic character. The cinematography makes the dim lighting and echoing corridors feel absolutely soaked in dread. The sound design holds the unease longer than most typical horror efforts, especially from Bollywood.

Having said that, Khauf isn’t perfect. The pacing is uneven as episodes meander through back-stories, and the horror payoff sometimes fades into explanation rather than lingering mystery.

If you’re looking for an intense playlist to match the Halloween mood, with atmospheric dread, a haunted hostel, and an undertone of societal fear, Khauf is a solid pick. Just don’t expect non-stop scares; instead, you’ll find a slow-burn, unsettling journey that lingers more in the mind than on the skin.

Published in Dawn, ICON, October 26th, 2025

Source link