afghan or pakistani

[randolph85]

actually, just found it after a quick google search

http://ia600407.us.archive.org/7/items/lifeofabdurrahma01abdauoft/lifeofabdurrahma01abdauoft.pdf

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

actually, just found it after a quick google search

http://ia600407.us.archive.org/7/ite...01abdauoft.pdf

ziiiiiiiiiiin ive been looking for this, for a minute now

[BarakzaiAbdali]

actually, just found it after a quick google search

http://ia600407.us.archive.org/7/ite...01abdauoft.pdf

Thank you Randolph. This will make for interesting reading.

[fzpz]

If your talking about Karzai or Toramana mindset people or even the Zardaris of the world, then they do not have well wishers. We are talking about theory here. South Asia has always been invaded by Central Asians, it is a natural course for central asians to go south towards the Indian Ocean for nothing more than survival. Ever since the Brits the South Asians have used Afghanistan as the buffer or the "Great Wall" if you want to use the Chinese version of its buffer between them and their northern neighbors who always invaded them. This "Great Wall" as a defense is an ends to their means. Who has suffered? Them or us, whose land is burning? Their or ours, whose mouths are boots being shoved into? Theirs or ours. It was always about theory. If one accepts your premise, why wouldn't the "obstacle" that is Islamabad look for strategic depth towards central asia? For Islamabad in your theory, it will go for anyway to co-opt the savages that live beyond the khyber, and get them to calm down, embroil them in their own muck, or the one you see playing out; making a push themselves to connect south asia and central asia - which is what they're doing and will do. The tragedy for Pashtuns is straddling two different regions. Living in two different environments with their own compulsions will naturally create differences in interests, polity, and goals. Interesting that the Pak Pashtuns live in the more stable environment, on the east side of the khyber influenced more by the indus valley/pak/south asia than the western slopes of the khyber. They have access to the more fertile lands, they have ocean access, market access, etc. Constantly out for your survival has got to be tiring. Why would they ever give that up? Isn't that the end state pashtuns/afghans/central asians have been looking for?

KP Pahstuns are naive to think they are better off with Islamabad. Islamabad is the obsticle of uniting this vast land of south and central asia into one unit. Islamabad was created by the Brits for this very purpose. Afghans or any other Central Asians will never stop eyeing the Indian Ocean for as long as it is. It is naive for south Asians to think that central asians would sit still and slowly starve when vast riches(meaning the unity of south and central asia) are an arms reach away. The fire has been burning in Afghanistan and the Pakistanis were naive to think that it will not spread to them. KP pashtuns ignorance is an obsticle of not only to the well being of Central Asians but also to the well being of South Asians because it is their ignorance that makes an obsticle like Islamabad exist. Afghanistanis are naive if they think the Pakis are going to sit on their butt waiting for the central asians to scheme their hackneyed dreams. The south asians too have dreams, to reconnect with central asia just like in the times of the mughals. They don't really mind the invaders since like all invaders before, the invaders will learn to live as south asians, they'll become south asians. Central asians haven't figured out that south asia is fools gold. It will do more to change the central asians. See the KP Pashtuns. KP Pashtuns are the end state for central asians. They are the future of Afghanistan pashtuns if one stretches your premise to the future. The connection of south and central asia is hindered by the buffer entity - Afghanistan. Islamabad, or greater Pak represents that united vast united construct that you dream of. Are you going to get caught slow-footed because the construct is called Pakistan instead of the Durrani empire? You actually have a lot in common with paki nationalists/generals who too want a rejuvenated connection with central asia and its offspring - the mughal successor state that is Pakistan. And they have the narrative which is likely to bring about an actual result - an "Islamic" one. No surprise that the game which Afghanistan started in the 1940s is staring them right in their face. It's made itself redundant, and a true obstacle to the integration of the two muslim regions. Afghanistan is now on the back foot.

I dont know why you are mentioning Salah as if people like him have any real power in Afghanistan. The Salehs of Afghanistan are on the verge of extinction. The only reason he even exists is because the US makes it so. Do you really think an Afghan would take Salehs side over a Yusephzai from Swat. If so then why are the Afghans launching attacks from Swat and hitting the Salehs.

I like geopolitical theorizing. should do more.

[mir mahsud]

[randolph85]

page 194

Again, on the 14th of June, Griffin Sahib wrote the
answers to my questions as follows :—After compliments :
"
I am commanded to convey to you the replies of the
Government of India to the questions you have asked. Firstly,
with regard to the position of the ruler of Kabul in relation to
foreign powers. Since the British Government admit no right
of interference by foreign powers in Afghanistan, and since both
Prussia and Persia are pledged to abstain from all political
interference with Afghan affairs, it is plain that the Kabul
ruler can have no political relations with any foreign power
except the English ; and if any such foreign power should
attempt to interfere in Afghanistan, and if such interference
should lead to unprovoked aggression on the Kabul ruler,
then the British Government will be prepared to aid him,
if necessary, to repel it, provided that he follows the advice
of the British Government in regard to his external relations.
"Secondly, with regard to limits of territory, I am directed
to say that the whole province of Kandahar has been placed
under a separate ruler, except Pishin and Sibi, which are
retained in British possession. Consequently, the Government
is not able to enter into any negotiations with you on these
points, nor in respect to arrangements with regard to the
north-west frontier, which were concluded with the ex-Amir
Mahomed Yakub Khan. With these reservations the British
Government are willing that you should establish over Afghanistan (including Herat, the possession of which cannot
be guaranteed to you, though Government are not disposed
to hinder measures which you may take to obtain possession
of it) as complete and extensive authority as has hitherto
been exercised by any Amir of your family. The British
Government desires to exercise no interference in the internal
affairs of these territories, nor will you be required to admit
an English Resident anywhere; although, for convenience
of ordinary and friendly intercourse between two adjoining
states, it may be advisable to station by agreement a Mahomedan
agent of the British Government at Kabul."

I wrote a short answTer to the above letter on the
22nd of June, but did not give my consent to their
separating the town of Kandahar from the kingdom,
on the ground that Kandahar was the town of the
Royal Family, and without including such a town the
Kingdom was of very little value.

page 208

On the other hand, the kingdom of Kabul, without
Kandahar, was like a head without a nose, or a fort
without any gate. I was the last person in the world
to appear before the nation as a coward, or as one who
would be afraid of any danger that stood in the way of
possessing the capital of my predecessors. On considering
the above advantages and disadvantages, I
found that the risk was very great; still, placing my
confidence in God, as usual, I accepted the town, and
appointed Hashim Khan Governor of the city

[mir mahsud]

Well both Afghanistan and Pakistan as countries mean nothing to me considering I've visited neither but I'll admit I feel closer to the term "afghan" then I do to "pakistani"

Paki's are soo and afghanis are so

[torkham]

alhamdulillah born in afghanistan. born a pashtun. even though i read somewhere on PF that pride in ones ancestry is not good . . . something to the effect, but the feeling of pride I cannot hide.

[DaMalakandGhar]

I think the problem with people like DaMalakandGhar is that the moment they step out of their house with all this anti-Pakistan nonsense they will be beaten up by patriotic Pakistani Pashtuns so it frustrates them so much they have to come online to insult others who think differently from them.

Whats our crime? Calling ourselves Pakistani? Whats Shahbaz Khan's crime. That he calls himself Pakistani and has utterly peacefully represented his beliefs without taking insult to your posts? So you're going to lynch him for it? Majority don't want Azad Pashtunistan in Pakistan. All provinces within can solve their problems internally within the federation no matter how serious they seem.

I so no difference between you and the Mullah crowd, DaMalakandGhar... both intolerant in their own ways.

There are 2 Pashtuns:
1) Pakistani Pashtuns
2) Afghan Pashtuns

We have to accept each others differing Nationality and thinking. Its the only way to move forward. For Pashtuns to be united they need to just accept each other the way they are like the Islamists need to abandon thoughts of why is your shalwar below your ankle? This is very important for Pashtun unity.

How are Pakistani Pashtuns responsible for something that happened so many years ago. This is beyond the British. Its about accepting each other and learning to co-exist.

Oh really? The first thing is, no Pukhtun would kill his/her own Pashtun brother no matter how loyal to Pakistan for pragmatic reasons for something as artificial as Pakistani nationhood. The second thing is, the so-called Paki patriotism is only skin-deep beneath which there are ethno-political sentiments simmering that explode occasionally and that may lead to the final implosion of Pakistan.

Your own Urdu-speaking Indic Mahajar community originally from Gangetic planes is an example of such sentiments which places its cultural and linguistic identity above Pakistan-Shakistan and which expresses that in MQMs Urdu-Mahajar chauvinism/terrorism and acrimony to the rest of peole including Pashtuns, Sindhis, Punjabis, etc. in Karachi So spare your typical Paki emotional manipulation disguised as Paki patriotism for someone else---don't play it here.

[khushal]

It was always about theory. If one accepts your premise, why wouldn't the "obstacle" that is Islamabad look for strategic depth towards central asia? For Islamabad in your theory, it will go for anyway to co-opt the savages that live beyond the khyber, and get them to calm down, embroil them in their own muck, or the one you see playing out; making a push themselves to connect south asia and central asia - which is what they're doing and will do. The tragedy for Pashtuns is straddling two different regions. Living in two different environments with their own compulsions will naturally create differences in interests, polity, and goals. Interesting that the Pak Pashtuns live in the more stable environment, on the east side of the khyber influenced more by the indus valley/pak/south asia than the western slopes of the khyber. They have access to the more fertile lands, they have ocean access, market access, etc. Constantly out for your survival has got to be tiring. Why would they ever give that up? Isn't that the end state pashtuns/afghans/central asians have been looking for?

The problem with your answer is what has happened to pakistan in the past decade. It supported the US war on terror. Its people are questioning its legitimacy, Foreign powers are rethinking its usefulness to their interests. A free Baluchistan is becoming more of a reality. Pakistan has been more isolated and contained than at any time in its history. Theres is a huge trust deficit with any Afghan group including the Taliban where Taliban guns are aiming at Islamabad and at the same time Islamabad has no choice but to aid them.

Afghanistanis are naive if they think the Pakis are going to sit on their butt waiting for the central asians to scheme their hackneyed dreams. The south asians too have dreams, to reconnect with central asia just like in the times of the mughals. They don't really mind the invaders since like all invaders before, the invaders will learn to live as south asians, they'll become south asians. Central asians haven't figured out that south asia is fools gold. It will do more to change the central asians. See the KP Pashtuns. KP Pashtuns are the end state for central asians. They are the future of Afghanistan pashtuns if one stretches your premise to the future. The connection of south and central asia is hindered by the buffer entity - Afghanistan. Islamabad, or greater Pak represents that united vast united construct that you dream of. Are you going to get caught slow-footed because the construct is called Pakistan instead of the Durrani empire? You actually have a lot in common with paki nationalists/generals who too want a rejuvenated connection with central asia and its offspring - the mughal successor state that is Pakistan. And they have the narrative which is likely to bring about an actual result - an "Islamic" one. No surprise that the game which Afghanistan started in the 1940s is staring them right in their face. It's made itself redundant, and a true obstacle to the integration of the two muslim regions. Afghanistan is now on the back foot..

Today is a different world. You have the resources of the persian gulf and central asia namely energy and minerals that would naturally flow towards a big market which lies close by in south asia(the whole indian subcontinent not just Pakistan). This trade would create a huge economic boom and would create an economic superpower much richer than the one in North America. The only obsticle to this is Pakistan. If you mean south asians have a dream of connecting to central asia namely resources that its market needs desperately, I agree only that south aisa is not only pakistan but more so the whole Indian subcontinent. It is pakistan that blocks such an alliance from happening. You dont need the Taliban nor do you need the Pakistani generals strategic depth into Central Asia for this to happen. This will happen naturally because of natural economic forces. To block these natural economic forces from occurring, the Brits, the genious they are did something that would block such a natural economic flow from happening by creating Pakistan(dividing the Muslims and Hindus by making them beleive they can not live with each other even though they have for over 1000 yrs without their help). This obsticle forced those resources(namely in the persian gulf) to flow westward(unnatural) instead of eastward(natural). One of the main reason why the West funnels Billions to Pakistan even though Pakistan aids people that kill its soldiers. While I agree with you that it is in Paksitan interest to want strategic depth into central asia, the problem is that the West would not let them that is why as Barackzai is saying the West is creating another pakistan next to pakistan. They are now creating two obsticles that oppose each other, another divide and rule tactic.

The problem of creating another pakistan to pakistan is that the Islam card has already been taken by the original pakistanis. What other card can the West use to create this new Pakistan that will oppose the orginal pakistan. Pashtun Nationalism is one card but the original pakistani will have a problem with that since they have the majority of pashtuns in their own feudalistic federation. Something that Mostafa encourages which is a new identity called Afghan Nationalism with different ethnicities united under an Afghan identity is also a problem because most of the rural pashtuns dont want central authority. You cant have something like FATA in the east and south of Afghanistan and call it a strong nation that can oppose a nation like pakistan.

And also when I say the well being of South asians I mean all of South Asians not just the 15% who live in Pakistan and when I say the well being of central asians, I mean all of central asians(the istans) and not just Afghanistan.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, Central asian wealth is there for the taking and the Brits inheritor is reshaping the map to continue this unnatural flow of resources westward.

[Old School Killiwal]

Oh really? The first thing is, no Pukhtun would kill his/her own Pashtun brother no matter how loyal to Pakistan for pragmatic reasons for something as artificial as Pakistani nationhood. The second thing is, the so-called Paki patriotism is only skin-deep beneath which there are ethno-political sentiments simmering that explode occasionally and that may lead to the final implosion of Pakistan.

Your own Urdu-speaking Indic Mahajar community originally from Gangetic planes is an example of such sentiments which places its cultural and linguistic identity above Pakistan-Shakistan and which expresses that in MQMs Urdu-Mahajar chauvinism/terrorism and acrimony to the rest of peole including Pashtuns, Sindhis, Punjabis, etc. in Karachi So spare your typical Paki emotional manipulation disguised as Paki patriotism for someone else---don't play it here.

Watch the news, you idiot.

Who do you think is fighting the Taliban in Waziristan and FATA? Are they Punjabi soldiers? No. They are unfortunate Pashtuns from "brainwashed" areas like Swat.

[Old School Killiwal]

alhamdulillah born in afghanistan. born a pashtun. even though i read somewhere on PF that pride in ones ancestry is not good . . . something to the effect, but the feeling of pride I cannot hide.

Torkham lala, Allah di mal sa.

Insha'Allah, one day, I will legally enter Afghanistan.

[Old School Killiwal]

Prick

I didn't say Swat, I said like Swat.

But Swat Pashtuns are the most brainwashed, possibly even more than Peshawaris.

[fzpz]

The problem with your answer is what has happened to pakistan in the past decade. It supported the US war on terror. Its people are questioning its legitimacy, Foreign powers are rethinking its usefulness to their interests. A free Baluchistan is becoming more of a reality. Pakistan has been more isolated and contained than at any time in its history. Theres is a huge trust deficit with any Afghan group including the Taliban where Taliban guns are aiming at Islamabad and at the same time Islamabad has no choice but to aid them. What has happened to Pakistan isn't any different than what had been happening before. Crisis to crisis. Nothing new. I don't see anyone questioning the legitimacy as a result of current geopolitical situation (wishful thinking on your part?), just the policy of supporting the wot (opposed by many and supported by many a political forces - mainly the anp and ppp). Balochistan isn't exactly getting in the way of central and south asia. We can have a discussion on Balochistan, but suffice to say it's can't and won't happen, mainly due to the fact that there are too few Baloch peoples in Balochistan to ever reach a critical mass. Geography, demographics, and law are the separatists' undoing. The situation can be kept at a boil only if Pak overreacts like it has. Too many fissures to be exploited within Balochistan and within the Baloch groups then we're back to square one - balochistan being off limits for economic activity, civilians being killed by both sides, continued gas/oil and minerals going to the ports, sindh or punjab while the baloch miss out, and continued repression of the baloch by the separatists, sardars, and security forces. A few sideshows - which you see as representing the reality - aren't going to change the reality - which is a lot different than that from Bangladesh, which i'm sure you were going to bring up. Those same "foreign powers" and actors were also discussing the partition of Afghanistan, doesn't mean it is gaining legitimacy or becoming closer to being a reality. This aside from the fact that you put entirely way too much hope in the "foreign powers". The same sideshows have also called for a lot of things which Pak hasn't done, and won't. It'll keep playing both the sides knowing full well it will remain useful to both sides, as both sides remain useful to it. The trust deficit goes both ways, and the strategic reality for the afghans is that it will always remain more dependent on the Pak than the other way around. Pak can always go along with the "game plan" - through coercion by those same foreign powers - and go all in the wot and be the gateway to central asia from the arabian sea. It's already making strides, Afghanistan is the block. Pak has granted or discussed granting birthing rights, trade routes, pipelines to most of the stans. It is Afghanistan due to its situation, and its elite, which is the obstacle - see the recent pulling out of the tapi pipeline.


Today is a different world. You have the resources of the persian gulf and central asia namely energy and minerals that would naturally flow towards a big market which lies close by in south asia(the whole indian subcontinent not just Pakistan). This trade would create a huge economic boom and would create an economic superpower much richer than the one in North America. Let me get this straight, there is supposedly vast potential in the region, so the "foreign powers" will do anything to realize it at the cost of their own predominance? Makes sense. On to the economic imperatives, those resources can just easily flow within the current political realities. Again the reason for it not happening is due to the instability in Afghanistan. The constant survival mode of the afghans will make them act as highway robbers rather than partners in this grand scheme. The only obsticle to this is Pakistan. If you mean south asians have a dream of connecting to central asia namely resources that its market needs desperately, I agree only that south aisa is not only pakistan but more so the whole Indian subcontinent. It is pakistan that blocks such an alliance from happening. You dont need the Taliban nor do you need the Pakistani generals strategic depth into Central Asia for this to happen. Talks of alliances are a little too far for me. Like the natural tendencies you've mentioned, they're the very reason that no alliance will ever happen if one continues with the nationalist/ethno-linguistic narrative. Those resources in central can just as easily go north to Russia, west to europe as they already are, east to China as they are already, and south to Pakistan/Iran. Like you said, times have changed, and the old central asia to south asia paradigm is miniscule compared to the absolute necessities of the past. South asia itself will not be able to support its burgeoning population (which can only increase with trade) nor will it be able to have sustainable growth/development - you're seeing the slowing down of india. This will happen naturally because of natural economic forces. To block these natural economic forces from occurring, the Brits, the genious they are did something that would block such a natural economic flow from happening by creating Pakistan(dividing the Muslims and Hindus by making them beleive they can not live with each other even though they have for over 1000 yrs without their help). You obviously have bought into this pseudo-history of "one people" living together for thousands of years in la la land. There was never any "living together" nor was there anything even as two distinct groups of hindus or Muslims. A myraid of groups that had never been in one political entity until the brits came along. The simple fact is that the natural imperatives of the south asian muslims (including east of khyber pashtuns) led them to support an independent homeland. The ML/Jinnah was by far the most hated political force the british.This obsticle forced those resources(namely in the persian gulf) to flow westward(unnatural) instead of eastward(natural). None of these resources have even been tapped much less flow the "unnatural" way. One of the main reason why the West funnels Billions to Pakistan even though Pakistan aids people that kill its soldiers. The reason for funneling "billions" is due to their compulsions, and its hardly "billions", on top of the fact Pak also loses somewhat in this equation. While I agree with you that it is in Paksitan interest to want strategic depth into central asia, the problem is that the West would not let them that is why as Barackzai is saying the West is creating another pakistan next to pakistan. They are now creating two obsticles that oppose each other, another divide and rule tactic. My talk of strategic depth is of the turkish concept - of increased trade etc. The only hangup is Kabul's obsession with the "durand line". From Pak's pov, it only overreacted to the belligerent approach of Kabul. "Burning Kabul" is only a response, not some grand strategic scheme or policy. It can stay confident in that the issue can never to taken up by the people that are of at the heart of the "issue". Again, too much credence to the foreign powers. Pak and afghanistan opposing each other is nothing new. The best way to oppose the divide and rule tactic certainly isn't clamoring for the destruction of the other supposed obstacle, it's by accepting the realities and moving forward together - who knows, maybe even towards one gigantic "obstacle": Greater Pak?

The problem of creating another pakistan to pakistan is that the Islam card has already been taken by the original pakistanis. What other card can the West use to create this new Pakistan that will oppose the orginal pakistan. Pashtun Nationalism is one card but the original pakistani will have a problem with that since they have the majority of pashtuns in their own feudalistic federation. Something that Mostafa encourages which is a new identity called Afghan Nationalism with different ethnicities united under an Afghan identity is also a problem because most of the rural pashtuns dont want central authority. You cant have something like FATA in the east and south of Afghanistan and call it a strong nation that can oppose a nation like pakistan. Simple, pashtun nationalism is a card that doesn't exist. It never did. You're going to jump onto another bound to fail "card" after realizing the last one didn't actually exist? The only "card" that fits is "Islamism". The only card (theoretically) which can negotiate between the different groups, ensure equality, provide a means of justice and conflict resolution, is decentralized yet has central legitimacy from the rurals, and provide a constructive and stable base to build for the future. The other card (maybe) is secularism and democracy, which isn't applicable.

And also when I say the well being of South asians I mean all of South Asians not just the 15% who live in Pakistan and when I say the well being of central asians, I mean all of central asians(the istans) and not just Afghanistan.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, Central asian wealth is there for the taking and the Brits inheritor is reshaping the map to continue this unnatural flow of resources westward. The resources will flow depending on their merit, not geopolitical conspiracies. They're flowing to china/russia/europe because those places have the resources/means to make use of them. Central asia is/will be doing just fine, it's just Afghanistan (a colonial buffer-state) which inflates itself as the all-important peg in this all-needing scheme.

FWIW, i don't look at Afghanistan or any other stan as the obstacle. The natural flow which you call it will only happen if all the people concerned get a fair share, which can happen given the current political entities - needs imagination from all concerned parties. Just responding to your geopolitical narrative.

[khushal]

^^@fzpz
Your going to have to figure out how to respond in quote mode in order for me to respond to you point by point.

But all your arguments are flawed, you are using a strawman fallacy. You are arguing from a point that Pakistan= South Asia. South Asia has 1.5 billion people, Pakistan does not. Pakistan is only about 12% of South Asia.
Your reponses are so lame that your second to last response in your last post is basically a repeat of what I said about afghan nationalism. In one of your responses you claim persian gulf oil have not been tapped. lol

In the next 100 years when we are all dead, you are most likely to see two World powerhouses. One in the West, America and the other in the East, China. In order for the West to counter China which is much bigger population wise. America must combine with Europe into one economic unit(hence the reason that Europe is already in the works to be unified). This will in turn force China to combine with regional players as well. What will happen in this climate is that the middle east and central asia will be fought over by these powerhouses.

It is pakistan that is the obsticle of a third powerhouse from forming and that would be the south and central asian alliance. India is being blocked from central asians and central asia are being blocked from India. If Afghanistan was the obsticle than PAkistan and India would have to be best friends. You dont make sense.