Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

No to Durrand line

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • No to Durrand line

    End of Imaginary Durand Line

    The British presented a signed document with the person of King Abdul Rahman Khan in 1893 referring to the borders between Afghanistan and British India. This document was in English and the person of Abdul Rahman Khan did not understand the English language, therefore leads the suspicious nature of forgery and or false documentation. The Dari or Pashto translation of this document or agreement has never been signed by Amir Abdul Rahman Khan, suggesting that he nullified this agreement. But the following researchers have provided arguments to the contrary that this document was signed and has expired. in either scenario, the Durand line does not exist today and the agreement was nullified the day it was written..
    The argument between Afghanistan and Pakistan centers on the issue of Durand Line Agreement and its validity. But, the Government of Balochistan (GOB) in Exile challenges the “legality” of the Durand Line Agreement between Afghanistan and British India in 1893, not its “validity”. We believe that the Durand Line Agreement is an illegal agreement, and therefore, it is null and void.

    DURAND LINE AGREEMENT

    In 1839, the Afghan and British governments agreed to demark a 2,450-kilometer (1,519 miles) long border dividing British India and Afghanistan. The signatory of the document, known as The Durand Line Agreement, were His Highness, Amir Abdur Rahman Khan, ruler of Afghanistan, and Sir Henry Mortimer Durand, the foreign secretary of the British Indian government.

    Since British India ceased to exist in 1947 with the independence of India, Pakistan, and princely States, it was assumed that the Durand Line Agreement will be automatically upheld by the International Court of Justice as a binding agreement under uti possidetis juris, i.e, binding bilateral agreements with or between colonial powers are "passed down" to successor independent states.

    AFGHANISTAN-PAKISTAN CONFLICT

    The Durand Line has been a source of contention between Afghanistan and Pakistan. On September 30, 1947, at the UN General Assembly meeting, Afghanistan even caste a vote against the admission of Pakistan to the United Nations.

    International Law states that boundary changes must be made among all concerned parties; and a unilateral declaration by one party has no effect. So, when in 1949, Afghanistan’s “Loya Jirga” (Grand Council) declared the Durand Line Agreement invalid, it was considered a unilateral declaration, and therefore, could not be enforced. Furthermore, Durand Line, like virtually any international boundaries, has no expiration date, nor is there any mention of such in the Durand Line Agreement, which is contrary to the popular beliefs of certain Afghan scholars that the Agreement lapsed in 1993 which is after a hundred years of its signing.

    To this date, the relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan are characterized by rivalry, suspicion and resentment. The primary cause of this hostility rests in the debate about the validity of the Durand Line Agreement. But, so far, it appears that Pakistan’s position in this debate is legally correct, and the Government in Afghanistan has never challenged Pakistan in the International Court of Justice.

    BALOCH-BRITISH RELATIONS

    In 1839, when the British army advanced through Balochistan towards Afghanistan, they battled with the Baloch for the first time. During this conflict, 400 Baloch were killed along with Mehrab Khan (ruler of Balochistan), and the British took 2,000 Baloch prisoners of war. After recognizing Mehrab Khan’s young son, Nasir Khan II, as his successor, the Baloch and British signed their first treaty in 1841 that dealt with “Military Offensive and Defensive” matters. The British vacated Balochistan after the treaty was signed, and until 1854, there were no major diplomatic interactions between the Baloch and the British.

    On May 14th, 1854, a new Treaty was signed which annulled the 1841 Treaty. The new Treaty focused on “Alliance, Defensive and Offensive” matters. It also demanded the Baloch rulers to oppose all enemies of the British government; required British consent prior to any Baloch ruler could negotiate with any other state; and it permitted the British to station troops within selected parts of Balochistan.

    When the Baloch ruler broke certain provisions of the 1854 Treaty, diplomatic relations between Balochistan and British were discontinued in 1874. But, after two years, in 1876 the Treaty of 1854 was rectified with minor modifications allowing the British government to mediate any Baloch tribal disputes, and lease Quetta valley to establish a military cantonment. Although the Baloch ruler’s writ still ran over Balochistan, but now it was under the watchful eye of a British Indian government.

    From 1890 to 1891, to contain the Pashtun tribes of the Suleman Mountains from conducting border raids, the British carried out a series of military expeditions that resulted in the occupation of Zhob valley. Soon afterwards, they constructed a cantonment at Fort Sandeman along with extensions of a line of outposts.

    In 1893, serious differences arose between the ruler of Balochistan, Mir Khodadad Khan and the British. Soon after, on instigation of the British, Mir Mahmud Khan deposed his father and became the new ruler of Balochistan in November 1893. By July 1899, the Baloch administration had negotiated perpetual lease and transfer of management to British agency of the Nushki district and Niabat with all rights, jurisdiction and administrative power, in lieu of perpetual rent. This secured direct British control of the great highway connecting Quetta to Taftan. This arrangement prevailed till August 1947 when British India was dissolved.


    SOVEREIGNTY OF BALOCHISTAN


    On August 11, 1947, the British acceded control of Balochistan to the ruler of Balochistan, His Highness Mir Ahmad Yar Khan - the Khan of Kalat. The Khan immediately declared the independence of Balochistan, and Mohammad Ali Jinnah signed the proclamation of Balochistan’s sovereignty under the Khan.

    The New York Times reported on August 12, 1947: “Under the agreement, Pakistan recognizes Kalat as an independent sovereign state with a status different from that of the Indian States. An announcement from New Delhi said that Kalat, Moslem State in Baluchistan, has reached an agreement with Pakistan for free flow of communications and commerce, and would negotiate for decisions on defense, external affairs and communications.” The next day, the NY Times even printed a map of the world showing Balochistan as a fully independent country.

    According to the Indian Independence Act 1947, all treaties and agreements between the British Government and the rulers of States were terminated as of August 15, 1947. On that day, the Khan addressed a large gathering in Kalat and formally declared the full independence of Balochistan, and proclaimed the 15th day of August a day of celebration. The Khan formed the lower and upper house of Kalat Assembly, and during the first meeting of the Lower House in early September 1947, the Assembly confirmed the independence of Balochistan.

    Jinnah tried to persuade the Khan to join Pakistan, but the Khan and both Houses of the Kalat Assembly refused. The Pakistani government took an aggressive stance against Balochistan, and in March 1948, the Pakistani armed forces started their operation against the Balochistan government. They invaded Balochistan on April 15th, 1948, and imprisoned all members of the Kalat Assembly.


    LEGALITY OF THE DURAND LINE AGREEMENT


    Throughout the period of British rule of India, the British never occupied Balochistan. There were treaties and lease agreements between the two sovereign states, but neither state invaded the other. Although the treaties signed between British India and Balochistan provided many concessions to the British, but none of the treaties permitted the British to demark the boundaries of Balochistan without the consent of the Baloch rulers.

    The Durand Line Agreement of 1893 divides boundaries between three sovereign countries, namely Afghanistan, Balochistan and British India. According to International Law, all affected parties are required to agree to any changes in demarking their common borders. In reality, the Durand Line Agreement was a trilateral agreement and it legally required the participation and signatures of all three countries. But, the Agreement was drawn as a bilateral agreement between Afghanistan and British India only, and it intentionally excluded Balochistan. Hence, under the rules of demarking boundaries of the International Law, the Agreement was in error, and thus, it was null and void as soon as it was signed.

    The British, under false pretenses, assured the Afghan rulers that Balochistan was part of British India, and therefore, they were not required to have the consent of anyone from Balochistan to agree on demarking borders. Meanwhile, the British kept the Baloch rulers in the dark about the Durand Line Agreement to avoid any complications. This policy helped the British to concentrate on fortifying their military positions in the region without causing any tensions between Afghanistan and Balochistan about demarking their boundary lines, otherwise this could have resulted in a war between Afghanistan and Balochistan.

    To ascertain that Balochistan and Afghanistan were not discussing the legality of the Durand Line Agreement among themselves, the British continued to reaffirm the Durand Line Agreement by each of the successive Afghan rulers who followed His Highness, Amir Abdur Rahman Khan. King Habibullah (1901-19), King Amanullah (1919-29), King Nadir Shah (1929-1933), and King Zahir Shah (1933-1973) reaffirmed the Agreement during their reign.


    A FACADE


    The British ruled parts of Afghanistan without any legal authority, but through treacherous use of a piece of paper, the Durand Line Agreement, which did not have any legal standing in any court of law. As long as the British kept Afghanistan and Balochistan in the dark and apart from each other to discuss the Agreement, the British could continue to rule Afghan territory.

    But, in 1947, the British Indian government was dissolved, and hence, there was no reason for the British to continue this façade. But, Mohammad Ali Jinnah and his legal team immediately found out after Pakistan’s independence that the Durand Line Agreement was not a legally admissible/binding document. To continue the illegal occupation of territories belonging to Afghanistan, it was important for Pakistan to keep the flaw in the Agreement a secret. But, the dilemma was that Balochistan was an independent country, and one day the truth might be reveled to Afghanistan about the Agreement. This truth could result in Pakistan losing its Pashtun dominated areas to Afghanistan.

    It was very important for Pakistan to either annex or invade Balochistan to continue with their illegal occupation of Afghan territories. When Jinnah failed to convince the Baloch government to annex with Pakistan on basis of the two sovereign states being predominantly Muslim countries, he ordered his armed forces to invade Balochistan and, under duress, forced the His Highness, the Khan of Kalat to sign legal documents to merge Balochistan with Pakistan. This simple act of aggression against a sovereign nation assured Pakistan that their secret about the Durand Line Agreement would remain intact.

    Once Balochistan was secured, the Pakistanis deceptively used the law of uti possidetis juris to their advantage and continued occupation of territories belonging to Afghanistan.


    CURRENT AFFAIRS


    Pakistan is in illegal occupation of territories belonging to Afghanistan under false pretenses. To maintain its current territorial integrity, it is in Pakistan’s interest to have a weak and destabilized government in Afghanistan so there is no one to challenge the authenticity of the Durand Line Agreement. Therefore, Pakistani intelligence agencies have provided shelter for members of Al-Qaeda and Taleban who are committing acts of terrorism within Afghanistan to destabilize the democratically elected government of President Hamid Karzai.

    US armed forces in Afghanistan are eradicating remnants of terrorists from Taleban era. The Americans are also helping to rebuild Afghanistan and strengthen the democratic process of government to get a strong foothold in the country. But, Pakistan has waged a proxy war against the United States, and continues to terrorize the Afghan nation in hopes to frustrate the US to leave Afghanistan and weaken the Afghan government.

    Meanwhile, the Baloch have launched their “War of Independence” in Iran and Pakistan. Three tribal Sardars (chieftains) have united their forces and are engaged in a guerilla war against the well-equipped Pakistani armed forces. The Baloch freedom movement is gaining momentum, and people from all walks of like are joining in droves.


    SOLUTION


    Afghanistan and Balochistan should form a legal team to challenge the illegal occupation of Afghan territories and Balochistan by Pakistan in the International Court of Justice. Once the Durand Line Agreement is declared illegal, it will result in the return of Pakistan-occupied territories back to Afghanistan. Also, Balochistan will be declared a country that was forcibly invaded through use of force by the Pakistanis; and with international assistance, Balochistan can regain its independence. It is the right time to act now because the US and Allied forces in Afghanistan are positioned to facilitate the enforcement of the Court’s judgment.

    After Pakistan vacates territories belonging to Afghanistan and Balochistan, a new boarder should be demarked amicably to determine Baloch dominated areas to become the new Balochistan, and Pashtun dominated areas to be merged into Afghanistan. And, with the help of the US and Allied forces, the Afghans and the Baloch forces can flush out members of Al-Qaeda and Talebans from their respective countries.

    A wise observer once said, “Pakistan is a completely superfluous and artificially created spot on the world map that has become a breeding ground for extremism, and trouble that would be best done away with.”



    Mir Azaad Khan Baloch



    In 1948 Pakistan began the arrest, imprisonment and execution of prominent NWFP Pashtun leaders who did not want to be ruled by Pakistan. Also Pakistan does not have any educational, social and economic plans for the NWFP. Children of Pashtun are thought urdu in schools and businesses are forced to deal with Karachi so that Pashuns of the NWFP never reach powerful status.







    Source:Afghanland.com Afghanistan Imaginary Durand Line




    Even Adobe Photoshop can't change me.

    A line[Durrand line] of hatred that raised a wall between the two brothers -Hamid Karzai

    For generations, the Hindus of India prayed for deliverance from "the venom of the cobra, the teeth of the tiger and the vengeance of the Afghan."


    The men of Kábul and Khilj also went home; and whenever they were questioned about the Musulmáns of the Kohistán (the mountains), and how matters stood there, they said, "Don't call it Kohistán, but Afghánistán; for there is nothing there but Afgháns and disturbances." Thus it is clear that for this reason the people of the country call their home in their own language Afghánistán, and themselves Afgháns. The people of India call them Patán; but the reason for this is not known. But it occurs to me, that when, under the rule of Muhammadan sovereigns, Musulmáns first came to the city of Patná, and dwelt there, the people of India (for that reason) called them Patáns—but God knows!

    -Ferishta, 1560–1620

  • #2
    This is awesome. Keep it up.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think we should accept the bitter reality, afghans should struggle for grabbing land of pakhtunkhwa but for instance durand line should not be voilated, it is an international border.

      Comment


      • #4
        ^^Why should we accept it? Our elders fought and sacrificed a lot. Why don't you tell Pakistan to forget Kashmir, or arabs to forget Israel.
        http://i29.tinypic.com/2a6j8jm.gif

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Luffy View Post
          I think we should accept the bitter reality, afghans should struggle for grabbing land of pakhtunkhwa but for instance durand line should not be voilated, it is an international border.
          arey bhai saab bas be karo
          tusey yee kya howa hay?ye kya bol raha hey tu koch samaj me nahi aata.

          Comment


          • #6
            For Punjabis and their co-ethnithnists, it is an International border. For Pashtuns, it is a divide imposed on them by colonial powers.

            Comment


            • #7
              We as Afghan citizens do not recognize it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Yes, as particular sects of Afghan citizens you don't have to recognize reality, but the Pakhtuns of Pakistan do, Pakistan does, as does the world, and even a large number of your own afghanistanis.

                Comment


                • #9
                  LOL We just lost another Water line to Iran yesterday, it goes from Badghis- Northern Herat into Iran a man made canal by Karzai to make Iran happy. Afghanistan being a mountainous area produces alot of water but yet our own farmers still suffer. Why? Lack of Government. When People tried to make their own canals, the Government step in. The Question is Where is our Water. Why is it going free to Iran? One of many questions, but hold on Our country is being sold inch by inch as we type. A weak Government would never allow us to be united with our blood brothers on the other side of Durand Line. That's my opinion. Like many Afghans I too would continue to dream destruction of another Berlin wall (Durand Line).
                  Happy Ramadan everyone. [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dym5AVwvc7c&feature=related]‫نشيد (زين الشهور) كااااملة || Zain Ramadan Nasheed-Full Version‬‎ - YouTube[/url]

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by fzpz View Post
                    Yes, as particular sects of Afghan citizens you don't have to recognize reality, but the Pakhtuns of Pakistan do, Pakistan does, as does the world, and even a large number of your own afghanistanis.
                    My dear lets put it this way put away your hate-love and everything in between politic, and anti-Politics.
                    Let put your words this way. Any Pakistani would of recognize Pakistani border. So now who is Pakistani? and who is not? Right now Pakistan lost more soldiers than India could imagine to kill and 10 times the total number of American soldiers lost in afghanistan, fighting who? LOL their own Pakistanis? Yes Good idea lets call Obama and bomb State of New york! LOL Makes sense? It doesn't hey! after all New yorkers are proud Americans so why should America bomb them.

                    Afghanistanis LOL
                    Happy Ramadan everyone. [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dym5AVwvc7c&feature=related]‫نشيد (زين الشهور) كااااملة || Zain Ramadan Nasheed-Full Version‬‎ - YouTube[/url]

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by fzpz View Post
                      Yes, as particular sects of Afghan citizens you don't have to recognize reality, but the Pakhtuns of Pakistan do, Pakistan does, as does the world, and even a large number of your own afghanistanis.
                      khaana za da pashtunkhwa yamm woss tsa waee?
                      http://i29.tinypic.com/2a6j8jm.gif

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Luffy View Post
                        I think we should accept the bitter reality, afghans should struggle for grabbing land of pakhtunkhwa but for instance durand line should not be voilated, it is an international border.
                        If anything, your logic applies to Pakistan. Read what it did to Baluchistan. The New York Times even published a newspaper article showing Baluchistan as an independent state. After they turned down the request of Jinnah, they were invaded and all it's parliament members were locked up.

                        What do you think of that Luffy?

                        Originally posted by fzpz View Post
                        Yes, as particular sects of Afghan citizens you don't have to recognize reality, but the Pakhtuns of Pakistan do, Pakistan does, as does the world, and even a large number of your own afghanistanis.

                        Leave your emotions to the side, and try to refute the article. If Pukhtuns of Pakistan would have recognized the "imaginary line" they would have not opposed Musharraf when he decided to make a fenced border. With all due respect, do some research and study the response of ANP.

                        Here, I will just give you an excerpt:
                        "Awami National Party (ANP) president Asfandyar Wali Khan has asked the Gen. Musharraf-led government to mount a sincere effort at discouraging interference in Afghanistan and shun the controversial plan for fencing and mining the border. In an exclusive interview with The Frontier Post on Friday, the nationalist leader denounced the border-fencing idea as a sinister conspiracy to further divide Pakhtuns living on both sides of the Durand Line. Islamabad was not sincerely helping its neighbour in the restoration of peace and stability, he believed, saying the whole global fraternity was aware of the Pakistani leadership’s duplicity in this regard. “By openly throwing his weight behind Taliban and bracketing Pakhtuns with them in his speeches, Gen. Musharraf is brazenly trying to deceive the world community,"

                        Source:http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News....cat=ts&nid=190
                        Even Adobe Photoshop can't change me.

                        A line[Durrand line] of hatred that raised a wall between the two brothers -Hamid Karzai

                        For generations, the Hindus of India prayed for deliverance from "the venom of the cobra, the teeth of the tiger and the vengeance of the Afghan."


                        The men of Kábul and Khilj also went home; and whenever they were questioned about the Musulmáns of the Kohistán (the mountains), and how matters stood there, they said, "Don't call it Kohistán, but Afghánistán; for there is nothing there but Afgháns and disturbances." Thus it is clear that for this reason the people of the country call their home in their own language Afghánistán, and themselves Afgháns. The people of India call them Patán; but the reason for this is not known. But it occurs to me, that when, under the rule of Muhammadan sovereigns, Musulmáns first came to the city of Patná, and dwelt there, the people of India (for that reason) called them Patáns—but God knows!

                        -Ferishta, 1560–1620

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Admin Khan View Post
                          If anything, your logic applies to Pakistan. Read what it did to Baluchistan. The New York Times even published a newspaper article showing Baluchistan as an independent state. After they turned down the request of Jinnah, they were invaded and all it's parliament members were locked up.

                          What do you think of that Luffy?




                          Leave your emotions to the side, and try to refute the article. If Pukhtuns of Pakistan would have recognized the "imaginary line" they would have not opposed Musharraf when he decided to make a fenced border. With all due respect, do some research and study the response of ANP.

                          Here, I will just give you an excerpt:
                          "Awami National Party (ANP) president Asfandyar Wali Khan has asked the Gen. Musharraf-led government to mount a sincere effort at discouraging interference in Afghanistan and shun the controversial plan for fencing and mining the border. In an exclusive interview with The Frontier Post on Friday, the nationalist leader denounced the border-fencing idea as a sinister conspiracy to further divide Pakhtuns living on both sides of the Durand Line. Islamabad was not sincerely helping its neighbour in the restoration of peace and stability, he believed, saying the whole global fraternity was aware of the Pakistani leadership’s duplicity in this regard. “By openly throwing his weight behind Taliban and bracketing Pakhtuns with them in his speeches, Gen. Musharraf is brazenly trying to deceive the world community,"

                          Source:http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News....cat=ts&nid=190

                          Salaam Khan saaib.

                          I saw this posting you made:

                          http://www.pashtunforums.com/politic...nd-line-10830/

                          I think it was excellent and was a unifier post. The post you make above conflicts with the spirit in that prior posting. This is why Pashtun nationalists always lose in the end. Your strategy is well meant, but executed incorrectly. Instead of mobilizing all Pashtun factions, Asfandiar alienates those that Matthew Hoh describes, and what I encountered on the ground in Kandahar, as a full third of the populace:

                          http://www.thenation.com/article/157...-insider-talks

                          Here is what I mean. You recognized and pointed out that Dr. Rauf's article discusses how the Taliban refused to recognize the durand line. Inherently, we Pashtoons want to be as one and the Taliban themselves made practical measures and open overtures in this regard.

                          Why do the nationalists not adopt the strategy of Ahmad Shah Abdali and other Pashtun leaders? Weren't they excellent models of military prowess? They understood what Pakistan's government and the Saudi's have understood for decades now: you harnass the Pashtun's capabilities by appealing to his nang and his religious sensibilities. Ahmad Shah Baba obviously did not set up a complete shariah law caliphate... his government was tribal and jirga based... yet both he and Mir Wais knew the power of the fatwa. He gave public respect to Pir Sabir Shah who basically anointed him King, but still did what he thought was best for his country. It was Mir Wais Nika that secured the fatwa from Arabia during hajj to overthrow the Iranian oppressors, yet the Ghilzai kingdom of Isfahan was not all shariah law based.

                          In this same way, utilize the mobilizing aspects of pashtun nang and religious devotion that your own enemies have stolen from you. You have a greater right to it than anyone based on the sacrifices we Pashtuns have made for our religion for generations. If you change the language of your conversation and quit demanding that pashtun nationalism be automatically tied to secularism and any other western associated ism, you build a bigger tent that is inclusive of ALL the pashtuns. You proved this point in that prior posting.

                          If you cannot do this then you lose 33.3% of the population. That 33.3% is usually well armed, very motivated, and willing to sacrifice himself against any threats. He is not an ideologue, he is a man in the field with practical sensibilities. You can become a force multiplier if you win him over and even do the general region some good if show the Pashtun what even Abdul Salam Zaeef realized when he referred to Pakistan as "able to even milk a bull" in its duplicity.

                          However, it does not stop there. You do not focus all the energies on simply freedom from a single country or allow a single nation to seize on the narrative that you are "out to get it." If you do this, you will push the Khattak with lands in Karrak into thinking the Abdaliyaan and the Khiljiaan want his land and the Yusufzai is colluding with him to get at it. He notes that the language is directed at what he was raised to believe is his country and nationality. Instead, incorporate him by telling him, it is not simply Pakistan, it is Iran, America, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan... anyone who dares to occupy us or misuse and abuse us does us injustice. Moreover, the narrative ought to be that injustice is against Islamic sensibilities.

                          Once we free ourselves of ALL oppressors then we can figure out what role culture, deen, education, etc play in the scheme of things.
                          "2 crackheads don't become any better or stronger by sharing the same crack pipe." - Greatest PF quote

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            NO TO THE DURRAND LINE, if there is a pashtunistan, if abolishing the durrand line means being under the government of karzai then hell no, its just as bad as the pakistani currupt dogs in the leading chairs.
                            ----------

                            *You cannot climb the ladder of success with your hands in your pockets*

                            Originally posted by Karachi
                            like I said, there was only one reason I pretended to be pathan, for a girl, who was from Afghan forums and also registered here

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by BarakzaiAbdali View Post
                              Salaam Khan saaib.
                              Walaikum Salam Abdali sahab, singaya? I hope you are in good health.
                              I saw this posting you made:



                              I think it was excellent and was a unifier post. The post you make above conflicts with the spirit in that prior posting.
                              I would like an elaboration on the above. When I made those threads, my point was very general. I don't endorse the Taliban, nor do I endorse ANP. All I am attempting to say is, we Pashtuns do not recognize the imaginary line. Clean and simple. I did not write the above, nor did I claim it's the gospel.
                              This is why Pashtun nationalists always lose in the end. Your strategy is well meant, but executed incorrectly.
                              Respected wrora, I would appreciate it if you can elaborate on the claim made above.
                              Instead of mobilizing all Pashtun factions, Asfandiar alienates those that Matthew Hoh describes, and what I encountered on the ground in Kandahar, as a full third of the populace:

                              http://www.thenation.com/article/157...-insider-talks
                              I don't agree with everything Asfandyaar does, nor do I agree with everything Karzai does. However, if they say something I like, I will respect it. If you take a look at my sig, despite Karzai being a puppet, he said the border divided brothers, which is why I have it in my sig. Does that mean I endorse Karzai? Of course not. It would be outrageous for anyone to assert such a claim. Same goes with Asfandyaar, I liked how the ANP opposed Musharraf, and that is all I mentioned. No where on PF, have I boasted on how ANP, Taliban or Karzai is the solution to our problems.

                              Here is what I mean. You recognized and pointed out that Dr. Rauf's article discusses how the Taliban refused to recognize the durand line. Inherently, we Pashtoons want to be as one and the Taliban themselves made practical measures and open overtures in this regard.
                              My point with that article is, despite people saying Taliban are the product of ISI, even they refused to recognize the imaginary line. It's sort of a general point I am making here, the point is quite simple. I am simply stating the We, as Pashtuns, do not recognize the line. We are 1 people, we share the same blood, culture and history. We won't tolerate a fenced border that will divide families.
                              In this sam way, utilize the mobilizing aspects of pashtun nang and religious devotion that your own enemies have stolen from you. You have a greater right to it than anyone based on the sacrifices we Pashtuns have made for our religion for generations. If you change the language of your conversation and quit demanding that pashtun nationalism be automatically tied to secularism and any other western associated ism, you build a bigger tent that is inclusive of ALL the pashtuns. You proved this point in that prior posting.
                              Do you mind showing where I proved the above? I never mentioned anything about nationalism wrora. All I said was, we, as Pashtuns, don't recognize the border.

                              Once we free ourselves of ALL oppressors then we can figure out what role culture, deen, education, etc play in the scheme of things.
                              Ameen.

                              My point by posting the article is as follow:
                              We are Pashtuns, we do not recognize the border. Plain and simple. No where did I claim to pledge allegiance to ANP, Taliban or any other political movement. I speak in general terms, I did not ask anyone to pledge allegiance to the Taliban for not recognizing the border, nor did I ask people to worship ANP for resisting Musharraf. It's a claim that speaks about the main principle i.e Pashtuns, no matter what kind they come in, oppose this line. If, of course, they are Pashtun to begin with. When I post articles, It does not mean I agree with what it says, sometimes it can be food to chew on, or something we can offer our dos pesos too. My posts and articles have a bigger picture, the picture being dividing Me, and Manzareh is impossible. We share the same blood, history, and culture.
                              Even Adobe Photoshop can't change me.

                              A line[Durrand line] of hatred that raised a wall between the two brothers -Hamid Karzai

                              For generations, the Hindus of India prayed for deliverance from "the venom of the cobra, the teeth of the tiger and the vengeance of the Afghan."


                              The men of Kábul and Khilj also went home; and whenever they were questioned about the Musulmáns of the Kohistán (the mountains), and how matters stood there, they said, "Don't call it Kohistán, but Afghánistán; for there is nothing there but Afgháns and disturbances." Thus it is clear that for this reason the people of the country call their home in their own language Afghánistán, and themselves Afgháns. The people of India call them Patán; but the reason for this is not known. But it occurs to me, that when, under the rule of Muhammadan sovereigns, Musulmáns first came to the city of Patná, and dwelt there, the people of India (for that reason) called them Patáns—but God knows!

                              -Ferishta, 1560–1620

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X