Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan's Idea Of Pashtoonistan

[ComradePashtun]

May be you are right. It is not for me to dispute it.

[Albani_Rahmat_Kabulzada]

Shehbaz Khan,

I respect you and what you wish for yourself. But I would also not buy your BS which you want to serve as propaganda and loyalty-pledging to Panjab. It does raise questions why he was jailed despite that he swore his allegiance to Pakistan and why he wished to be burried in Jalalabad. Why would I make a wish to be burried in Peshwar?

What I gather is that may be he did want to have his own Pashtunistan but he knew the thin ice he had to walk on since he lacked the necessary support within Pashtuns of KP. That is why all the misries he went through, you and our likes hardly shed a tear or fought to free him from his pains when was chained by the prodominantly Panjabi establishment. He was a man of his era, his contemporary ANP is not worth a penny but a corrupt clique, from what I know.

Why is it propaganda for Panjab if Pathans want to live in Pakistan and do not want to join any other state?? I still did not understand this logic. That´s the Pakistani Pashtuns own choice.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Panjab is the major power broker in the state, so they have the most to lose if the state goes south. If anything they attach their identity quite in line with Pakistan, which is not the case with other ethnic groups.

About Pakistani Pashtuns having a choice, well that would have been a good point had they really been given that option. However Pashtuns east of the durand were denied or given a *******ized option in the "referendum"...then again the whole idea of this country has been played around with including when jinnah lala was running it.

[ComradePashtun]

Which is what it is Kadozada.

[graveyardofempires]

lol at phatan traitors!
dont worry waziris will teach you a good lesson.

[Toramana]

Please listen to the talk by Asfandiyar Wali Khan in the following clip to Pashtun literary figures. Watch the clip from point 33:15 onwards especially at 33:59 when he talks about his exchanges with Sardar Ahmad Ali and General Pervez Musharaf in the cotext of Pakhtunkhwa renaming.

http://amntv.org/index.php?option=co...id=71&Itemid=2

[Toramana]

Who didn't swear allegiance to Pakistan and what that practically means? It is said Shiekh Mujibur Rahman and Mualavi Fazli Haq were such staunch Muslim Leaguers and Pakistanis that before partition i.e., 1946 and 1947, they used to campaign for Pakistan by travelling between Dhaka and Chitagang on their bicycles to mobalise masses in support for Muslim League and Pakistan (with Pakistani flags hoisted on their bicycles). Mualavi Fazli Haq is credited with seconding Pakistan resolution which envisioned Pakistan as a confederal state where the constituent units would maintain their autonomy.

The same Maulavi Fazli Haq declared in 1960 that Pakistan resolution is burried under the debris of history.


Rather, Pakistan owes its existence to the struggle of Bangalis who waged freedom movement for almost 200 years and who sent Jannah and Liaqat Ali Khan to the legislative assembly of Pakistan in 1947 because both those leaders had left their constituencies in India.


And who can't remember the "public" loyalty of Sindhi leaders e.g., GM Sayed and Baluch stalwarts like Attaullah Mengal, Bugti, etc. to Pakistan who swore allegiance to Pakistan in the parliament many times? But what their public and official stances meant in real sense? One can judge well by looking at the views and struggle of these leaders.


Rest, as for Bacha Khan, one should look at it in the context of global politics and local conditions at that time. Pakistan at that time was a member of SEATO and CENTO and was totally supported by the West especially Britian as a bulwark against Russian expansion eastward. Pakistan was considered a vital organ of West's global strategy against communism. And the Western alliance was so formidable that it was almost impossible for any nationalist struggle to succeed. Even Afghanistan was helpless before that.


Also when Bacha Khan took the oath of loyalty, that was according to the spirit of Pakistan resolution in 1940 which envisioned Pakistan as a confederal state. That oath was conditional in the sense that Bacha Khan expected all Pashto-speaking areas to be united in an autonomous province and given autonony. Still Jannah asked Bacha Khan to dismantle Khdai Khidmatgar party and merge it with Muslim League (shame ). Still, Bacha Khan and his family along with thousands of Khudai Khidmatgars were imprisoned and kept in jails for almost 7 years. They were tortured and hundreds of Khudai Khidmatgars died in prisons due to persecution and torture.

One should also take into account the boycot of the referendom by Khudai Khidmatgars on the pretext that Pashtuns were not given a third option in the referendom.

The fact is Pakistan today is nothing but a Punjab-cenetered army that is keeping a multi-ethnic country united through bruteforce and propaganda dissimenated by media and imparted through curriculum and educational system of Pakistan. Take that off and every body will see how much are Baluchis, Pashtuns, Sindhis, etc. are loyal to Pakistan and how long Pakistan lasts.

[graveyardofempires]

I was very happy of hear about this Bacha Khan. He is like Gandhi.

he was no where like gandhi

he didnt serve the british
he didnt serve the british army

bacha khan never served the british raj

so Bacha Khan was your king!

[Michin Khel]

lol at phatan traitors!
dont worry waziris will teach you a good lesson.

Most of my close friends are wazirs, they dont talk of teaching me a lesson...i have even enjoyed hospitality of one of my wazir friend in his waziri village domail for two days...wazirs are not what you think of them...

[Shehbaz Khan]

Please listen to the talk by Asfandiyar Wali Khan in the following clip to Pashtun literary figures. Watch the clip from point 33:15 onwards especially at 33:59 when he talks about his exchanges with Sardar Ahmad Ali and General Pervez Musharaf in the cotext of Pakhtunkhwa renaming.

http://amntv.org/index.php?option=co...id=71&Itemid=2

So what's there that we aren't expecting? You say ethnic Afghans I agree You say Afghan Nationals i.e., living in Afghanistan I've got a problem
Plus, later he talks about the Province name, I have got no issue with it, but was this really an issue? There are many other problems that needs his attention than this

[Shehbaz Khan]

Who didn't swear allegiance to Pakistan and what that practically means? It is said Shiekh Mujibur Rahman and Mualavi Fazli Haq were such staunch Muslim Leaguers and Pakistanis that before partition i.e., 1946 and 1947, they used to campaign for Pakistan by travelling between Dhaka and Chitagang on their bicycles to mobalise masses in support for Muslim League and Pakistan (with Pakistani flags hoisted on their bicycles). Mualavi Fazli Haq is credited with seconding Pakistan resolution which envisioned Pakistan as a confederal state where the constituent units would maintain their autonomy.

The same Maulavi Fazli Haq declared in 1960 that Pakistan resolution is burried under the debris of history.


Rather, Pakistan owes its existence to the struggle of Bangalis who waged freedom movement for almost 200 years and who sent Jannah and Liaqat Ali Khan to the legislative assembly of Pakistan in 1947 because both those leaders had left their constituencies in India.


And who can't remember the "public" loyalty of Sindhi leaders e.g., GM Sayed and Baluch stalwarts like Attaullah Mengal, Bugti, etc. to Pakistan who swore allegiance to Pakistan in the parliament many times? But what their public and official stances meant in real sense? One can judge well by looking at the views and struggle of these leaders.

Nothing to do with the topic

Rest, as for Bacha Khan, one should look at it in the context of global politics and local conditions at that time. Pakistan at that time was a member of SEATO and CENTO and was totally supported by the West especially Britian as a bulwark against Russian expansion eastward. Pakistan was considered a vital organ of West's global strategy against communism. And the Western alliance was so formidable that it was almost impossible for any nationalist struggle to succeed. Even Afghanistan was helpless before that.


Also when Bacha Khan took the oath of loyalty, that was according to the spirit of Pakistan resolution in 1940 which envisioned Pakistan as a confederal state. That oath was conditional in the sense that Bacha Khan expected all Pashto-speaking areas to be united in an autonomous province and given autonony. Still Jannah asked Bacha Khan to dismantle Khdai Khidmatgar party and merge it with Muslim League (shame ). Still, Bacha Khan and his family along with thousands of Khudai Khidmatgars were imprisoned and kept in jails for almost 7 years. They were tortured and hundreds of Khudai Khidmatgars died in prisons due to persecution and torture.

Bacha Khan took oath Said Sealed and his idea of Pakhtunistan is there

One should also take into account the boycot of the referendom by Khudai Khidmatgars on the pretext that Pashtuns were not given a third option in the referendom.

That was before the creation of Pakistan. Re-Read Yousufzai Pakhtun's post

The fact is Pakistan today is nothing but a Punjab-cenetered army that is keeping a multi-ethnic country united through bruteforce and propaganda dissimenated by media and imparted through curriculum and educational system of Pakistan. Take that off and every body will see how much are Baluchis, Pashtuns, Sindhis, etc. are loyal to Pakistan and how long Pakistan lasts.

Out of Topic

[BLS_1919v2.0]

It is Shehbaz, I don't know why you don't see (or choose not to). To swear allegiance doesn't necessarily mean you are an affirmed loyal individual. You may accept it and work within it's system. It may be the case that later on Bacha Khan grew wary of it and had other ideas Allah u aalim. In the bacha Khan documentary, Begum asked him about his burial in Jalalabad and he replied "One day they will be one" (I am paraphrasing of course). Now does that sound like total loyalty? I don't think so. However let us say, he did swear his loyalty, now what does that say about Pakistan? About Jinnah? About the early so-called honest "pakistanis"? They were the ones who jailed him, abused him and now all of a sudden Bacha Khan is given a favourable light. Lol.

[Shehbaz Khan]

^ Ah, Irony !! They didn't trust him.

=) When they will be one, we will see Right now they aren't and are in no condition to be one

[BLS_1919v2.0]

How is that Ironic? I am just posted what he said, just to put it in context, what the future holds I don't know and can't predict.

[Toramana]

Nothing to do with the topic

It is relevant in the sense that it draws an analogy between different nationalist struggles that confronted the same situation as how they made compromises and had to pledge allegiance to the idea of a confederal Pakistan but ultimately had to go with the general trend of history i.e., a synthetic and unnatural nation and imposed identity cannot be sustained for longer until an equitable and democartic dispensation is in place that secures the rights of all people and communities.

Same is the case with all leaders who took oath (not willingly) . Political compromises and tactical decisions and moves are an integral part of nationalist movements and struggles. I hope you are able to understand this point.

The rest what you say is just mandane indicating how typical Pakistani thinking could be.