What's new

Indian View about Wakhan Corridor and Border with Afghanistan - 2019

Its whatever... But what I have realised with some members here who belong to a certain faith jump up and criticise Afghanistan but don't do so when the heat is on Iran. I won't name those members but they know who they are. And in a way I am a bit jealous that Iran has such influence within Pakistan while we Afghans don't.

Do you know how many Pakhtuns or Pashtuns there are in Pakistan?

Imran Khan is Pashtun, from the Niazi tribe and Sherman Khel sub-tribe. I think Pashtuns are generally treated well in Pakistan. There will be exceptions.

Afghanistan's disagreement is regarding the Durand Line. Also, allegations of intervening in internal matters. These are different matters.

I reside in England, UK. My family are from Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Some centuries ago we came from Afghanistan. Pakistanis treat me well. Alhamdulillah.
 
Last edited:
.
nd in a way I am a bit jealous that Iran has such influence within Pakistan while we Afghans don't.
Quite frankly, a strong Afghan-Pakistan relationship makes a lot more sense than a strong Iran-Pakistan relationship. The Iranians are more tied to their 'Persian Civilization' narrative, and will never really accept anyone else as equals - you're either Persian or you're not and there is a degree of arrogance there. Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the other hand, share ethnic, cultural, religious and historical ties that are much stronger.

But that is also why you'll find many Pakistanis extremely angry at Afghans, because it seems that Afghanistan has wasted over 7 decades trying to undermine Pakistan over the Durand Line instead of building stronger cultural and economic bonds. The whole Pashtunistan business & claiming Pakistani territory till the Indus ... the Iranians have done nothing along those lines.

And would your anger towards a brother (Afghanistan) that betrayed you not be significantly more than the anger towards a 'stranger' (Iran)? Pakistan's relationship with Afghanistan is perceived as one of betrayal and wasted time. The two countries could have been so much stronger had Afghanistan accepted Pakistan after 1947 and built bridges and ties over our shared interests, culture and history.

Complete and utter nonsense.

India wanted an unconditional, unilateral withdrawal of all Pakistani military and para-military forces from J&K prior to conducting a plebiscite, a demand that was practically untenable and unrealistic both for Pakistan and most objective international observers - who in their right mind would trust one warring party to a territorial dispute to not simply take over territory vacated by another?

The initial UNSC resolution did not infact even cover the withdrawal of Pakistani troops. The subsequent UNSC Resolutions did cover the withdrawal of Pakistani troops but tied any withdrawal to an agreement on demilitarization between Pakistan, India and the UN. Pakistan and the UN agreed to several proposals in multiple rounds of negotiations (with different UN appointed rapporteurs) but India rejected all of them.

So, in fact, it was not Pakistan that 'avoided the plebiscite', but India, with it's unreasonable demands that Pakistan unilaterally vacate all territory in J&K and basically 'trust' India to hold up it's end of the bargain, and, as I pointed out above, even the UNSC did not agree with India's demands.
 
.
You deliberately skipped my question and instead tagged me in something else but I will take you back for sometime. Let's repeat what you said when someone said we should annex wakhan. You said we people of Kp won't allow that .

Here I ask WHY ? What's the issue ? Why won't we allow that to happen ? Sta da tror kor dy pakki sa ? Ka nya di da wakhan na rawada wa ? Q urta tree apni tue me Lena hy ?
I didn't tag you, I tagged Agnostic, your answer was in his quotation.
 
.
Quite frankly, a strong Afghan-Pakistan relationship makes a lot more sense than a strong Iran-Pakistan relationship. The Iranians are more tied to their 'Persian Civilization' narrative, and will never really accept anyone else as equals - you're either Persian or you're not and there is a degree of arrogance there. Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the other hand, share ethnic, cultural, religious and historical ties that are much stronger.

But that is also why you'll find many Pakistanis extremely angry at Afghans, because it seems that Afghanistan has wasted over 7 decades trying to undermine Pakistan over the Durand Line instead of building stronger cultural and economic bonds. The whole Pashtunistan business & claiming Pakistani territory till the Indus ... the Iranians have done nothing along those lines.

And would your anger towards a brother (Afghanistan) that betrayed you not be significantly more than the anger towards a 'stranger' (Iran)? Pakistan's relationship with Afghanistan is perceived as one of betrayal and wasted time. The two countries could have been so much stronger had Afghanistan accepted Pakistan after 1947 and built bridges and ties over our shared interests, culture and history.


Complete and utter nonsense.

India wanted an unconditional, unilateral withdrawal of all Pakistani military and para-military forces from J&K prior to conducting a plebiscite, a demand that was practically untenable and unrealistic both for Pakistan and most objective international observers - who in their right mind would trust one warring party to a territorial dispute to not simply take over territory vacated by another?

The initial UNSC resolution did not infact even cover the withdrawal of Pakistani troops. The subsequent UNSC Resolutions did cover the withdrawal of Pakistani troops but tied any withdrawal to an agreement on demilitarization between Pakistan, India and the UN. Pakistan and the UN agreed to several proposals in multiple rounds of negotiations (with different UN appointed rapporteurs) but India rejected all of them.

So, in fact, it was not Pakistan that 'avoided the plebiscite', but India, with it's unreasonable demands that Pakistan unilaterally vacate all territory in J&K and basically 'trust' India to hold up it's end of the bargain, and, as I pointed out above, even the UNSC did not agree with India's demands.

Utter Nonsense to Who? You!- Nevermind.

Anyways when are you going to include the whole of J and K (The ones occupied by China as well)- Once that is done and you withdraw, India will take your consideration and get back to you on the Plebiscite.

Sorry UN has no say to direct India or Pakistan on this matter anymore (Its Bilateral)- The onus is now on Pakistan-otherwise status quo is good for India for now.
 
.
lets first point out the knowledge gap you have on history.
1. KP was a province of Afghanistan before Ranjit Singh occupied it when Pashtoon made him its caretaker, its the same thing as Pakistan asking for Kashmir.

.
Well founder of Afghan kingdom Ahmed shah Durrani aka Ahmed Khan Abdali born, raised and had family in Multan,Pakistan went down the hill captured Herat and adjacent areas.....If he was alive today he would rather prefer to live in gulgasht colony and see affairs of Afghanistan from home.. you want to live in the era of ranjit sngh you gotta be responded in teh same manner..
 
Last edited:
.
You deliberately skipped my question and instead tagged me in something else but I will take you back for sometime. Let's repeat what you said when someone said we should annex wakhan. You said we people of Kp won't allow that .

Here I ask WHY ? What's the issue ? Why won't we allow that to happen ? Sta da tror kor dy pakki sa ? Ka nya di da wakhan na rawada wa ? Q urta tree apni tue me Lena hy ?
daer kamakal yae? tala jawab darkol hum asae zanla kar katal di

Do you know how many Pakhtuns or Pashtuns there are in Pakistan?

Imran Khan is Pashtun, from the Niazi tribe and Sherman Khel sub-tribe. I think Pashtuns are generally treated well in Pakistan. There will be exceptions.

Afghanistan's disagreement is regarding the Durand Line. Also, allegations of intervening in internal matters. These are different matters.

I reside in England, UK. My family are from Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Some centuries ago we came from Afghanistan. Pakistanis treat me well. Alhamdulillah.
afghanis are also pashtoons.

daer kamakal yae? tala jawab darkol hum asae zanla kar katal di


afghanis are also pashtoons.
My problem here is pashtoon will be against pashtoon if we try to occupy wahkan
 
.
Utter Nonsense to Who? You!- Nevermind.

Anyways when are you going to include the whole of J and K (The ones occupied by China as well)- Once that is done and you withdraw, India will take your consideration and get back to you on the Plebiscite.

Sorry UN has no say to direct India or Pakistan on this matter anymore (Its Bilateral)- The onus is now on Pakistan-otherwise status quo is good for India for now.
daer kamakal yae? tala jawab darkol hum asae zanla kar katal di


afghanis are also pashtoons.

I stated Afghanistan in my post. But now there are Pashtuns or Pakhtuns residing in Afghanistan and Pakistan. My tribe pronounce it as "Ifghanistan". I like this pronunciation.
 
.
Utter Nonsense to Who? You!- Nevermind.
Utter nonsense based on the rebuttal I wrote. For more details read through the following threads instead of hijacking this one further:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-kashmir-resolutions-explanations.7904/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...agreement-sources.392233/page-10#post-7528125
Anyways when are you going to include the whole of J and K (The ones occupied by China as well)- Once that is done and you withdraw, India will take your consideration and get back to you on the Plebiscite.

Sorry UN has no say to direct India or Pakistan on this matter anymore (Its Bilateral)- The onus is now on Pakistan-otherwise status quo is good for India for now.
Once India agrees in principle to actually carry out a UN led plebiscite without asking the other warring parties to unilaterally vacate the disputed territory, the residents of the region (what few there are) under Chinese control can vote in said plebiscite as well. The UNSC Resolutions don't exclude that territory. This is yet another BS excuse promoted by the greedy, petty and insecure Indian State to continue it's occupation of J&K and atrocities on its people.

And the UNSC resolutions still apply because Simla clearly re-states the commitment of both India & Pakistan to the UN Charter (under which the UNSC Resolutions were passed) as well as also committing to any peaceful means of dispute resolution agreed to by both (which the UNSC Resolutions also are).

Finally, India's unprovoked attack on Balakot threw Simla in the garbage in any case since Balakot was certainly not a 'peaceful means of dispute resolution' agreed to by both parties to the agreement.

Any further discussion can occur on the threads I linked to.
 
.
Sorry UN has no say to direct India or Pakistan on this matter anymore (Its Bilateral)- The onus is now on Pakistan-otherwise status quo is good for India for now.
who told you that?
UN resolutions supercede every bilateral agreement.
Anyways dont change the topic of discussion here..
 
.
.
My problem here is pashtoon will be against pashtoon if we try to occupy wahkan
I don't support taking over the Wakhan corridor through force but this statement is really annoying every time I hear it.

Pashtun will not be against Pashtun, just like it isn't Punjabi vs Punjabi when India and Pakistan have fought wars.

It is Afghan vs Pakistani and Indian vs Pakistani. Pakistani Punjabis have massacred plenty of Indian Punjabis in India-Pakistan conflicts and will do so again if need be.

No thanks- I can google the details myself- I will leave you to your Narrative- carry on.
Yes please, 'google' your Indian government propaganda 'reports' & 'books' and keep yourself hidden in your petty, greedy and insecure Indian echo chamber.
 
.
Utter nonsense based on the rebuttal I wrote. For more details read through the following threads instead of hijacking this one further:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-kashmir-resolutions-explanations.7904/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...agreement-sources.392233/page-10#post-7528125

Once India agrees in principle to actually carry out a UN led plebiscite without asking the other warring parties to unilaterally vacate the disputed territory, the residents of the region (what few there are) under Chinese control can vote in said plebiscite as well. The UNSC Resolutions don't exclude that territory. This is yet another BS excuse promoted by the greedy, petty and insecure Indian State to continue it's occupation of J&K and atrocities on its people.

And the UNSC resolutions still apply because Simla clearly re-states the commitment of both India & Pakistan to the UN Charter (under which the UNSC Resolutions were passed) as well as also committing to any peaceful means of dispute resolution agreed to by both (which the UNSC Resolutions also are).

Finally, India's unprovoked attack on Balakot threw Simla in the garbage in any case since Balakot was certainly not a 'peaceful means of dispute resolution' agreed to by both parties to the agreement.

Any further discussion can occur on the threads I linked to.

If India and Pakistan come face-to-face,
Insha Allah, Pakistan will take the rest of Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. The Pashtuns or Pakhtuns of Pakistan suffice.

It has been 73 years since Azad Jammu and Kashmir has been administered by Pakistan. If India can take Azad Jammu and Kashmir, and Gilgit-Baltistan, then they should have by now. Saying is one thing and doing is another.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-41662588
 
Last edited:
.
im sure you folks would plan similar stuff for Pakistan. so i dont think you should be worried about it..

He is a pro-Pakistan Afghan Pukhtoon. He is one of us, my dear brother.

Kabulie qasbeh city state does not represent all of Afghanistan.

You are right too but we cannot open that new front untill wo solve Kashmir. Kashmir is way more strategic and important to us. For the time being, it is secured as china has it under control.

We have achieved our objectives in Afghanistan, now it is time to partner with Taliban to finish the job.

India must be isolated and only we can do it.

The problems are the nationalists, the Abu jahals and namrood within your own country who value their own "afghan blood" more than Islam, daal khors and the punjabi army are the derogatory terms they use, there is no emaan, muslim brotherhood and pan Islamism within their hearts, they would rather bow down to the idol worshippers than join hands with the believers, as long as this enemy exist there can never be a confederacy between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Old crony class of Afghan snakes who betrayed Pakistan and Afghanistan is now dead. It is time to build a new reality. We must merge together. For both of us, it is the only path forward if we wish to live. otherwise wait until the next power comes and uses Afghan kabuleh against us.

What exactly are you so upset about? The suggestion by the poster that Pakistan should take control of the Wakhan corridor? Give him a rational counter-argument. This is a forum and people debate all kinds of ideas.

Secondly, don't speak on behalf of all Pakistani Pashtun and refrain from abuse and personal attacks.


I'm sorry?

Did you actually state that Afghanistan is the 'only country Pakistan can trust'?

We're talking about the same Afghanistan that refused to accept Pakistan in 1947?

The same Afghanistan that has sheltered and instigated Baloch terrorists and insurgencies in FATA since 1947?

The same Afghanistan that refused to accept the internationally recognized Afghan-Pakistan border?

The same Afghanistan that elects governments that utilize their intelligence service (NDS) to support terrorists in Pakistan?

The same Afghanistan that elects governments that cannot get India's testicles out of their mouth?


This is a discussion forum - people will discuss all manner of things. Instead of insulting them and attacking them, maybe offer a rational, civil argument explaining why their proposal is not a good idea.

Afghan kings and Afghan political elite have betrayed Afghans just as much as Pakistanis.

Afghans are our blood brothers and our closest country. We are interlinked by history.

Its whatever... But what I have realised with some members here who belong to a certain faith jump up and criticise Afghanistan but don't do so when the heat is on Iran. I won't name those members but they know who they are. And in a way I am a bit jealous that Iran has such influence within Pakistan while we Afghans don't.

Influence of Afghans over Pakistan is among Sunni Deobandis and Pukhtoons, Hindkowan, Punjabis, Potohar.

Unfortunately criminal gangs and mafias who came with Afghan refugees, maybe sent by Indians and NDS, wrecked havoc all over Pakistan. They gave Afghans a bad name in places like Karachi, Lahore, and Pakhawar.

Quite frankly, a strong Afghan-Pakistan relationship makes a lot more sense than a strong Iran-Pakistan relationship. The Iranians are more tied to their 'Persian Civilization' narrative, and will never really accept anyone else as equals - you're either Persian or you're not and there is a degree of arrogance there. Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the other hand, share ethnic, cultural, religious and historical ties that are much stronger.

But that is also why you'll find many Pakistanis extremely angry at Afghans, because it seems that Afghanistan has wasted over 7 decades trying to undermine Pakistan over the Durand Line instead of building stronger cultural and economic bonds. The whole Pashtunistan business & claiming Pakistani territory till the Indus ... the Iranians have done nothing along those lines.

And would your anger towards a brother (Afghanistan) that betrayed you not be significantly more than the anger towards a 'stranger' (Iran)? Pakistan's relationship with Afghanistan is perceived as one of betrayal and wasted time. The two countries could have been so much stronger had Afghanistan accepted Pakistan after 1947 and built bridges and ties over our shared interests, culture and history.


Complete and utter nonsense.

India wanted an unconditional, unilateral withdrawal of all Pakistani military and para-military forces from J&K prior to conducting a plebiscite, a demand that was practically untenable and unrealistic both for Pakistan and most objective international observers - who in their right mind would trust one warring party to a territorial dispute to not simply take over territory vacated by another?

The initial UNSC resolution did not infact even cover the withdrawal of Pakistani troops. The subsequent UNSC Resolutions did cover the withdrawal of Pakistani troops but tied any withdrawal to an agreement on demilitarization between Pakistan, India and the UN. Pakistan and the UN agreed to several proposals in multiple rounds of negotiations (with different UN appointed rapporteurs) but India rejected all of them.

So, in fact, it was not Pakistan that 'avoided the plebiscite', but India, with it's unreasonable demands that Pakistan unilaterally vacate all territory in J&K and basically 'trust' India to hold up it's end of the bargain, and, as I pointed out above, even the UNSC did not agree with India's demands.

Your logic makes complete sense, but then you must realize Afghans were also held captive by their rulers. During British rule, Barakzai kings were content to give away Pukhtoon land via Durand Line to British, just for an extra check to support their lavish lifestyle. Current Kabul elite also is fed by foreign suitcases of money, they are equal to our lifafa politicians in Pakistan.

I don't support taking over the Wakhan corridor through force but this statement is really annoying every time I hear it.

Pashtun will not be against Pashtun, just like it isn't Punjabi vs Punjabi when India and Pakistan have fought wars.

It is Afghan vs Pakistani and Indian vs Pakistani. Pakistani Punjabis have massacred plenty of Indian Punjabis in India-Pakistan conflicts and will do so again if need be.


Yes please, 'google' your Indian government propaganda 'reports' & 'books' and keep yourself hidden in your petty, greedy and insecure Indian echo chamber.

These Indians have derailed another great threat, which has absolutely nothing to do with them.

India has no say in affairs between Afghan and Pakistani brothers.

In sha Allah, we will merge together, it is destiny and Pakistan ideology will expand to Central Asia.

Afghanistan needs a stable and developed government, which Pakistan has, and security, which only Pakistani military and nuclear deterrence can give. This will end the uncertainty of Afghan future and allow their society to progress..

For Pakistan, Taliban military tactics (for use in Kashmir) and their Jirga system need to be studied. Genuine Islamic governance needs to be established in Pakistan to bring accountability to the corrupt. Also Pukhtoonwali can be expanded all over Pakistan, which would promote our soft power further and bring a sense of loyalty to Pakistanis for their state.
 
Last edited:
.
.
Still avoiding the question. Why is it bad for us KPians and will offend us if we Pakistanis invade wakhan ?

Sparsely populated Wakhan corridor (inhabited only by nomadic Wakhi people who cross the border every year) with harsh environment and mountains, which is isolated from Afghanistan but not Pakistan, will eventually merge with GB. That much is obvious.

However, Afghan Taliban are our ally and time-tested friend. We should tread cautiously.

Instead of talking about taking just a little
tiny piece of territory, which US, Russia, India, Iran, and others will jump to prove Pakistan is illegally invading Afghanistan, let us reach a political settlement which includes the rest of Afghanistan too.

For now, we can build transit lines to Tajikstan and work to wean them away from India and Iran, this way Tajikstan can normalize their relations with Afghanistan and also other CARs.

Pakistan can be a great source of good in this region.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom