What's new

Pakistan repeats call for fencing Afghan border

From wiki, since it was easy to quote all the arguments from one source:


The Afghan arguments, and the arguments in the article you posted, have no basis in international law. The world legally recognizes the Durand line as the international border, and the only way it could be changed is through bilateral negotiation between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The Durand agreement itself has no mention of any need of 'ratification from the Afghan parliament' - its just another bogus excuse made up to justify the Afghan claim over Pakistani territory.

Friend I have never doubted the existence of Durand agreement. I only said you cannot exactly point out to fence it. The agreement signed in 1893 is it ..

Now see the map of British Empire at that time.


So according to this map, what is the possible border has been accepted by British and Afghans at that time?(Afghanistan too had a point to make).

Since the Agreement does not contains any 'exact' geographical positions you cannot locate where it lies. Hope you understand..

Anyway about the Durand agreement my source is wiki but the rest is just common sense.
 
Last edited:
.
Friend I have never doubted the existence of Durand agreement. I only said you cannot exactly point out to fence it. The agreement signed in 1893 is it ..

I don't see how you can say that about the entirety of the Durand, especially with that map. Read the text of the Durand agreement I posted and tell me whether several geographic features and locations are mentioned or not.

The agreement also talks about the meeting of representatives from both sides to delineate certain aspects of the border not specifically mentioned in the agreement.

There is no merit to the Afghan argument - how did the British have control of the lands that currently comprise Pakistan if they were not demarcated to be British controlled under the agreement between the GoA and the British?

The major Afghan argument is not that the delineation of the line is subject to interpretation, but that the Durand agreement itself is invalid (which has been shown to be an invalid argument).

You are raising an argument the even the Afghans don't raise. There may be minor quibbles of a village or peak here or there along the Durand that the agreement is not clear about, but the argument you make based on that map you posted is absurd and does not have any basis.
 
.
I would agree with this coz some people which i know are from waziristan say that they have famallies in afghanistan and they often go there with ease .People come to Pakistan from Afghanistan without any difficulty.

As for fencing the border is concern i think it will be a tough challange. Its not that easy to fence the border with all those deadly loop holes. The another thing is smuglling. Many influential people in NWFP and Balochistan are linked with smuglling and they they also dont like the fencing idea.
.

Appart from the huge cost of building it the moment it is up smugglers will dig under/cut through or climb over it and where the smugglers travel the taliban would follow.
 
.
I don't see how you can say that about the entirety of the Durand, especially with that map. Read the text of the Durand agreement I posted and tell me whether several geographic features and locations are mentioned or not.

The agreement also talks about the meeting of representatives from both sides to delineate certain aspects of the border not specifically mentioned in the agreement.

There is no merit to the Afghan argument - how did the British have control of the lands that currently comprise Pakistan if they were not demarcated to be British controlled under the agreement between the GoA and the British?

The major Afghan argument is not that the delineation of the line is subject to interpretation, but that the Durand agreement itself is invalid (which has been shown to be an invalid argument).

You are raising an argument the even the Afghans don't raise. There may be minor quibbles of a village or peak here or there along the Durand that the agreement is not clear about, but the argument you make based on that map you posted is absurd and does not have any basis.

Oops I didn't meant that(missed a word and entire meaning has changed.now edited).
 
.
Appart from the huge cost of building it the moment it is up smugglers will dig under/cut through or climb over it and where the smugglers travel the taliban would follow.

I'll get the clippers.Meet you guys at the boder:devil:
 
.
mine and fence the border. Afghan require our ports and highway for their survival. Who are they to accept or deny it? Like Patriot, i'm also a Pakistani Pakhtun. We're fed up of the afghans and their false nationalism. 50 percent of their country isn't even afghan. They are darri speaking tajiks and uzbeks for crying out loud.
 
.
I'll get the clippers.Meet you guys at the boder:devil:
High impact hollow points await you. No offence, but being indian won't win you friends in this neck of the woods. Trust me :)
 
.
mine and fence the border. Afghan require our ports and highway for their survival. Who are they to accept or deny it? Like Patriot, i'm also a Pakistani Pakhtun. We're fed up of the afghans and their false nationalism. 50 percent of their country isn't even afghan. They are darri speaking tajiks and uzbeks for crying out loud.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are countries of settlers but mojority are muslims so their need are interlinked,Afghanistan and Pakistan have very important strategic location (gate way to central asia), US and allies wanted their stronge hold in this region .

Iran and Pakistan are US allies but Afghan talaban are infact dont want US presence, similar satuation when east india company landed in sub continant, terrorism or weapon of mass distruction is just a drama to rule the world.
 
.
so basically you are saying that taleban isnt our enemy?


hogwash. I don't buy it.






p.s. learn the ground realities not just among non-Pakhtun Afghans, but also among a good number of tajiks. They are anti-Pakistan. That is one reason (among many) why we supported a Pakhtun majority taleban in the first place!!!!!

one enemy to the east is enough! But now, either way -- we have another one to the northwest.



Mine/fence the border. It's a good solution for us.
 
.
The main power wanting to control trans-border aggression should mine and fence the border.I don t think finance is a problem for a country spending a Billion dollars a day to stay in Afghanistan. The problem remains who they will blame for their failures next. Mining and fencing is the most logical solution to the problem even if we do so ourselves. Afghans who want to trade can come in through the international border control area. However our own mafias will be dead against it for very tangible losses it will bring to their livelihoods and in many ways this is what has stopped the PAkistani government from doing it rather than the Afghan resistance to it.
Araz
 
.
the mafias dont benefit the govt. as they are dealing in a black market economy (drugs and guns primarily, along with smuggled fuel from Iran)

they may be tight with some of the tribal elders in some of the agencys, but who cares?


Mining is the logical thing to do. Should we compromise national security for the interests of a few bloody buggers and their talebany wahhaby friends? **** that.


Mine and fence the border. It will even create jobs and bring much relief to the locals of the area! ;)

Have you heard of ANYYYY other country in the world who allows people to go back and forth with such ease?

Yemen-Saudi Arabia? Syria-Iraq?? even Bangladesh-hindustan?!!?!?

use all your powers to lobby for this action. Write to newspaper editors. Tell your friends to also push for this measure.


The benefits for security would be unimaginable.
 
.
We need this fence ASAP ! its time to saveguard our land enough is enough the is is and should have been the first step before anything else ohwell we are going backwards no worries but it needs to be done.
 
.
Build this fence now!






8251efd2587793594f7c35e5be84311a.gif
 
.
Back
Top Bottom