What's new

19th SAARC Conference in Islamabad 2016-News and Updates

Better indicators than us??, yara grow up...

You asked for it:

Bangladesh growth rate 6 %
Pakistan 4%

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG

Bangladesh global competitiveness 106
Pakistan 122 (last in South Asia)

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ndia-jumps-16-spots/articleshow/54562035.cms?

Bangladesh foreign reserves $ 30 billion
Pakistan $ 20 Billion

Pakistan exchange rate
1 USD = 104.65 PKR

Bangladesh exchange rate
1 USD = 78.5 Bangladeshi takka

Bangladeshi exports have risen while Pakistani exports have fallen this year. See the graph below:

pakistan-exports.png


They're doing better than us. We have to work very very hard to improve our economy so our country has more power in the international scene.
 
Last edited:
Some from the West cant even identify Pakistan in map.
Bhtuan is a Sovereign nation and member state of SAARC.



Hegemonic ambitions ?
Only thing that we wont allow is that intereference of some foreigners in our internal matter .
Reacting to that intereference wont make you hegemony.
Why double standards if you interfering Baluchistan financing terror there giving asylum to terrorist like bugti and kalbhushan Singh is proof of it why you don't take these things in account too before saying Pakistan interfering in your issues

Kashmir is not an your issue it is internationaly recognized dispute your Nehru has signature on it as a dispute don't divert things which is not in reality speak truth it is dispute clearly written in UN between Pak and India it is not a internal issue balochistan is a clear cut part of Pak recognize by UN and internationaly US also gave you clear cut slap so talk logic don't go here and there

SAARC is useless it is just group of nothing but bullshit it has nothing done good better Pakistan leave it rather than face Indian grouping keep that SAARC to u

Once you say we want dialogue with Pak than cowardly running from dialogue

Justification given by india that current situation won't allow it to talks tell me whenever was situation good between both countries

Russia USA had never closed table talk in cold war when easily either of them can made illogical justification like india is nuke war was imminent than

When you talk when situation get out of hands but16 years of indian idiotic policy given nothing but we are standing same place

Why can't you resolve all issues once it for all kashmir is issue better u also allow it to be state and we also leave it no one wins but peace wins kashmir wins Pakistan is asking we both leave it to be new state but your ego to lead Asia is hurdle

I think some people from Pakistan cant digest the growth of a mere tea vendor to Prime Ministership of world largest democracy.
Those administrate perfectly will always welcome to become Choudhary



How many of them cares what US says?
He is world recognized terrorist too plz mention it along with tea seller
 
Why double standards if you interfering Baluchistan financing terror there giving asylum to terrorist like bugti and kalbhushan Singh is proof of it why you don't take these things in account too before saying Pakistan interfering in your issues

Kashmir is not an your issue it is internationaly recognized dispute your Nehru has signature on it as a dispute don't divert things which is not in reality speak truth it is dispute clearly written in UN between Pak and India it is not a internal issue balochistan is a clear cut part of Pak recognize by UN and internationaly US also gave you clear cut slap so talk logic don't go here and there

SAARC is useless it is just group of nothing but bullshit it has nothing done good better Pakistan leave it rather than face Indian grouping keep that SAARC to u

Once you say we want dialogue with Pak than cowardly running from dialogue

Justification given by india that current situation won't allow it to talks tell me whenever was situation good between both countries

Russia USA had never closed table talk in cold war when easily either of them can made illogical justification like india is nuke war was imminent than

When you talk when situation get out of hands but16 years of indian idiotic policy given nothing but we are standing same place

Why can't you resolve all issues once it for all kashmir is issue better u also allow it to be state and we also leave it no one wins but peace wins kashmir wins Pakistan is asking we both leave it to be new state but your ego to lead Asia is hurdle


He is world recognized terrorist too plz mention it along with tea seller

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/jammu-and-kashmir-out-of-un-list-of-disputes/article886480.ece

So its already gone .There is nothing you can do in there

Bugti is not here and Yadav story is not going spent here .

So your are neither Russia nor US .
We are not equals .Deal with that reality .
J&K is our integral part and internal matter whether you likes or not.

Why double standards if you interfering Baluchistan financing terror there giving asylum to terrorist like bugti and kalbhushan Singh is proof of it why you don't take these things in account too before saying Pakistan interfering in your issues

Kashmir is not an your issue it is internationaly recognized dispute your Nehru has signature on it as a dispute don't divert things which is not in reality speak truth it is dispute clearly written in UN between Pak and India it is not a internal issue balochistan is a clear cut part of Pak recognize by UN and internationaly US also gave you clear cut slap so talk logic don't go here and there

SAARC is useless it is just group of nothing but bullshit it has nothing done good better Pakistan leave it rather than face Indian grouping keep that SAARC to u

Once you say we want dialogue with Pak than cowardly running from dialogue

Justification given by india that current situation won't allow it to talks tell me whenever was situation good between both countries

Russia USA had never closed table talk in cold war when easily either of them can made illogical justification like india is nuke war was imminent than

When you talk when situation get out of hands but16 years of indian idiotic policy given nothing but we are standing same place

Why can't you resolve all issues once it for all kashmir is issue better u also allow it to be state and we also leave it no one wins but peace wins kashmir wins Pakistan is asking we both leave it to be new state but your ego to lead Asia is hurdle


He is world recognized terrorist too plz mention it along with tea seller
cry me a river:cry::cry::cry:
 
Janab Yeh to Apki Juuti Ka Sadka Hai.

Sadqa jaan magta ha, doosri cheez ka....


We learned this from you. 1947 you give us the classes how to send kabaili disguised as local, and then capture it, we did in 1971. You started giving weapons and supports to the Sikhs to start terrorism in Punjab, we learned it too from you. So what is the big Deal.

A bit further back in history, we learnt from you when India sent troops in Kashmir in the name of so-called accession against the wish of people and Mukti Bahni in Bangladesh.
 
Pakistan Humiliated by south Asian countries' boycott of summit



India, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Bhutan cite regional interference as they pull out of what was set to be a historic meeting



Jon Boone in Islamabad and Michael Safi in Delhi

Wednesday 28 September 2016 14.59 BST Last modified on Wednesday 28 September 2016 16.19 BST

Four south Asian countries are to boycott what was set to be a historic regional summit in Islamadad in November, dealing a humiliating blow to Pakistan and isolating it diplomatically.

India, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Bhutan all said they would pull out of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) meeting following a collapse in relations between Pakistan and India, the subcontinent’s nuclear-armed rivals.

Statements by the region’s foreign ministries echoed India’s criticism on Tuesday night, which blamed “increasing cross-border terrorist attacks and growing interference of the internal affairs of member states” for Delhi’s decision to boycott the conference.

Until recently, the prospect of the Indian prime minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Islamabad had been seen as a potentially highly symbolic step towards reconciliation between Pakistan and India.

The two countries, however, have been engaged interse exchanges following an attack on an Indian army base on 18 September that killed 19 soldiers, which Delhi has blamed on jihadis based in Pakistan. The raid took place in town of Uri near the line of control that divides the contested Himalayan territory of Kashmir.

Four days later, India denounced Pakistan at the UN as the host of the “Ivy League of terrorism”.

Islamabad says India has provided no evidence linking the attack either to militants based in Pakistan or to the country’s intelligence agencies, which have long been accused of complicity with anti-India jihadi groups.

Pakistan’s defence minister has even suggested that India itself carried out the attack to deflect attention from its ongoing struggle to quell popular disturbances in the Indian part of Kashmir.



Indian soldiers patrol near the line of control in Kashmir following the 18 September attack. Photograph: Mukhtar Khan/AP
Tensions have been fuelled by television networks and social media on both sides of the border, with some pundits appearing to relish the prospect of all-out nuclear war.

Some Indian hawks have demanded retaliatory attacks against suspected militant camps in Pakistan, but Modi has sought to punish Islamabad with steps that fall short of military means.

His strategy is, however, far tougher than the relative restraint shown by previous Indian governments during earlier crises, such as that prompted by the four-day assault on Mumbai by Pakistani militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba in 2008.


In recent weeks, Modi has publicly backed separatist rebels in the restive Pakistani province of Balochistan, a move that has infuriated Islamabad. He has also questioned a key cross-border river treaty and vowed to orchestrate Pakistan’s diplomatic isolation.

That promise became reality on Wednesday when it became clear four out of SAARC’s eight members would not attend the summit, which it is Pakistan’s turn to host.

Afghanistan’s foreign ministry, which has long accused Pakistan of supporting the Taliban-led insurgency, was most stinging in its criticism, denouncing “the increased level of violence and fighting as a result of imposed terrorism on Afghanistan”.

Nine months ago, hopes were high for a rapprochement between India and Pakistan following Modi’s surprise visit to Lahore on Christmas day, the first time an Indian leader had set foot in Pakistan since 2004.



Pakistan’s prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, welcomes his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi to Lahore in December 2015. Photograph: PIB/AFP/Getty Images
His Pakistani counterpart, Nawaz Sharif, won a landslide election victory in 2013, determined to end the decades’ long standoff and open up trade.

“But Pakistan has a tremendous capacity to withstand coercion and a mindset that wants eternal confrontation with India that is too deeply entrenched,” he said.

On Monday, Modi ordered water officials to step up efforts to divert a greater share of the three rivers the countries share under the Indus treaty, a 1960 agreement that has survived their subsequent conflicts.

“Blood and water cannot flow together,” Modi said, a rare invocation of India’s power to meddle with the Indus river system, which flows downstream into Pakistan and provides water to 65% of the country’s landmass.

Himanshu Thakkar, the coordinator of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, said it would take up to a decade to build dams capable of reducing the flow to Pakistan.

“But it sends a signal, and that signal will have an impact,” he said. “If India builds projects to store water from its entitlement, it will provide a means for India to control water flow to Pakistan, even temporarily.”

On Tuesday, Pakistan complained to the World Bank, which brokered the original treaty, urging it to prevent India from starting construction work on the Neelum and Chenab rivers.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ed-by-south-asian-countries-boycott-of-summit


@nair @Joe Shearer @MilSpec

I think this is the end of SAARC as we know it.
 
:lol: Afghanistan? who was brought to SAARC by Pakistan.

Bangladesh ? Ohhh Sorry I mean Hassina, wellll nothing to explain.

Bhutan hmmmm a small country that is blackmailed by India but wait the real humiliation was when even Bhutan despite a colony of India showed eyes to India sometime back.
;)

SAARC also include Sri Lanka and Nepal
 
Let me put up the relevant news items


Afghanistan boycotts SAARC summit

September 28, 2016 In Latest Updates, Nation
  • Array
    SAARC-summit-cut-615x300@2x.jpg


By Mansoor Faizy-KABUL: After India, Bangladesh, and Bhutan, Afghanistan also come up to the fore and boycotted the upcoming South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit to be hosted by Pakistan in November.

The Presidential Palace Spokesman, Haroon Chakhansuri, confirmed to Afghanistan Times that no Afghan official would attend the SAARC summit in Islamabad. “We will not attend the summit at any level. We will boycott the summit,” he said.

He termed lack of cooperation from Pakistan, especially in the war against terrorism as a core reason behind Kabul’s decision to boycott the summit. The Afghan government had repeatedly asked Islamabad to eliminate the Taliban and Haqqani Network and stop using extremists as strategic assets.

Afghan officials have also alleged Pakistan of supporting the Islamic State, also known as Daesh. Security forces have detained several members of Daesh and recovered Pakistani documents from their possession, proving identity of the IS fighters.

Top U.S military generals have also confirmed that most of Daesh members are ex-Pakistani Taliban.

Sri Lanka has already said that the SAARC summit would not be possible without India’s participation.

India recently announced that it was pulling out of the Islamabad summit in the wake of the September 18 cross-border terror attack on an Indian Army base in Uri town of Jammu and Kashmir, which New Delhi has blamed on terrorists based in Pakistan.

According to some sources in Nepal, the current chair of SAARC, confirmed having received messages from the four countries conveying their inability to attend the summit.


http://afghanistantimes.af/afghanistan-boycotts-saarc-summit/
 
Boycott of Afghani randi and Bengali doesn't matter, SAARC is useless organisation anyway. Its good to know Afghanis, bengalis and Bhutanis are on firmly under India control.
Well sir we have to look closer at the instance of these countries. They refused to come due to tension between Pakistan and India. So, if it is Pakistan's failure, its also not at all favorable for India as well, in fact, for no body, and refusing to join the summit will not help the region in anyway.
 
Well sir we have to look closer at the instance of these countries. They refused to come due to tension between Pakistan and India. So, if it is Pakistan's failure, its also not at all favorable for India as well, in fact, for no body, and refusing to join the summit will not help the region in anyway.


The level of hostility and the refusal for cooperation in facilitating trade and commercial activities by itself was creating a problem even when summits were being held.

What is relevant, is the question, is SAARC over?
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom