Afghanistan doesn't recognise Durand line as the International Border with Pak: Afghan Ambassador

[TMA]

Let's all agree that being a responsible citizen of the Global village. it's not easy every time to do as per your wishes. Pakistan have some responsibilities just like it have rights in international affairs. You just can not deport (all) immigrants and afghan muhajirin at once. in steps yes, but it will take 5-6 years.

They traitors will never do it. What will happen is that some will be deported, but more will come through the back door.

I am happy even if it takes 15-20 years.

 

[RealNapster]

I am happy even if it takes 15-20 years.

We need a cleanup before 2025. so that we can correct our Path and policies by then.

 

[Vapnope]

Again you miss the woods for the trees.
I didn't provide any opinion on the matter. But it is clear that youre willing to criticize and berate the afghans for using the same logic as the Chinese for using convoluted old maps.
The hypocrisy is for everyone to see.

You want my opinion of the Durand line?
I think it's wrong to use old maps and those treaties that were signed with Afghanistan by the British should be honored. But i also think the Chinese are equally wrong in doing so. The Chinese too have to honor treaties signed by an independent Tibet with the British well before china annexed Tibet!
At least I'm even handed with my opinions.

Oh thankyou for giving your opinion with whataboutary, however my statement is/was for everyone be it Chinese, Indian, Isrealies or Afghans !
Try your luck another time for calling me a hypocrite !

 

[Peshwa]

Oh thankyou for giving your opinion with whataboutary, however my statement is/was for everyone be it Chinese, Indian, Isrealies or Afghans !
Try your luck another time for calling me a hypocrite !

So are you opposed to the Chinese use of old "Chinese only" maps to claim territory in todays world?

 

[imadul]

Afg just creating noise, should be ignored for the time being.

 

[lastofthepatriots]

Afghanistan is a weak nation that will disintegrate. I pray to Allah swt that their nation stays together and protected. Ameen

 

[Vapnope]

So are you opposed to the Chinese use of old "Chinese only" maps to claim territory in todays world?

For that you will have to read my first ever comment again, slowly! Might save you more comments.

 

[Peshwa]

For that you will have to read my first ever comment again, slowly! Might save you more comments.

Eh been there done that.
Problem is, it only spoke of your position on Afghans. If you truly are even handed, make your stance clear as I have.

Anywyas, don't think this conversation is going anywhere. My work here is done.

 

[Vapnope]

Eh been there done that.
Problem is, it only spoke of your position on Afghans. If you truly are even handed, make your stance clear as I have.

Anywyas, don't think this conversation is going anywhere. My work here is done.

How old are you? Any comprehension problems? I understand english is not our first language but i have used archaic yet. My stance is clear be it Chinese, Bhutanese, Indians or Martians. Now bug off and pester someone else.

 

[Eagle_storm]

credit goes to BOOTS.

tusi dushman la aa

hum bandooq la awanga.....

 

[Areesh]

Ive explained my position in previous posts. Please feel free to go through it.
Id be happy to hear how the two situations differ so i can weigh in.

Chinese are right. They never signed a treaty with Britishers.

Afghans are liars. They signed border treaty with British not once but thrice.

There is no comparison here.

 

[Peshwa]

Chinese are right. They never signed a treaty with Britishers.

Afghans are liars. They signed border treaty with British not once but thrice.

There is no comparison here.

British signed a treaty with the Tibetans. Tibet was independent and annexed 30 years after. The Chinese have to honor this treaty.

The afghan kings signed the treaty with the British, not the present govt.

The two situations are similar if not identical. In both cases, the current govt is rejecting treaties signed by the previous independent monarchies with the British.

 

[Imad.Khan]

British signed a treaty with the Tibetans. Tibet was independent and annexed 30 years after. The Chinese have to honor this treaty.

The afghan kings signed the treaty with the British, not the present govt.

The two situations are similar if not identical. In both cases, the current govt is rejecting treaties signed by the previous independent monarchies with the British.

I agree with you on the part that the treaty between the British and Afghan kings is now null and void. I am a Pukhtoon and i do not accept the Durand Line. But on saying that and before you get to excited there is a twist, to me all of Afghanistan belongs to us and should be part of Pakistan reason being that there are most Pukhtoons on this side than the whole population of Afghanistan.

 

[Peshwa]

I agree with you on the part that the treaty between the British and Afghan kings is now null and void. I am a Pukhtoon and i do not accept the Durand Line. But on saying that and before you get to excited there is a twist, to me all of Afghanistan belongs to us and should be part of Pakistan reason being that there are most Pukhtoons on this side than the whole population of Afghanistan.

There really is nothing for me to get excited. This is purely a matter between the state of Afghanistan and Pakistan. So I have no horse in this race.

But I am also of the view that we cannot just revert to maps from past eras, before the concept of nation states came into existance. I say this because, then how far back in history does one go? It leads to an anarchic situation.

And by that standard, didn't Pakistan also become a nation state thanks to the same British? The reason why you have the northern areas is because of the british and the treaties they signed. Now you want to revert to pre British era borders? Doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Imad.Khan]

But I am also of the view that we cannot just revert to maps from past eras, before the concept of nation states came into existance. I say this because, then how far back in history does one go? It leads to an anarchic situation.

Its true in a sense that it could lead to anarchy but only if the demands of the people are forcefully crushed. I am a big supporter of giving the majority what they demand. If the wishes of the people are granted then there will never be anarchy.

And by that standard, didn't Pakistan also become a nation state thanks to the same British? The reason why you have the northern areas is because of the british and the treaties they signed. Now you want to revert to pre British era borders? Doesn't make sense to me.

Thats true aswell Pakistan became a state because of the British but so did India. Had the British not shown up, there would have been no Pakistan or India or Bengladesh, instead there would have been many smaller countries just like they were prior to the arrival of the British.