What's new

Ghani’s call for India joining transit trade rejected

Turkey and Iran shows interest for Game changer CPEC, and CPEC benefits can be shared with Afghanistan now its depend on Ashraf Ghani Govt. If Ashraf Ghani wants the permission to Indian for trade through wahga border than he must be play positive role for solution for Independence of of Kashmir from Indian occupation and human right violations by Indian Arm forces against Innocent Kashmiri.
 
Last edited:
for A naval base of 43 bn dollar the sum is too much. They could have simply leased the base from Pakistan

how do you get $43 billion in the first place ? it includes a lot of things completely irrelevant to a transport or trade corridor
 
Why would iran want to use Pakistan route to trade with india? Iran is establishing Chabahar which it can use for iran-india trade. If going by typical indian mentality of somehow wishing to manipulate Iran to do india's bidding; Iran is far smarter than these Afghans and has much more strategic independence than india can ever dream of.

It is just so obvious "chabahar" hype india tried to create not to be so. india had been cut off from Central Asia, that is physical truth and can NOT be altered by Chabahar or any other means. So indians are desperately trying to use their sick manipulative mind.

First of all that was hypothetical questions. And more importantly every country will look after its interest first be it India,Iran or Afghanistan. You can call it independent policy or self-interest doesn't matter.And if any country doesn't it would be incredibly stupid on its part.

Don't count your chickens before its hatched, CPEC may have it's importance so does Chabahar. To see its value some people has to understand beyond jamaat politics.
 
for A naval base of 43 bn dollar the sum is too much. They could have simply leased the base from Pakistan
You do understand that $43 billion is not a grant...right??

Well According to you Cpec is for base
Nopes...CPEC is an alternate trade route...Every country wants multiple reliable trade routes...CPEC fits very well there...
 
The transit as originally started 'Afghanistan-Pakistan' means it is between Pakistan and Afghanistan only. India is not allowed. It is simple at that. If not Afghanistan, then it will be Iran as next replacement with China for CPEC already being prepared. That being said, without Pakistan, Afghanistan is totally landlocked. No neighbor nations of Afghanistan want to deal with Afghanistan apart from Pakistan. Have Afghanistan not thought it through?
 
You do understand that $43 billion is not a grant...right??
Who would be so generous to give you that as a grant ?

Nopes...CPEC is an alternate trade route...Every country wants multiple reliable trade routes...CPEC fits very well there...
yeah 43bn dollar trade route. It sems like this trade passes through mars, hence the price is so much inflated
 
Ghani may choose not to understand but Pakistan doesn't need India, hence the CPEC without India. Pakistan is already at the geographically placed where the access to Central Asia is accessible through Iran and China. From Iran all the way to Turkey and Middle East and from China all the way to Central Asia and North.

Having India makes no sense considering Ghani's call for India only benefits India, not Afghanistan and certainly not Pakistan either. Given lack of brain cell for Ghani, he is about to witness Afghanistan-free in Pakistan economically trade project, CPEC. :D
 
In that case , please inform to your pakistan brothers, who are saying russia/iran/ME will join CPEC

I've NO IDEA why you're taking things out of perspective but, my contention is quite simple. And that being, whosoever shall we deal with, it'll be under the ambit of some FTA or bi, tri, quadri, penta or whatever "AGREEMENT." Please pay heed to that word for my point is that, statecraft is managed under the ambit of certain laws, rules, regulations and not at whims of someones' rhetoric aimed at satisfying the appetite of their political constituency or to please a foreign power for that matter.

Hope you understand that and, would not divulge in an empty debate any further.

Peace.
 
I've NO IDEA why you're taking things out of perspective but, my contention is quite simple. And that being, whosoever shall we deal with, it'll be under the ambit of some FTA or bi, tri, quadri, penta or whatever "AGREEMENT." Please pay heed to that word for my point is that, statecraft is managed under the ambit of certain laws, rules, regulations and not at whims of someones' rhetoric aimed at satisfying the appetite of their political constituency or to please a foreign power for that matter.

Hope you understand that and, would not divulge in an empty debate any further.

Peace.
Interesting... But your views are in minority. Anyway I'm out
 

Back
Top Bottom