What's new

KP belongs to Afghans, no one can force them out: Mahmood Achakzai

There are 30 million Pakistani Pashtuns who love and support Pakistan while there are only 13 million Afghani Pashtuns, this will never happen.
Well if the number of Afghans increase in Pakistan which is the case and if they have more children than Pakistanis ( I do not know about this) then never say never.
 
. .
Boom! Hit the nail on the head. Demographic time bomb ticking.
Pakistan should stop settling down more Afghan refugees in Pakistan or they will claim KP in future as we are starting to hear voices now.

Afghans i have met hate Pakistan intencely, while Iran they have no issu with. In Iran afghans have never been alloud out of refugee area, while in Pakistan they have mixed up with rest of the population all over the country.

It is not KPK that we need to worry about, anyone who has spent any time in the province will know it will not happen in a thousand years.

It's Baluchistan which has become a ticking bomb.

For a long time, a very long time, our establishment was ok with Afghani assimilation into province of Baluchistan which I believe and I might be wrong was for a twisted demographic engineering reason.

The overall population of Pakistan increased by 46 percent between 1998-2011, but the population of Baluchistan increased by 139 percent. And consider the fact that the province has the highest infant mortality rate and worst medical facilities in the country, but still it is clocking much higher population growth. Why? Afghan refugees becoming Pakistani citizens that's why.

Please don't believe in those figures of 1.4 million legal and 1 million illegal refugees, the Baluchistan province alone has 4 million Afghan refugees and our law enforcement institutions knows that. Not all of them are Pashtuns of course, but majority of them are.
http://www.dawn.com/news/708123/the-tricky-demographics-of-balochistan

So the net result is that the Baluch percentage of population in the province has been steadily decreasing for the last two decades and all the while Pashtun population has been increasing. If you have any source in the province then you will know that Quetta where the Baloch-Pashtun population was somewhat equal but has now become a Pashtun majority city. Look at the results from the last polls, PKMAP won a clear majority in the city.

As for why it was allowed and perhaps facilitated, well here is my very own conspiracy theory. Baloch do have grievances and some of them actually want to secede, and there is an insurgent movement for that cause. Pashtuns on the other hand, while do have grievances are not talking about seceding and their is no insurgent movement for that cause. So having a very large pasthun population naturally negates the idea of an independent Baluchistan, or so goes the logic behind this.

In the last census done in 1998, Baloch were 40% of the province population, Barahui were 20%, while Pashtun were 25%, while the rest was made up of Hazaras and Punjabi, Urdu-speaking and Sindhi settlers. Barahui consider themselves part of the Baloch culture, so that is 60% Baloch and 25% Pashtuns.

That was 98, oh boy just wait for the next census and we all will be in for a big surprise. Keep in mind we are talking about a province of 13 Million, add 4 million refugees most of whom might have the Pakistani nationality by now and we will see the balance tilting in favor of Pashtuns.

So yeah on the surface of it, when the next census results come out it will take a lot of air out of the Baloch separatists demands as they will be demanding for seceding a province where their ethnic don't have a clear majority. But here is where lies the real problem.

With the statement made by this Achakzai guy you can clearly see how loyal he is to the state of Pakistan. Same is the the case with most of his party members, I can share a few videos of them chanting anti-Pakistan slogans but that will be in bad taste, search Youtube yourself and you'll find many.

They don't talk about secession but they are not in love with the state either. We are also sure how much love those 4 million Afghan refugees have for Pakistan as well, and they will definitely be voting for PKMAP who allegedly supported them in getting Pakistani CNICs in the first place.

So when the next census comes Baluchs might lose their majority in the province and the election commission will have to divide the constituencies accordingly. Which means this man might become the next chief minister of the province and will have 4 million Afghans who have no love for Pakistan and the political leaders of their homeland pushing him to "stand up" to "Punjabi Establishment". He already demands for a separate province for Pashtuns, only GOD knows what he will do when he get a clear majority.

And if I am a Baloch that will really piss me off and even if I was not part of any movement till now, I will start considering it in future.

So we are heading towards a disaster in Baluchistan if action is not taken against the Afghans who have illegally got Pakistani CNICs. This needs to be done now and perhaps it is already on the table and thats why this goon is barking about protecting Afghan rights and stuff.

This is not the first time we have unleashed the dragons that will come back to haunt us. Oh the games we play.
 
.
Pakistan is in mess because of traitors like him who are more obsessed with ethnic nationalism than showing loyalty and solidarity toward Pakistan and protecting its interests. This idiot speak on behalf of KPK province where he does not even hold one seat
What if in future , Afghanistan claims KPK. They already don't accept Durand Line.
 
.
51 to 49%. That's how the vote went. AND the Khudai Khitmatgars did not vote.
:omghaha::omghaha::omghaha:

The choice in the referendum was to join Pakistan or join India.

Total eligible voters were 5,72,799.

51% was the turn out.

So in total 2,92,118 votes were cast

Of those 2,89,244 voted for Pakistan.

2,874 voted for India.

So that means, do correct me if I am wrong, that 99.1 percent people voted for Pakistan in that referendum.
 
. .
:omghaha::omghaha::omghaha:

The choice in the referendum was to join Pakistan or join India.

Total eligible voters were 5,72,799.

51% was the turn out.

So in total 2,92,118 votes were cast

Of those 2,89,244 voted for Pakistan.

2,874 voted for India.

So that means, do correct me if I am wrong, that 99.1 percent people voted for Pakistan in that referendum.

Slightly, 51% of the total eligible voters cast their vote for Pakistan. 0.5% cast for india - mainly nwfp hindus/sikhs settlers. Over 99% for Pakistan.

Joe however, is completely wrong. The voter turnout was only 15% less than the 1946 elections, and assuming generously that the failed boycott by kk was the main reason for those 15% not to show up, and assuming even more generously that they would've voted for india (they only boycotted b/c afghanistan was not an options thanks to nehru and jinnah), the boycott by kkk wouldn't have made a difference. Afghanistan and/or India (i.e the not-Pakistan option) would still have lost handily. This isn't even including FATA or the Yousufzai state of Swat which was even more pro-Pakistan than the kk bastion of charsadda/peshawar valley.

mr. achakzai isn't even from KP. He from Balochistan. Him and his party have no rep/influence in KPK.

51 to 49%. That's how the vote went. AND the Khudai Khitmatgars did not vote.

you know you're being intellectually dishonest. You're comparing votes cast for a particular party of the 1946 voter eligibility list to votes not cast from the eligibility list and awarding the opposition party those votes not cast. There is no 49% as opposition in any of the calculations regarding the NWFP referendum. KK would've garnered at most 15% of the votes.

51% to 0.5%. That's how the vote went. or More accurately 99%. Pretty damning..
 
.
51 to 49%. That's how the vote went. AND the Khudai Khitmatgars did not vote.
No turnover was 51% and out of those who voted 99% voted in favor of Pakistan.
Those who boycotted knew they will lose.
The turnover was as much as in any modern election, and even today only those votes matter which are casTed, not those who didn't.
 
.
Do you by any chance have links for archives of what you've stated? The 51 to 49 percent?

You have to calculate the number who took part and the number who were debarred. Look at the opinion below, and observe how he has done the math (not an Indian author, btw).


Meghnad Desai, "The Rediscovery of India", for starters.

@Mentee Please note.

Another comment which is an opinion merely but illustrates what a farce took place:

Muhammed Iqbal Chawla writes:----

"As the last Viceroy of India, Mountbatten presided over the transfer of power which involved both independence and the division of the subcontinent in 1947. While dividing India it was decided that the wish of the people through the democratic process is sought, for or against, inclusion within Pakistan. In the two major Muslim majority provinces of Bengal and Punjab this was determined by the vote of their representatives in the legislature. In the provinces of the NWFP, Baluchistan and Assam however this was determined by a referendum. The Congress had opted to abstain from the referendum in the NWFP, and its outcome was a heavy mandate for Pakistan but even after that the ruling Congress Ministry refused to resign. Mountbatten refrained from using his discretionary powers to dismiss Dr Khan Sahib’s ministry, consequently, the Government of Pakistan, after it came into being, dismissed it, for it believed that the Congress party had lost every legal or moral foundation to be in power as the people had given a clear verdict in favour of Pakistan and against the Congress government in the Referendum.------------------The author takes the position that Mountbatten, despite the controversy with which he is regarded in Pakistan, played an instrumental role in the accession of NWFP to Pakistan. This was by no means a forgone conclusion in the wake of the Muslim League’s poor showing in the 1946 Frontier Provincial elections.His decision that a referendum should be held enabled the Muslim League to galvanize popular sentiment for inclusion in Pakistan, despite the presence of a Congress ministry----"

Congress abstaining, along with Khudai Khidmatgar, a farce and a shameful farce , this referendum was. And the key reasons were:

A: It was not based on adult franchise, Voting was restricted
B. Not all Pakhtoons were allowed to participate in the referendum that would seal not only their fate but that of their brothers in Afghanistan
C. The tribal Pakhtoons were not allowed to vote. In the population of 3.5 Million only 0.6 Million were allowed to vote
D. 6 Tribal agencies were barred from it
E. The States of Sawat, Dir,Amb, and Chitral were also not allowed to participate

Any referendum that disenfranchises such a large number of population can never be called a legitimate exercise of “self determination”. It has no political, legal and moral authority whatsoever.

As Khudai khidmatgar of Abdul Ghaffar Khan boycotted the Plebiscite, the lone contender in the fray, the Muslim League, won the vote by default, as only 0.6 Millions (17%) out of 3.5 millions of the population were allowed to vote in the Plebiscite and only 51% (2,92 lakhs) of this voted. Muslim League got only 51% votes. The remaining votes of 49% were double stamped. Remember, 83% or nearly 29 lakhs did not participate and Muslim league had got only 51% of 17%, who were asked to vote.

The Results:

Population : 35 Lakhs
Number of people allowed : 5,72,799
Polled votes (51%): 2,92,118
For Pakistan (51.5%) 2,89,244
For India 2,874

51.5% of the allowed Voters , Voted for Pakistan.Is this the result of a referendum that sealed the fate of Millions of Pakhtoons? With the disenfranchisment of 29 lakhs, it can’t even be called a majority vote.


No one understands Nehru's motive, other than influence of Louis Mountbatten and his wife. Ever since PAKHTOONS have been a thorn in the flesh of Pakistan. Pakistan never had its writ run over seven tribal areas of FATA.

Had third option been allowed to Khudai Khidmatgars of an independent state , they would have participated in the Plebiscite. Then, they would have got 90% votes due to Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan and then NORTH WEST FRONTIER PROVINCE would have been Independent state. In any case, once the elected assembly had the majority, the need for refrendum was not understood. Like Bengal and Punjab, NWFP assembly should have decided on the fate of PATHANISTAN. But Nehru ditched Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan.

As Wali Khan, son of late Abdul Ghaffar Khan wrote:

” In the ends, thus, one keeps coming back to the same conclusion that the British were keen on putting an Islamic halter round the socialist order in the north and were not prepared to permit any hurdle, Khudai Khidmatgars’ or whatever, in their way. In fact they were convinced that unless they removed all the nationalist and anti imperialist forces from their path would not be able to consummate their design.”

Was JL Nehru acting as a British agent ?
 
.
He even didnt have a link to prove own legitimacey left alone the link as he described it so precicely seems present at counting himself :D
Plz behave he's the most rational and senior Indian poster --- i and you may disagree with him but in no case personal insults should be thrown at any member---- God Bless
 
.
:omghaha::omghaha::omghaha:

The choice in the referendum was to join Pakistan or join India.

Total eligible voters were 5,72,799.

51% was the turn out.

So in total 2,92,118 votes were cast

Of those 2,89,244 voted for Pakistan.

2,874 voted for India.

So that means, do correct me if I am wrong, that 99.1 percent people voted for Pakistan in that referendum.

Indeed.

The clue, given by yourself, is in the total eligible voters. Please look up my post in response to another member.
 
.
You have to calculate the number who took part and the number who were debarred. Look at the opinion below, and observe how he has done the math (not an Indian author, btw).


Meghnad Desai, "The Rediscovery of India", for starters.

@Mentee Please note.

Another comment which is an opinion merely but illustrates what a farce took place:

Muhammed Iqbal Chawla writes:----

"As the last Viceroy of India, Mountbatten presided over the transfer of power which involved both independence and the division of the subcontinent in 1947. While dividing India it was decided that the wish of the people through the democratic process is sought, for or against, inclusion within Pakistan. In the two major Muslim majority provinces of Bengal and Punjab this was determined by the vote of their representatives in the legislature. In the provinces of the NWFP, Baluchistan and Assam however this was determined by a referendum. The Congress had opted to abstain from the referendum in the NWFP, and its outcome was a heavy mandate for Pakistan but even after that the ruling Congress Ministry refused to resign. Mountbatten refrained from using his discretionary powers to dismiss Dr Khan Sahib’s ministry, consequently, the Government of Pakistan, after it came into being, dismissed it, for it believed that the Congress party had lost every legal or moral foundation to be in power as the people had given a clear verdict in favour of Pakistan and against the Congress government in the Referendum.------------------The author takes the position that Mountbatten, despite the controversy with which he is regarded in Pakistan, played an instrumental role in the accession of NWFP to Pakistan. This was by no means a forgone conclusion in the wake of the Muslim League’s poor showing in the 1946 Frontier Provincial elections.His decision that a referendum should be held enabled the Muslim League to galvanize popular sentiment for inclusion in Pakistan, despite the presence of a Congress ministry----"

Congress abstaining, along with Khudai Khidmatgar, a farce and a shameful farce , this referendum was. And the key reasons were:

A: It was not based on adult franchise, Voting was restricted
B. Not all Pakhtoons were allowed to participate in the referendum that would seal not only their fate but that of their brothers in Afghanistan
C. The tribal Pakhtoons were not allowed to vote. In the population of 3.5 Million only 0.6 Million were allowed to vote
D. 6 Tribal agencies were barred from it
E. The States of Sawat, Dir,Amb, and Chitral were also not allowed to participate

Any referendum that disenfranchises such a large number of population can never be called a legitimate exercise of “self determination”. It has no political, legal and moral authority whatsoever.

As Khudai khidmatgar of Abdul Ghaffar Khan boycotted the Plebiscite, the lone contender in the fray, the Muslim League, won the vote by default, as only 0.6 Millions (17%) out of 3.5 millions of the population were allowed to vote in the Plebiscite and only 51% (2,92 lakhs) of this voted. Muslim League got only 51% votes. The remaining votes of 49% were double stamped. Remember, 83% or nearly 29 lakhs did not participate and Muslim league had got only 51% of 17%, who were asked to vote.

The Results:

Population : 35 Lakhs
Number of people allowed : 5,72,799
Polled votes (51%): 2,92,118
For Pakistan (51.5%) 2,89,244
For India 2,874

51.5% of the allowed Voters , Voted for Pakistan.Is this the result of a referendum that sealed the fate of Millions of Pakhtoons? With the disenfranchisment of 29 lakhs, it can’t even be called a majority vote.


No one understands Nehru's motive, other than influence of Louis Mountbatten and his wife. Ever since PAKHTOONS have been a thorn in the flesh of Pakistan. Pakistan never had its writ run over seven tribal areas of FATA.

Had third option been allowed to Khudai Khidmatgars of an independent state , they would have participated in the Plebiscite. Then, they would have got 90% votes due to Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan and then NORTH WEST FRONTIER PROVINCE would have been Independent state. In any case, once the elected assembly had the majority, the need for refrendum was not understood. Like Bengal and Punjab, NWFP assembly should have decided on the fate of PATHANISTAN. But Nehru ditched Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan.

As Wali Khan, son of late Abdul Ghaffar Khan wrote:

” In the ends, thus, one keeps coming back to the same conclusion that the British were keen on putting an Islamic halter round the socialist order in the north and were not prepared to permit any hurdle, Khudai Khidmatgars’ or whatever, in their way. In fact they were convinced that unless they removed all the nationalist and anti imperialist forces from their path would not be able to consummate their design.”

Was JL Nehru acting as a British agent ?
Sir its a kind of an article would read it tomorrow and come with an answer to it right now iam tired n dizzy going to zzZzZzZz mode
 
.
Slightly, 51% of the total eligible voters cast their vote for Pakistan. 0.5% cast for india - mainly nwfp hindus/sikhs settlers. Over 99% for Pakistan.

Joe however, is completely wrong. The voter turnout was only 15% less than the 1946 elections, and assuming generously that the failed boycott by kk was the main reason for those 15% not to show up, and assuming even more generously that they would've voted for india (they only boycotted b/c afghanistan was not an options thanks to nehru and jinnah), the boycott by kkk wouldn't have made a difference. Afghanistan and/or India (i.e the not-Pakistan option) would still have lost handily. This isn't even including FATA or the Yousufzai state of Swat which was even more pro-Pakistan than the kk bastion of charsadda/peshawar valley.

mr. achakzai isn't even from KP. He from Balochistan. Him and his party have no rep/influence in KPK.



you know you're being intellectually dishonest. You're comparing votes cast for a particular party of the 1946 voter eligibility list to votes not cast from the eligibility list and awarding the opposition party those votes not cast. There is no 49% as opposition in any of the calculations regarding the NWFP referendum. KK would've garnered at most 15% of the votes.

51% to 0.5%. That's how the vote went. or More accurately 99%. Pretty damning..

I am citing more than one opinion on the matter. It is for you to decide if the disqualification of 85% of the eligible electorate leads to a representative vote.

I have never been intellectually dishonest, and fail to see what in your opinion would provoke me to start on a matter like this.

It is amusing to see the stressful responses of some who have replied. That, too, with full knowledge of the chicanery involved.
 
. .
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom