PAK Afghan peace Commission, did they see this coming ?

[Leader]

Pakistan and Afghanistan have upgraded a joint commission for peace in a bid to end Afghanistan’s near-decade old insurgency, and have the support of the US for the move, leaders of the two countries said on Saturday.

Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said he and former Afghan President and High Peace Council chief Burhanuddin Rabbani would lead talks involving the military and intelligence chiefs from both sides of the border for the first time. “Today’s visit, I believe has been one of the most historical and unprecedented meetings, because all the stakeholders were with us,” Gilani said, at a joint news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

The original commission was set up in January.

Karzai said he had discussed the move with US counterpart Barack Obama during a phone call last week, and the upgraded commission had the full backing of the United States.

“We welcome the participation of the US in this tripartite arrangement...We have recently seen more interest by the US in the peace process,” he told the news conference.

But both Gilani and Karzai were keen to emphasise that the peace process would remain “Afghan-led and Afghan-owned.”
President Karzai said: “The joint peace commission which used to be at the level of foreign ministers has been upgraded by Pakistan to the highest governmental level.”

The first tier of commission will now include the chief executives, foreign ministers along with chiefs of the military and intelligence services of the two countries while the second tier will comprise senior officials of foreign ministries, military and intelligence services. “I have assured President Karzai that Pakistan strongly supports an Afghan-led and Afghan-owned process for reconciliation and peace,” Gilani said.

He also extended Pakistan’s full support to the efforts of President Karzai and the High Peace Council, for initiating an inclusive process of grand national reconciliation in which all Afghans not only have a stake but the process also promises the future peace and stability in their country. “We firmly believe that this process must have full Afghan ownership,” Prime Minister Gilani said and added that it was for the Afghan nation to determine the parameters on which a reconciliation and peace process would be shaped.

 

[Leader]

 

[Leader]

some country that claimed to hold itself as stakeholder is missing here !! hmmm....

 

[Omar1984]

Aghanistan can never be friendly to Pakistan when they have America's and India's puppet as President of Afghanistan.

Karzai hates Pakistan's very existence.

 

[Leader]

Aghanistan can never be friendly to Pakistan when they have America's and India's puppet as President of Afghanistan.

Karzai hates Pakistan's very existence.

dont be foolish,

 

[RazorMC]

Remove the puppet and have free elections and let Afghans come to power instead of a US-import.
The most important thing for Afghan people to stop thinking on ethnic lines completely and look at themselves as Afghans. Ask the US to spend more money on development and building institutions because once they leave, ther'll forget Afghanistan like last time.

 

[Leader]

the puppet is good enough to know who can help him, so he made a choice. and kept the "building constructors" out of the politics business !!

 

[Watani]

Afghanistan can never be friendly to Pakistan when they have America's and India's puppet as President of Afghanistan.

Afghanistan isn't the only country with US puppet as it's president, remember.

Karzai hates Pakistan's very existence.

That's what politicians/puppets are for, create and spread hatred. Especially when it comes to Islamic countries.

The most important thing for Afghan people to stop thinking on ethnic lines completely and look at themselves as Afghans.

If our country had a neutral name (indeed like 'Khorasan'), people would have felt much more connected to it's term. Naming the country to 'Afghanistan' in itself was a big mistake, atleast there would have been no ethnic-bias issue regarding it.

 

[Kambojaric]

"If our country had a neutral name (indeed like 'Khorasan'), people would have felt much more connected to it's term. Naming the country to 'Afghanistan' in itself was a big mistake, atleast there would have been no ethnic-bias issue regarding it. "

Just out of curiosity what is the root/meaning of the name Afghanistan? Also doesn't the historic Khorasan region comprise parts of Iran, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan as well? Wouldnt that develop a Greece-Macedonia type of problem regarding Macedonia's name?

 

[Mutee]

It's all going to fail just like all the previous attempts for peace and it can only be established if the core issue is addressed which is the presence of the American troops

---------- Post added at 02:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:02 AM ----------

And btw yes Hamid karzai does hate Pakistan and he is a puppet President

 

[Watani]

@BAMXA
Until the 20th century most of Afghan regions had their independent kingdoms, such as Balkh. Indeed even Iran/Tajikistan/Uzbekistan and etcetera were linked to the term 'Khorasan', but many foreign attacks took place and the country had to be led under ONE kingdom. Since the country was ruled by a Pashtun (known as 'Afghans' by the Persians) it was decided to call the country 'Afghanistan', indeed also to take it's distance from Persian countries like Iran and Tajikistan. Nonetheless, Khorasan is a very neutral name in terms of it's meaning, which means 'the land where the sun rises', as compared to Afghanistan which LITERALLY means 'land of the Pashtuns'. Back in the days there were some upsets amongst the civilians but not too much of an objection and gradually people became accepting of the term. Though because of ethnic tensions arise recently, views and opinions seem to have changed drastically.

 

[Kambojaric]

@BAMXA
Until the 20th century most of Afghan regions had their independent kingdoms, such as Balkh. Indeed even Iran/Tajikistan/Uzbekistan and etcetera were linked to the term 'Khorasan', but many foreign attacks took place and the country had to be led under ONE kingdom. Since the country was ruled by a Pashtun (known as 'Afghans' by the Persians) it was decided to call the country 'Afghanistan', indeed also to take it's distance from Persian countries like Iran and Tajikistan. Nonetheless, Khorasan is a very neutral name in terms of it's meaning, which means 'the land where the sun rises', as compared to Afghanistan which LITERALLY means 'land of the Pashtuns'. Back in the days there were some upsets amongst the civilians but not too much of an objection and gradually people became accepting of the term. Though because of ethnic tensions arise recently, views and opinions seem to have changed drastically.

Interesting, i have heard another theory regarding the origins of the name which seem to suggest it is derived from the sansikrit word "Asvaka" i.e. horse or people of the horse. I know this as it relates to my tribe, the Kamboja, who originate from these lands. The fact that Afghan is synonymous with Pashtun is new to me but looking up on the net, what you say is true. But wikipedia mentions my theory as well

"The name Afghan is believed to be first attested in its Arabic form in the 10th century Ḥudūd al-ʿĀlam.[4] It likely derives from a Sanskritic tribal name, Aśvaka, used in reference to the Kambojas in antiquity."

Afghan (name) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Watani]

^ The original term is said be 'Paktian' (referred to Afghan province of Paktia), though it were the Arabs who referred to all Pashtuns as 'Awghans', which I understood means 'horse-rider' in Arabic. As far as I know the Indians use the term 'Pathan' when they refer to Pashtuns and 'Parsi' when they refer to Tajiks/Persians, Pashtuns/Afghans themselves aren't familiar with the word 'Asvaka' so I doubt our identity is named after any Sanskrit word. Ever since our country is named Afghanistan, the term 'Afghan' is now also being used by non-Pashtuns, which is why many people don't understand why many Pashtuns use the quote 'all Pashtuns are Afghans but not all Afghans are Pashtuns'. Infact, even some Pakistani Pashtuns don't know that these words historically got the same meaning.

 

[hembo]

some country that claimed to hold itself as stakeholder is missing here !! hmmm....

Leader, till the time you have people with views as below, you don't need anyone else to pull you down. AFAIC, peace beween two neighbors is always a good thing. I'm glad that Pakistan and Afghanistan has shown sign of maturity and willing to burry past hatred and work towards a better and peaceful future. Personally I would like to see a peaceful South Asia-China-Russia which is better for our children's peaceful, prosperous future. You would perhaps appreciate that 60+ years of enmity has only dragged us all backwards. It's time to look for the future.

Regards

Aghanistan can never be friendly to Pakistan when they have America's and India's puppet as President of Afghanistan.

Karzai hates Pakistan's very existence.

 

[Leader]

Afghanistan isn't the only country with US puppet as it's president, remember.


That's what politicians/puppets are for, create and spread hatred. Especially when it comes to Islamic countries.


If our country had a neutral name (indeed like 'Khorasan'), people would have felt much more connected to it's term. Naming the country to 'Afghanistan' in itself was a big mistake, atleast there would have been no ethnic-bias issue regarding it.

very well stated.