......When my Pakhtun Grandfather voted for Pakistan, he believed in the idea of Pakistan - A muslim homeland ....
And did your grandfather say that *"I have struggled so long to change the name of my province, but British didn't budge. Now you baita ji, make sure you carry on the struggle of changing the name. British didn't listen to us, but Pakistanis would".
*
No joke, just serious reply please.
And did your grandfather say that *"I have struggled so long to change the name of my province, but British didn't budge. Now you baita ji, make sure you carry on the struggle of changing the name. British didn't listen to us, but Pakistanis would". *
No joke, just serious reply please.
^
Clearly you are trying to provoke. I'll explain according to your narrow minded cranial capacity:
British Imperialists were Christians who would have been overjoyed to control Pakhtunkhwa or at the very least stop the attacks from the "frontier." Therefore, Northwest Frontier became a purely administrative name. With the Pakistan movement, calling for a Muslim state, the name change was almost an implicit matter - trivial in the sense that opposition to Pakhtunkhwa is both disappointing and shocking to many Pakhtuns of that era and beyond. So to make things clear: This name change issue has big deal because of the illogical and unnecessary opposition from certain quarters. Pakhtuns, being staunch Muslims saw an Islamic Pakistan as a means of expressing their identity not having to continue to tolerate the limitations imposed by the imperialists of the past.
Now I am more than happy to interact and discuss this matter with thejoke as he happens to have links with the province, what right do you have to critique or criticize something that is purely a provincial matter? Stick with your praise of the US and bashing Afghanistan.
^
......With the Pakistan movement, calling for a Muslim state, the name change was almost an implicit matter - ..
bro! you don't know the history of Sarhad. That's a shame.
Let me give you a bit of background of the political landscape of the region as it existed around the challenging years of 1940s.
Sarhad residents (Pashtuns, Hinkos, and Hazaras) were mainly divided along left-wing Hindu-Congress (with main leader as Badshah Khan aka sarhadi ghandi) and right-wing Muslim League. Until 1947 no implicit or explicit name-change claims were made by either of the two main parties.
Badsha Khan was named "sarhadi ghandi" and not "Pashtunistani ghandi and by the way he was proud of that name. (Nothing against him. He was a good man. His decentness were not upto the par though)
Once Sarhadi ghandi was defeated in the referendum, Hindus started roping in few leftist Pashtuns in Peshawar and in Afghanistan, just to make sure that newly founded Pakistani state gets a bloody nose. Leading that charge were $tupid thankless Afghanistani-Hindu-agents like Pizhwak etc.
And even with nicks like Pak-one you are trying to carry on the tradition of those Hindu-instigators (perhaps unwittingly).
And that's what bugs the hell out of those who have bitter memories of Hindu atrocities on Pakistan and Pakistanis.
It is your choice to side with Hindus or Pakistanis. Name change was never an issue for Pashtun leadership before 1947. Perhaps you are not familiar with the region or its history.
**bro! you don't know the history of Sarhad. That's a shame.
Let me give you a bit of background of the political landscape of the region as it existed around the challenging years of 1940s.
Sarhad residents (Pashtuns, Hinkos, and Hazaras) were mainly divided along left-wing Hindu-Congress (with main leader as Badshah Khan aka sarhadi ghandi) and right-wing Muslim League. Until 1947 no implicit or explicit name-change claims were made by either of the two main parties. **
The name change was not an issue in the face of the larger matter at hand (Azadi from the British). Issues like name change, living in a Muslim country were implicit in the minds of the voters.
You don’t know about Pakhtunkhwa. Besides my family, I have spoken with historians and family members who were around during the partition – their views and historical accounts have more credence than your statements. Yes, the Badshah Khan baba and his movement was held in high esteem, however there is also campaign to discredit the fact that Pakhtuns overwhelmingly voted for Pakistan (please do remind me of that percentage?), yet our patriotism continues to be questioned.
**
Badsha Khan was named "sarhadi ghandi" and not "Pashtunistani ghandi and by the way he was proud of that name. (Nothing against him. He was a good man. His decentness were not upto the par though)
Once Sarhadi ghandi was defeated in the referendum, Hindus started roping in few leftist Pashtuns in Peshawar and in Afghanistan, just to make sure that newly founded Pakistani state gets a bloody nose. Leading that charge were $tupid thankless Afghanistani-Hindu-agents like Pizhwak etc.
**
That is not relevant to this discussion. When an entire province voted to elect a party that has clearly stated a name change in it’s platform, who are you to bring up some obtuse historical theories. This is something that the majority wants based on election of the ANP. This is not an issue of concern to you. You will not see me intruding in the democratic process of your home city/province.
**
And even with nicks like Pak-one you are trying to carry on the tradition of those Hindu-instigators (perhaps unwittingly).
And that's what bugs the hell out of those who have bitter memories of Hindu atrocities on Pakistan and Pakistanis. **
Oh please I have done more for Pakistan than you would know or believe. My family has a longstanding diplomatic record of representing Pakistan irrespective of the government of the time. This name change is an issue of identity. Imagine if Pakistan was named ‘Northwest India’ by the Brits and Pakistanis were forced to continue that name after 1947, sounds pretty silly yes?
**
It is your choice to side with Hindus or Pakistanis. Name change was never an issue for Pashtun leadership before 1947. Perhaps you are not familiar with the region or its history.**
Of course the name change wasn’t an issue for the Pakhtun leadership, independence was. Any sane person would try to discard the yoke of the imperialists before worrying about the name of their area. The political dialectic shifts along the time continuum, where the Pakhtun leadership, after acquiring independence and becoming part of Pakistan, sought to rename their home province and fulfill the wishes of the majority.
Oh this is rich coming from an avowed British/American bootlicker: Using Islam as the wild card to convince me that I am following some type of Indian agenda. Indians are not involved in this matter, it is an internal matter that only concerns the people of Pakhtunkhwa, therefore any resident (Pakhtun, Hindoko, Chitrali etc.) is welcome to weigh in on it.
The only thing that the ANP can do for the pashtuns is give them an identity. They cant get them jobs, security, food, improved standard of life, better education so they have made this one issue one to fight for.
It all boils down to principles.
If i was a filthy rich Pakhtun politician I would not worry about the economy, social issues, better life style for the people.....because I have that......I owuld worry about issues like identity/ name changing.
More and more Pakhtuns from NWFP each day are emigrating to Punjab and Sindh. There may not be anyone left in The pakhtun areas of NWFP because the government does not have and has never ever had a reakl plan to deal with the problems.
Why dont they fight for doing ACTUAL things for pakhtuns...ie making sure pashtu is a language taught in schools where there are pashtuns.
The only thing to a name change is what your lifes priorities are.
Thank you on all counts. I know what people will say: NWFP has so many problems why dwell on a name issue? Well basically it comes down to identity and being part of Pakistan. When my Pakhtun Grandfather voted for Pakistan, he believed in the idea of Pakistan - A muslim homeland with a place for Pakhtuns in its' colorful ethnic mosaic. He never saw himself living in NWFP - A purely Imperial British creation. Since independence (and further adding fuel to the fire) cities like Montgomery, Lyallpur were changed to reflect the more Muslim and indegenious names, why not NWFP? Simply because SOME people fear secession or others harp on unneccssary and illogical "minority" rights arguments.
Bottom line is that NWFP has to go, as it continues to abrasively serve as a colonial vestige of no useful merit.
Whwt would you do if people wanted to change the name of Pakistan and one of the options put forward was Punjab and it not so surprisngly got the highets number of votes ......should it be changed?
There is one thing you dont understand about the names of Punjab and Sindh. They are not ethnic names. Sindh takes its name from the river Indus/Sindhu and its people became named after this region, even though they belonged to different tribes. Punjab means 5 rivers - the people living here, like the sindhisbelonged to many different tribes but became known as Punjabis.
Balochistan was given by the British.
Pakhtuns have every right to make a pakhtun province but a chance has to be given to the minorities - do they accept the name? if they dont accept it - what options are there? a neutral name? opt out and make a new province?
sadly the minorities have been drowned out because of opposition based on pakhtun-phobia outside of NWFP and the pakhtuns ethnicising the whole issue. Some non-NWFP people are afraid of the whole pakhtun name thing because they see it as a step towards independence. At the same time pakhtuns have pakhtunised the whole issue and accused those out of nwfp being anti-pakhtun and they will give it what name they want - the sad thing about this is what the pakhtun supporters of the renaming thing accuse those outside nwfp of ie being racist, ignorant of our culture etc......the pakhtuns are going to end up doing the exact same thing to the chitralis, hindkowans, seraikis in nwfp.....
They are not just any old minorities but they are native to the area and deserve to have input. Is nt that what democracy is all about?
I personally think scrap punjab, sindh, balochistan, nwfp - cut them up and make more numerous provinces.
democractically, they have the right to call their land whatever the hell they want.
Furthermore the issue of hindko speaking people assumes that no other province has sizable minorities of another ethnicity. So its pretty illogical to use that argument when three other provinces have names associated with the dominant ethnicity. It doesnt matter if some of those provinces were arguably named before the ethnicity got its name, you could argue that it is now associated with the ethnic group, and therefore other minority sects feel sad, so lets change Punjab's name shall we?
And the whole we-came-here-first thing is lame beyond words. It doesnt matter who came first.
Finally, I fail to see what the national implication of this is, and if there is none, I fail to see why the federal govt has a say in it.
**bro! you don't know the history of Sarhad. That's a shame.
Let me give you a bit of background of the political landscape of the region as it existed around the challenging years of 1940s.
Sarhad residents (Pashtuns, Hinkos, and Hazaras) were mainly divided along left-wing Hindu-Congress (with main leader as Badshah Khan aka sarhadi ghandi) and right-wing Muslim League. Until 1947 no implicit or explicit name-change claims were made by either of the two main parties. **
[quote="pak-one"]
The name change was not an issue in the face of the larger matter at hand (Azadi from the British). Issues like name change, living in a Muslim country were implicit in the minds of the voters.........
.
[/QUOTE]
Look British partitioned Punjab and made Sarhad in 1902 and they appointed Pashtun officers and politicians to run the newly created region.
Now go back to your family historians and ask them if they can produce a single document from 1902 through 1947 that shows even a small application to set the name of the Sarhad correctly. And yes majority of Pashtuns WERE NOT FIGHTING the British in 1902.
For 55 years (From 1902 to 1947) not a peep came out for the name change. It was only when Pakistan came into being AGAINST the Hindu supporters' plans, that they turned around and started raising ethnic slogans in cahoots with Hindu and Afghanistani socialists.
And you my friend are simply repeating the propaganda of Hindu and Afghanistani socialists.
The problem clearly is with some of the modern day Pashtuns that they don't know much about the "written" history even for the relatively short life of their province.
They listen to few rumors and start believing in them as if they were the divine revelations.
You keep on telling me the name change was implicit. In politics you put your stuff on the table from day 1 and do not carry around things hidden in conspiracy theories.
The only thing that the ANP can do for the pashtuns is give them an identity. They cant get them jobs, security, food, improved standard of life, better education so they have made this one issue one to fight for.
It all boils down to principles.
If i was a filthy rich Pakhtun politician I would not worry about the economy, social issues, better life style for the people.....because I have that......I owuld worry about issues like identity/ name changing.
More and more Pakhtuns from NWFP each day are emigrating to Punjab and Sindh. There may not be anyone left in The pakhtun areas of NWFP because the government does not have and has never ever had a reakl plan to deal with the problems.
Why dont they fight for doing ACTUAL things for pakhtuns...ie making sure pashtu is a language taught in schools where there are pashtuns.
The only thing to a name change is what your lifes priorities are.
Again, this name change issue always becomes a focal point of attention because of the unnecessary opposition to it. I say lets change the name legislatively and move on to bigger and better issues. I agree that the economic issues, a better life for ALL residents of the province and managing the militant threat is a crucial priority.
I agree that Pakhtu along with Urdu and English should be taught in the appropriate areas. Hindko, Chitrali and other languages also must be supported on a provincial level as the represent the identities of mny people. We need comprehensive solutions for these problems and would be happy to discuss them with you.
*Look British partitioned Punjab and made Sarhad in 1902 and they appointed Pashtun officers and politicians to run the newly created region.
*
Lands west of the abaseen existed as separate entity for times immemorial, your Brits did jack to "create" a region. they inherited the region from Ranjit Singh who wanted to demarcate the Pakhtunkhwa areas as distinct from the agriculturally rich plains of Punjab. So sad that you don't even know the basics, a trip to Lahore's Museum might change that.
**
Now go back to your family historians and ask them if they can produce a single document from 1902 through 1947 that shows even a small application to set the name of the Sarhad correctly. And yes majority of Pashtuns WERE NOT FIGHTING the British in 1902.
For 55 years (From 1902 to 1947) not a peep came out for the name change. It was only when Pakistan came into being AGAINST the Hindu supporters' plans, that they turned around and started raising ethnic slogans in cahoots with Hindu and Afghanistani socialists.
**
In politics coalitions are built on the larger good of the region - in this case it was independence from the British, so ofcourse there no discussions of the name of a provincewhen there was NO independent country to begin with..its really amazing that I haveto spell that out to you.
Also you are confusing Pakhtunistan with Pakhtunkhwa. One is secessionist, the other represents a genuine desire to align identity with the name of the province. Of course subtlety is never your strong suit.
**
And you my friend are simply repeating the propaganda of Hindu and Afghanistani socialists.
The problem clearly is with some of the modern day Pashtuns that they don't know much about the "written" history even for the relatively short life of their province.
They listen to few rumors and start believing in them as if they were the divine revelations.
You keep on telling me the name change was implicit. In politics you put your stuff on the table from day 1 and do not carry around things hidden in conspiracy theories.**
Pakhtun history predates Islam, forget Pakistan. Administrative demarcations continue to be an affront to the majority of the province. Don't bring in the Indians or Afghan - they have nothing to do with this issue. In fact most of Pakistan doesn't have anything to do with this issue, yet herewe are doing circles around a legitimate name change matter.
In politics you put the stuff on the table from day? Either your misguided or an outright liar. Nothing is ever on or off the table.
** Now go back to your family historians and ask them if they can produce a single document from 1902 through 1947 that shows even a small application to set the name of the Sarhad correctly. And yes majority of Pashtuns WERE NOT FIGHTING the British in 1902.
For 55 years (From 1902 to 1947) not a peep came out for the name change. It was only when Pakistan came into being AGAINST the Hindu supporters' plans, that they turned around and started raising ethnic slogans in cahoots with Hindu and Afghanistani socialists. **
[quote="pak-one, post:34, topic:196266"]
In politics coalitions are built on the larger good of the region - in this case it was independence from the British, so ofcourse there no discussions of the name of a provincewhen there was NO independent country to begin with..its really amazing that I haveto spell that out to you.
Also you are confusing Pakhtunistan with Pakhtunkhwa. One is secessionist, the other represents a genuine desire to align identity with the name of the province. Of course subtlety is never your strong suit.
...
...
[/QUOTE]
You mean the province could not be named until British left?
That's a big news.
O Bhai. The name of the province was selected by British and ACCEPTED by Pashtun leadership. Why do you tend to ignore the history because your elders never gave you this detail. Here is some milestones for Sarhad province from the Wiki:
1901 - The province was formed as a Chief Commissioner province. The Chief Commissioner was the chief executive of the province.
1902 - the occasion of the historical "Darbar" in Shahi Bagh in Peshawar held by Lord Curzon. The formal inauguration of the province took place.
1931 -Tthe Round Table Conference. It was agreed upon in the conference that the NWFP would be raised to a governor province with its own Legislative Council.
1932-- the Viceroy inaugurated NWFP Legislative Council.
1935 - The NWFP was raised to a full-fledged Governor province
Now that you know a bit more about Sarhad tell me!
why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1901?
why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1902?
why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1931?
why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1932?
why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1935?
You mean Pashtun politicians can have lagistive sessions and big darbars with the viceroys in all these years and yet no talk about the name of the province. How's that possible?
Man the Pashtuns politicians were kissing British viceroy's hands just like the leaders from other provinces.
Then in 1947, when socialists and Hindu-lackeys were least expecting, the province became part of Pakistan. And guess what, the same anti-Pakistan socialists and Hindu-Lackeys started the mischievous plots like the name part and the hypocrisies on the border with Afghanistan.
You mean the province could not be named until British left?
That's a big news.
O Bhai. The name of the province was selected by British and ACCEPTED by Pashtun leadership. Why do you tend to ignore the history because your elders never gave you this detail. Here is some milestones for Sarhad province from the Wiki:
1901 - The province was formed as a Chief Commissioner province. The Chief Commissioner was the chief executive of the province.
1902 - the occasion of the historical "Darbar" in Shahi Bagh in Peshawar held by Lord Curzon. The formal inauguration of the province took place.
1931 -Tthe Round Table Conference. It was agreed upon in the conference that the NWFP would be raised to a governor province with its own Legislative Council.
1932-- the Viceroy inaugurated NWFP Legislative Council.
1935 - The NWFP was raised to a full-fledged Governor province
Now that you know a bit more about Sarhad tell me!
why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1901? why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1902? why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1931? why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1932? why no one ever talked about Pashtunistan in 1935?
You mean Pashtun politicians can have lagistive sessions and big darbars with the viceroys in all these years and yet no talk about the name of the province. How's that possible?
Man the Pashtuns politicians were kissing British viceroy's hands just like the leaders from other provinces.
Then in 1947, when socialists and Hindu-lackeys were least expecting, the province became part of Pakistan. And guess what, the same anti-Pakistan socialists and Hindu-Lackeys started the mischievous plots like the name part and the hypocrisies on the border with Afghanistan.
This discussion is getting retarded with each exchange. What province do you speak of? NWFP during colonialism or after the formation of an independent Pakistan? If we are talking about the British period then your entire argument becomes irrelevant because its a non-sequiter fallacy to connect the policies of British period to an independent Pakistan.
The people of Pakhtunkhwa voted in party that has made the name change to Pakhtunkhwa a piece of is agenda, now me make some things clear for you:
Who are you to subvert democracy and the will of the people? Who you to make some ridiculous arguments of Pakhunsnot asking the British to change the name of an administrative region? The answer to all of thequestionsisthat you no one to dictate to us.
As for kissing the viceroy's hands, its a damn shame that you continue this practice long after the Brits have left. The name NorthWest Frontier Province doesn't mean a damn thing to anyone anymore.
P-one bp has made loads of factually inaccurate comments which also need correcting for other readers and not for him.
He makes a wrong comparison between NWFP and other provinces. NWFP was under defacto martial law for most of the 1905-1935 period and 1939-1944 period. It had no legislative council throughout the initial period and no Pashtun chief minister till the mid 1930's. He wrongly believes Ghaffar Khan assumed the role of Sarhadi gandhi which in fact h deeply disliked. His comments about imaginary hindu conspiracies is just part of the usual smear campaigns that are done by establishment supporters.
....... He makes a wrong comparison between NWFP and other provinces. NWFP was under defacto martial law for most of the 1905-1935 period and 1939-1944 period....
So were other provinces of British-India. Did that stop them from making their "province-specific" demands? Heck no!
FYI. There were major milestones (as listed above) in the short history of Sarhad and many top Pashtun leaders were like hand-in-glove with the Brits. There were all kinds of demands including the status of Sarhad even in 1931 round table conference.
Brits accepted such demands and implemented them "according the the wishes" of Sarhad politicians.
And yet there was never a demand to change the name.
The name changers only got life AFTER Hindus and socialists lost the referendum. Thus the whole tamasha was started by anti-Pakistani Hindus, socialists and communists.
BTW Bacha khan was least interested in the name changing too. Especially before 1947 no record exists. Now prove it otherwise with documentary evidence and this discussion will end in your favor.
If you two want to ignore the history, well do so at your own peril. Because just like Afghanistanis you two are bent upon following the mischievous tendencies of socialists, communists and now Islamists.
Make your case on solid footing and you will succeed. Rumor mongering and ignorance never helps.
P-one bp has made loads of factually inaccurate comments which also need correcting for other readers and not for him.
He makes a wrong comparison between NWFP and other provinces. NWFP was under defacto martial law for most of the 1905-1935 period and 1939-1944 period. It had no legislative council throughout the initial period and no Pashtun chief minister till the mid 1930's. He wrongly believes Ghaffar Khan assumed the role of Sarhadi gandhi which in fact h deeply disliked. His comments about imaginary hindu conspiracies is just part of the usual smear campaigns that are done by establishment supporters.
Zakk, thank you for pointing out the inaccuracies. I wasn't even willing to engage him on the pre-partition state of NWFP because it is beyond ludicrous to expect Pakhtuns and the leadership to call for province named Pakhtunkhwa when there is no independent Pakistan. The British made up a termNorthwest FrontierProvinceand they could have named it Afghanistan East, yet people like B-P would still complain why didn't Pakhtuns speak up before 1947.
i say that is history lets talk about the present: The namechangeshould go through not because of some comspricy theory but rather the justified demands of the populace as evident by their votes.
........ i say that is history lets talk about the present: ..
Ah right! Pak one.
You want to ignore history? OK for next 24 hours we put temporary restrictions on the use of history and discuss this thread. OK?
Just look at the subject line of this thread. "Greater pashtunistan".
So let's assume you want to ignore history and you really mean that. Here is something related to the thread and your name-changing cries.
**
Do you agree that "the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan should be enforced just like NORMAL international borders?"
**
So were other provinces of British-India. Did that stop them from making their "province-specific" demands? Heck no!.
Really which ones? there is virtually no comparison between what was going on in NWFP and the tribal areas and the other provinces in united India. The closest you will get is **national movements **like the Khilafat movement or quit India movements. Sind was the only province where you had a Hur rebellion but even that wasn't on for years on end..
FYI.There were major milestones (as listed above) in the short history of Sarhad and many top Pashtun leaders were like hand-in-glove with the Brits. There were all kinds of demands including the status of Sarhad even in 1931 round table conference.
Brits accepted such demands and implemented them "according the the wishes" of Sarhad politicians.
Obviously there were some Pashtun politicians who were hand in glove with politicians much the same way politicians and people are hand in glove with the establishment..some people are attracted to power. To say the British just bestowed the provincial status and provincial rights to the province out of the goodness of their hearts is totally out of touch with reality.it took huge efforts from everyone from Jinnah to Gandhi for the province to get even the most basic rights offered to the other provinces.
The name changers only got life AFTER Hindus and socialists lost the referendum. Thus the whole tamasha was started by anti-Pakistani Hindus, socialists and communists.
I refer you to pak-ones comments about the difference between Pakhtunkhwa and Pakhtunistan. I'd also like to correct you again that the pakhtunistan option was mentioned after the Indian National Congress had accepted partition and before the referendum.
If you two want to ignore the history, well do so at your own peril. Because just like Afghanistanis you two are bent upon following the mischievous tendencies of socialists, communists and now Islamists.
Make your case on solid footing and you will succeed. Rumor mongering and ignorance never helps.
If you wish genuianely to have a debate you can do better then making linkages where none exist and make assumptions from facts. Labelling people who disagree with you as Hindu/socialist/Islamists everytime does little to show you know what you are talking about either.
Ah right! Pak one.
You want to ignore history? OK for next 24 hours we put temporary restrictions on the use of history and discuss this thread. OK?
Just look at the subject line of this thread. "Greater pashtunistan".
So let's assume you want to ignore history and you really mean that. Here is something related to the thread and your name-changing cries. ** Do you agree that "the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan should be enforced just like NORMAL international borders?"
**
Your selective reading skills are exemplary. In regards to your question: I have called for a soft border between the to countries, no export militancy but avenue of trade and mutual cooperation. See? its not so hard to give
an upfront response.
Since I responded to your question, its your turn:
What right do you have to subvert the proposed name change of NWFP to Pakhtunkhwa? This is a provincial matter exemplifies desires of the province.
Whwt would you do if people wanted to change the name of Pakistan and one of the options put forward was Punjab and it not so surprisngly got the highets number of votes ......should it be changed?
There is one thing you dont understand about the names of Punjab and Sindh. They are not ethnic names. Sindh takes its name from the river Indus/Sindhu and its people became named after this region, even though they belonged to different tribes. Punjab means 5 rivers - the people living here, like the sindhisbelonged to many different tribes but became known as Punjabis.
Balochistan was given by the British.
Pakhtuns have every right to make a pakhtun province but a chance has to be given to the minorities - do they accept the name? if they dont accept it - what options are there? a neutral name? opt out and make a new province?
sadly the minorities have been drowned out because of opposition based on pakhtun-phobia outside of NWFP and the pakhtuns ethnicising the whole issue. Some non-NWFP people are afraid of the whole pakhtun name thing because they see it as a step towards independence. At the same time pakhtuns have pakhtunised the whole issue and accused those out of nwfp being anti-pakhtun and they will give it what name they want - the sad thing about this is what the pakhtun supporters of the renaming thing accuse those outside nwfp of ie being racist, ignorant of our culture etc......the pakhtuns are going to end up doing the exact same thing to the chitralis, hindkowans, seraikis in nwfp.....
They are not just any old minorities but they are native to the area and deserve to have input. Is nt that what democracy is all about?
I personally think scrap punjab, sindh, balochistan, nwfp - cut them up and make more numerous provinces.
The democratic process has been subverted so many times, and minority rights ignored so often in Pakistan, I honestly dont think anyone will care if NWFP is renamed against the wishes of the minority Hindkowans. In the great scheme of things, it makes no difference. In the long run however, it will be off great help if we can avoid antagonize the majority, even at the expense of the minority, who I am sure will eventually reconcile themselves to the situation.
Do you agree that "the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan should be enforced just like NORMAL international borders?"
[quote="pak-one, post:10, topic:196557"]
...In regards to your question: I have called for a soft border between the to countries, ... .
.
[/QUOTE]
"soft border"???? yeah right.
Why do you forget that militancy is being imported/exported because of this so-called "software border".
why do you forget that smuggling and illegal arms are flowing into Pakistan because of this soft border.
"Grater Pakhtunistan" supporters want the border issue to be "soft" but the name issue to be "hard".
this is precisely the selective application of history here?
See this is how some people want to use history on Pak-Afghan border issue, but the the same people want us to forget history for the name-changing shenanigans.
"soft border"???? yeah right.
Why do you forget that militancy is being imported/exported because of this so-called "software border".
why do you forget that smuggling and illegal arms are flowing into Pakistan because of this soft border.
"Grater Pakhtunistan" supporters want the border issue to be "soft" but the name issue to be "hard".
this is precisely the selective application of history here?
See this is how some people want to use history on Pak-Afghan border issue, but the the same people want us to forget history for the name-changing shenanigans.
Fine, go ahead and try to enforce the international border, can YOU do it? All one needs to do is physically go to the Durand line to see how impractical it becomes enforcing the border. 60+ years have gone by. My solution is a pragmatic one, grounded in the realities.- go ahead an enforce away (PS: You might want to take back Swat first).
In typical chankya fashion you refused to answer my question, so I will repeat:
**
What right do you have to subvert the proposed name change of NWFP to Pakhtunkhwa? This is a provincial matter exemplifies desires of the province.**