Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
Let's call it Little Afghanistan.
:k: Pakhtunkhwa!
Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
^^ it's already a so-called little afghanistan ............................ but now they wanna give it a new name
Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
Way things are going, it might be Coalition controlled Little Afghanistan pretty soon.
Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
People from Lahore, Lalukhet or Karachi need not worry what the natives of NWFP want to rename their province into.
While i certainly have no doubt on your or any other Pakhtun's patriotism living in NWFP and infact you might be more patriotic then i am....
I am just questioning the way they have opted to change the name. A political party solely must not be entitled to take decisions of this nature. How about the people who live in NWFP??.... How do you know that many people agree on this name of "Pakhtoonkhwa" ?? How many Districts in NWFP agree with the name of "Pakhtoonkhwa"??
How can ANP be representative of all the 100% people of NWFP?? Why not conducting a refrendum in all districts of NWFP and seeing which ones agree with it...
Under 'democracy' the will of the majority rules through the elected representatives. I don't think you need to have referendum or 100% people to vote for a name change in order to achieve it.
When city names like Lyallpur or Montgomery were changed, was there a referendum? Like it or not Sindh, Punjab, and Baluchistan - while being diverse provinces, are named after the historic nationalities.
Interestingly enough, there is large Pashtun population in Northern Baluchistan, yet despite that fact, the province is known as Baluchistan.
At the same times its perfectly acceptable for a political party like ANP (who have no other real policy but name change) to change the name of a province because they feel its right?
Is nt Pakhtunkhwa a colonial affront to the Hindkowans, Seraikis, Chitralis, Kohistanis, Hazarawals?
The problem with Pakistan is people do interfere with areas not related to them. There will be more input from Non-NWFP people on name change than the locals. Theres more input from Punjab and Karachi. At the same time when there is a political clash in Karachi ie MQM vs whoever - the thread is kept alive by non-Karachites non-Sindhis ie Pashtuns,Punjabis.
Why are people from outside areas concerned when there is a clash in Karachi?
ANP may have a one policy agenda, but obviously it has enough resonance amongst the people to have it repeatedly forwarded within the democratic framework of Pakistan.
The minority group argument is base less because there are plenty of minority groups living in Sindh and Punjab yet the province names have not been the issue, equality and the distribution of resources has been a greater concern there.
In regards to the clashes in Karachi - I don't think it is fair to compare them with a name change, unless you believe changing the name will cause violence. If Karachi's name is changed to Jinnahpur, do you think that non-Karachiite, Non-Sindhis will be up in arms over the name change? I don't think so.
To equate senseless ethnic violence with the name change does not work. On the other hand, if there is concern for separatist sentiment, I do want to mention that there is a Punjab in India and a Baluchistan va Seistan in Iran, yet that issue never comes up in such discussions.
People from Lahore, Lalukhet or Karachi need not worry what the natives of NWFP want to rename their province into.
Thank you! It should not be a big deal, but it has become one. I don't think that renaming the province will bring any material prosperity, however having a provincial name reflecting the primary heritage goes a long way in further strengthening Pakistan.
Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
good points pak-one.
there needs to be a certain level of political maturity for non-NWFP people to appreciate the fact that this is NOT your concern.
it is a provincial issue and is rightly being decided by the elected representatives of that province. if people dont like the name (as is being speculated) they can vote against it in the next elections.
the federal govt shouldnt even have a say in this, and what mr. zardari thinks should have the same significance as my thoughts on his garden decorations.
Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
^ It cannot be done without the Fed Govts approval, but that does not mean the system is flawed, it should work out nicely since this was part of ANP's agenda, and they clearly got the mandate which proves that this is what the people want, and if they are to continue their support for Zardari's Govt, Zardari needs to fulfill his promise.
Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
no the system is flawed. Pakistan has too strong and overbearing a federal govt, which contributes to much broader problems than name changes.
anyway thats another topic, discussed here
Th way Pakhtuns discard the minority argument is selfish - NWFP was not formed for Pakhtuns alone. When you talk about Sindh and Punjab - the people named themselves after the area. Sindh and Punjab have been known as such for so many centuries. There were the accepted names and people named themselves after it NOT the other way around.
The only solutions would be to redraw provincial boundaries of the so called pakhtun povincce so the chitralis, hazarawal, seraikis do not feel they are forced into it. Another solution would be to discard the large provinces and make smaller ones.
ANP may have a one policy agenda, but obviously it has enough resonance amongst the people to have it repeatedly forwarded within the democratic framework of Pakistan.
The minority group argument is base less because there are plenty of minority groups living in Sindh and Punjab yet the province names have not been the issue, equality and the distribution of resources has been a greater concern there.
In regards to the clashes in Karachi - I don't think it is fair to compare them with a name change, unless you believe changing the name will cause violence. If Karachi's name is changed to Jinnahpur, do you think that non-Karachiite, Non-Sindhis will be up in arms over the name change? I don't think so.
To equate senseless ethnic violence with the name change does not work. On the other hand, if there is concern for separatist sentiment, I do want to mention that there is a Punjab in India and a Baluchistan va Seistan in Iran, yet that issue never comes up in such discussions.
Imagine if Kalabagh am was put under a referendum - the people of the affected 3 provinces ie sindh, nwfp, punjab voted and punjab won - would that man the dam should be constructed? Not every problem is solved by votes and majority rules - at times commonsense, compromise and looking at views from another angle matters too.
Faisalabad was not named after an ethnic group - its a neutral name. Many people call NWFP Name Wanted for Province - but that name should reflect the current and modern heritage of the area. 50% of Pashtu speakers within NWFP are not even classed as Pashtuns by the locals.
What surprises me or should i say does not - is that the very people who are so pro renaming Pashtunkhwa/pakhtunistan are the very people who complain that "Indic" groups (the terms they use) such as Muhajirs and Punjabis are dominating Pakistan in very sphere an forcing an "Indic" culture upon non-Indic areas such as NWFP/Balochistan. But these very people who complain now want to force a Pakhtun identity on so many non-Pakhtuns because thy feel "left out". The renaming would never affect Pakhtun integration into Pakistan.
One more thing the ANP leaders from the very bottom of their hearts do not believe in Pakistan let alone their integration into it. Given the chance they will go back to their anti-Pakistan ways. All thy have really changed is what they say publicly as they know that the vast majority of Pakhtuns in NWFP are pro-Pakistan and would not tolerate their secular nationalistic approach.
Under 'democracy' the will of the majority rules through the elected representatives. I don't think you need to have referendum or 100% people to vote for a name change in order to achieve it.
When city names like Lyallpur or Montgomery were changed, was there a referendum? Like it or not Sindh, Punjab, and Baluchistan - while being diverse provinces, are named after the historic nationalities.
Interestingly enough, there is large Pashtun population in Northern Baluchistan, yet despite that fact, the province is known as Baluchistan.
Th way Pakhtuns discard the minority argument is selfish - NWFP was not formed for Pakhtuns alone. When you talk about Sindh and Punjab - the people named themselves after the area. Sindh and Punjab have been known as such for so many centuries. There were the accepted names and people named themselves after it NOT the other way around.
The only solutions would be to redraw provincial boundaries of the so called pakhtun povincce so the chitralis, hazarawal, seraikis do not feel they are forced into it. Another solution would be to discard the large provinces and make smaller ones.
There is no 'discarding' of the minority argument. It seems like the minority argument has been used to oppress the majority up until now.
NWFP was not 'formed' it has existed as Pakhtunkhwa for centuries. If the British decided to take a a pen and randomly draw boundaries does not change the reality on the ground: Pakhtuns constitute the numerical majority. Pakhtunkhwa is an accepted name and has been accepted unofficially for decades. Not one Pakhtun I have met has ever said 'I am from NWFP' or 'I am going to NWFP.'
I find it ironic that you would rather sacrifice provincial boundaries to stop a simple name change. This would certainly mean that N. Baluchistan + Attock would come under a Pakhtun province and create further disharmony. I am not talking about some dramatic shift that would further weaken Pakistan.
Wow so you are actually arguing against democracy and the majority will of the people now? I guess my forefathers were fools to vote for Pakistan in a certain referendum.
Actually you’re dead wrong about the percentage of Pakhtu speakers: http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/pco/statistics/other_tables/pop_by_mother_tongue.pdf
If you look at the chart, you will find that the Punjabi speakers predominate in Punjab, Sindhi speakers in Sindh, and Pakhto/Pashto speakers in Pakhtunkhwa.
I think that a name change hardly means an imposition of Pakhtun identity on minorities. I don’t think any Urdu speaker in Sindh will say that the provincial name ‘Sindh’ is imposing a Sindhi identity. It is more about economic and social policies that cause disagreements rather than the name itself.
I don’t speak for the ANP leadership, however on this issue they 100% reflect the majority views of the province. Despite being pro Pakistani for decades, the simple aspiration of Pakhtuns to have a province that includes the history of their land and moves away from the colonial construct, is being denied due to weak minority arguments, baseless separatism fears, and the denial of democratic-majoritarian opinion.
you forgot to add, flawed according to your opinion.
Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
that would make sense if usually i was expressing someone else's opinion
Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
^ let me tell u why its not flawed then, according to my opinion...
if you have the sort of provincial autonomy that you are referring to, there will be name changes every time the regime changes in nwfp/pakhtunkhwa, just because the other one didnt like the name or politicized the issue. If there was no say by the Fed Govt, the provinces up north can build dams and completely stop the supply of water or other such projects. This isnt good for a cohesive country at all.
Re: NWFP to be renamed Pakhtoonkhwa: Zardari
part of democracy is to not assume your opinion matters more than others, and letting local concerns be addressed by local people.
your argument about the name change could just be made into "we shouldnt have democracy because parliament can pass a law saying all elephants should be shot, lets save the elephants by not having elections". People are rational, and very few democratic systems in the world have name changes every election cycle.
This is not to say that matters that may be interpreted as frivolous dont make their way to the ballots. But that is the nature of democracy.
Rahi baat dams ki, that is a fair point. This is where having an overriding federal government actually makes things worse, because it gives a perception to the smaller provinces that one province, which is perhaps over-represented in the federal govt, is getting favours.
Settle these issues like any two entities would. Pakistan has a water brokering commission, representing all four provinces. That is the place to resolve disputes. The federal govt should have a say in the matter, but only to the extent of facilitating the resolution of disputes, not dictating one way or the other.
You live in the US, where the federal govt is now very powerful, but has traditionally been less so compared to the states. I dont believe there is a tradition of frequent name changes by states.
It is a balance, but the more it favours the states, the less chance of an autocratic/despotic setup.
part of democracy is to not assume your opinion matters more than others, and letting local concerns be addressed by local people.
your argument about the name change could just be made into "we shouldnt have democracy because parliament can pass a law saying all elephants should be shot, lets save the elephants by not having elections". People are rational, and very few democratic systems in the world have name changes every election cycle.
This is not to say that matters that may be interpreted as frivolous dont make their way to the ballots. But that is the nature of democracy.
Rahi baat dams ki, that is a fair point. This is where having an overriding federal government actually makes things worse, because it gives a perception to the smaller provinces that one province, which is perhaps over-represented in the federal govt, is getting favours.
Settle these issues like any two entities would. Pakistan has a water brokering commission, representing all four provinces. That is the place to resolve disputes. The federal govt should have a say in the matter, but only to the extent of facilitating the resolution of disputes, not dictating one way or the other.
You live in the US, where the federal govt is now very powerful, but has traditionally been less so compared to the states. I dont believe there is a tradition of frequent name changes by states.
It is a balance, but the more it favours the states, the less chance of an autocratic/despotic setup.
Im not saying democracy is good or bad, and you are failing to understand the point I'm making, the ppl elect the fed govt too, so what the fed govt decides is according to their wishes too, BUT it reflects a say of the other provinces along with theirs. Hope you understand this.
Coming back to the topic, Provincial Govt wants to change the name, Zardari (head of the fed govt) says yes, no big deal, enjoy a diet coke.