Talk:Afghanistan
|
|
How does this entry not have any information about Opium production, forever a long historial staple to the Afganistan economy, which underwent an explosion after the Taliban was removed from power? [1] (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/19/international/asia/19afghanistan.html?ei=5094&en=12dc9e3c9d258065&hp=&ex=1100926800&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&position=) --Howrealisreal 18:01, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I went ahead and did this. --Howrealisreal 17:45, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
An event mentioned in this article is an August 11 selected anniversary
Is Afghanistan still recognized as a transitional government or not now that Karzai has been inaugurated?
It looks like nobody wants to remember that Taliban was strongly supported by Pakistan and CIA when it took power in 1997. Since this is non-government project I would like to remind it in this Article.
- Oh, I did put some refernce to it in; unfortunately, it got wiped out. Arno 00:42, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Of all countries Afghanistan comes first in the alphabet. It also has 3 consecutive letters ("fgh"), that are consecutive in the alphabet and in alphabetical order.
The CIA certainly supported the Pakistani intelligence agency who where prime supporters of the Taliban but I am having trouble finding (of course) mention that the CIA directly helped the Taliban after the Soviets left. I would not be surprised if it were true but it needs support. --rmhermen
dear rmhermen
Try looking through ZNet on West/Central Asia: http://www.zmag.org/terrorme.htm
e.g. http://www.zmag.org/aliqa.htm here's a cut-n-paste (which is why it's on talk)
Meanwhile the United States decided to destabilise the regime by arming the ultra-religious tribes and using the Pakistan Army as a conduit to help the religious extremists. The Americans were laying a bear-trap and the Soviet leadership fell into it. They sent the Red Army to topple Amin and sustain the PDPA regime by force. This further exacerbated the crisis and the United States gave the call for a jihad against communism. The Pakistani military thought it would help the jihad if a Saudi prince came to lead the struggle, but volunteers from that quarter were not forthcoming. Instead the Saudi regime suggested Ossama Bin Laden to the CIA. He was approved, recruited, trained and sent to Afghanistan where he fought well.
hope this helps.
- As I said before we know they supported them during the war with the Soviets but what about afterward. This quote is about the Soviet War. I will search the link some and see if there is anything there. Rmhermen 06:34 Aug 28, 2002 (PDT)
Removed from article: It was expected in advance that cutting off truck transport of food and making mass food transport to and in Afghanistan even more difficult by the bombing attacks would cause about 50% of 7.5 million starving people to die. According to the definitions of the International Criminal Court, this known action of killing millions of people defined by their national group is termed genocide. The final death toll by this genocide-by-cutting-food-supplies is poorly known, but "fortunately" estimated as maybe only about 1 million.
This is an extremely POV statement and needs to be backed up by a source. This was all I could find and it certainly does not agree. Afghans Still Dying by Ian Traynor "Guardian" February 12, 2000[[2] (http://www.zmag.org/content/ForeignPolicy/TraynorAfghans.cfm)]
- “In a new study, Carl Conetta of the Commonwealth Institute estimates that up to 1,300 civilians have been killed by US bombs and at least 3,000 other Afghans
are dead because the American campaign worsened the humanitarian emergency.”
Genocide or Peace By George Monbiot Published in the Guardian 2nd October 2001
- “The 19-day suspension of aid which came to an end yesterday” (Normal distribution did take a 2-3 months longer to be resumed, I believe.)
Rmhermen 06:48 Aug 28, 2002 (PDT)
I think the flag shoudl go for now as it has not yet been confirmed. Teh flags flown are of the 92 flag: [[3] (http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/af1992d.html)] and 73: [[4] (http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/af1973.html)]
--- Both Afghanistan and Politics of Afghanistan have As of 2002 links that need updating by someone familiar with the current situation than I.... (sorry, I just update links for the most part!) Catherine
- oops, great minds etc - I was just saying that in the Politics talk ... Nevilley 18:37 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)
"Zahir was returned as King, but has largely constitutional power. "
Is this true? I never heard of it. - Montréalais
- That is not true. Afghanistan is a republic, and Hamid Karzai is President and Head of State. The former king does play a role in the country, but I don't think he has any official role. Perhaps it's comparable to France, where the late Comte de Paris frequently had roles on official state occasions. john 18:40 Apr 30, 2003 (UTC)
No there is no king of Afghanistan. -fonzy
It took a fair bit of work to enter what was said about the history of Afghanistan. It would be appreciated if it was not arbitarily deleted.
Arno 11:36, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)~
- The history of this section should only give a brief overview. The more detailed history belongs at History of Afghanistan. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries for a guideline on how to apply the country template. The history section goes first and should not be ridiculously long. --Jiang 15:43, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware of this template until now. However, it is still a poor show to simply throw away a fair bit of research without warning or explanation. I'll have to integrate what I've written later - I'm too pressed for time now.
- I will put back the earthquake stuff. Arno 06:57, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Is it in Central, or South Asia? Should Asia be wikified, or Central Asia / South Asia?
flag? coat of arms? controversy?
| Contents |
1911 Encyclopedia
Afghanistan (1911 Encyclopedia) was listed on VfD, but suggestions made that it be merged here instead. It currently redirects here, but from the page history, the original can be found if anyone wants to merge this information. It is also listed on Cleanup. Angela. 22:30, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
URRS intervened in the conutry not invaded, as reflected int he UN resolution A/RES/37/37 If we call "Invasion" we will need to call Invasion also to the intervention of USA in Vietnam. Milton 16:32, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
What's the government called?
The article refers to the Afghan Interim Authority (AIA) but I don't know about that. I am reliably informed that at least a year ago it was called the Afghan Transitional Islamic Administration -- at least that's what was on the Ministry for Communication's letterhead.
Why...
is Afghanistan considered part of Southwest Asia even though South Asia sounds more natural to me based on its geographical location?? 66.32.144.73 02:58, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
Official Government Site
Why is the website of Mohammed Zaher Shah considered an "official government website?" Listed as site of the king, sure. But I don't think it counts as official. I'm not getting into a revert war --Golbez 15:14, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)
Last I heard the Afghans had been given their own top level domain but was being held by US/UN until the countries infrastructure was developed enough. Darthmalt 22:11, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
10 million registered voters
Just read in one of Paul Krugman's columns that some experts think that the number of registered voters exceeds the numeber of eligible voters. (A large percentage of the country is not under the control of the US/U.N./whatever there is of the Afghan government, so this might well be true. Anybody want to check this out?)
- I'm interested in hearing about that. Should we also add some details about how the election was held? I understand that voters had their thumb stamped to prevent double voting. It's certainly very different than what I'm used to here in the US. Anyone have the facts on this? Jgardner 17:19, 2004 Oct 14 (UTC)
- Any details should be minor, since there is already a full article on the elections. Afghan presidential election, 2004. --Golbez 17:59, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
Suggest 3 possible wiki links and 3 possible backlinks for Afghanistan.
An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Afghanistan article:
- Can link nation-state: ...enghis Khan]] and [[Alexander the Great]]. The Afghanistan nation-state as it is known today came into existence in [[1746]] under ... (link to section)
- Can link ethnic groups: ...he [[Northern Alliance]], and a mix from other regional and ethnic groups formed from the transition government by the [[Loya jirga]]... (link to section)
- Can link defense minister: ...trol of warlords. On [[March 27]], [[2003]], Afghan deputy defense minister and powerful warlord General [[Abdul Rashid Dostum]] create... (link to section)
Additionally, there are some other articles which may be able to linked to this one (also known as "backlinks"):
- In Afghanistan timeline 1991-1995, can backlink Islamic State of Afghanistan: ...mes caretaker president on April 28. The country is renamed Islamic State of Afghanistan. When peace seems imminent, fighting among the various guer...
- In Afghan Constitution Commission, can backlink Islamic State of Afghanistan: ...constitution-afg.com/ Official website] - "The Transitional Islamic State of Afghanistan Constitutional Committee."...
- In Bonn Agreement (Afghanistan), can backlink AFGHANISTAN: Officially the "AGREEMENT ON PROVISIONAL ARRANGEMENTS IN AFGHANISTAN PENDING...
Notes: The article text has not been changed in any way; Some of these suggestions may be wrong, some may be right.
Feedback: I like it, I hate it, Please don't link to — LinkBot 11:35, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
counter-argument against "Pashtun majority because of recent elections" theory
The following article is taken from the "Washington Times":
The IRI conducted a one-day, public opinion survey on Afghanistan's election day. Over 450 Afghan volunteers interviewed more than 17,000 respondents at 177 locations across Afghanistan and in neighboring Pakistan where more than 700,000 refugee voters also cast their votes. According to this survey, Karzai received support from 86 percent of Pashtun voters. This was not surprising as Karzai also belongs to this ethnic group, which is the largest in Afghanistan. But unexpectedly 40 percent of Tajik voters also said they cast a ballot for Karzai. Tajiks are the second largest ethnic group in Afghanistan and the relations between the Tajiks and Pashtuns were strained during the Taliban era because most Taliban leaders were Pashtuns. The Taliban regime persecuted the Tajiks, forcing many to leave the capital, Kabul, and seek refuge in the Tajik-dominated northern provinces. That's why when Karzai's Defense Minister Mohammed Fahim, who is a powerful Tajik militia commander, broke with the Afghan president when the election campaign formally started, many predicted the election could turn into a conflict between the Pashtun and Tajik ethnic groups. Fahim severed connections with Karzai and decided to support a rival candidate, former Law Minister Yunus Qanooni, bringing along other powerful Tajik personalities, such as Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah. ... Besides Pashtuns and Tajiks, according to the survey, Karzai also received the support of 16 percent of Uzbek and 21 percent of Hazara voters. These are the other two large ethnic groups in Afghanistan. ... His main rival, Qanooni, received the support of 5 percent of Pashtun voters, 34 percent Tajik, 9 percent Uzbek and 5 percent Hazara. Thus, although he is Tajik, Qanooni received fewer votes from his own ethnic group than Karzai. http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20041012-031213-5906r.htm
In other words: 86% Pashtuns + 40% Tajiks + 21% Hazaras + 16% Uzbeks = Karzai's (very weak) 54,6%. On the other hand: assuming that Qanooni was voted only by Tajiks (15% of the total results = 1/3 of the total votes), that would mean that Tajiks are ca. 45% of the population (1/3 of Tajiks voted for Qanooni, 2/3 for others --> Qanooni's 15% * 3 = 45%).
So, the recent elections are not a proof that Pashtuns a majority but rather that Pashtuns are NOT the majority.
Nature of the people of Afghanistan
Afghanistan has hardly ever been a single country. It does not even completely represent a people as such, since the Pashtuns are almost evenly split between Afghanistan and Pakistan, Tajiks between Tajikistan and Afghanistan and Uzbeks with Uzbekistan. A census has never been taken, and various pieces of land has belonged to different people. In addition, almost noone can be considered indigenous of the land, due to non-stop invasions throughout the history. The approximate area of Afghanistan has also shifted quite a bit. Ancient Khwarazm was slightly to the north including Bokhara and Samarkand, and so was Bactria and Khorasan. Before the Soviet and British 'Great Game', the size of 'Afghanistan' or Khorasan was more than twice of what it is now. At times it has included lands upto the Indus river, and other times, it was a large remote province of the Persian empire.
Afghanistan for most of its history has been a collection of loosely-connected tribes, most of which lived quite autonomously. This reduces the meaning of 'rules Afghanistan' to ruling Kabul or Kandahar. Afghanistan could never be seen simply as a 'nation' or country of a 'people'. The name 'Afghanistan' was coined by a Pashtun at a time when many other ethnic groups lived autonomously within the region. The central highlands was referred to as Hazarajat or Hazaristan, and the King of Kabul or Kandahar actually paid the Emir of Hazaras for the safe passage of soldiers or traders. Afghanistan in history is best seen as a collection of Khanates in a border only visible to outsiders, who would only deal with the rulers of Kabul.
The demographics and history of Afghanistan are therefore highly disputed. Percentages of population are very frequently overstated, each ethnic group claiming 80% of the population is not uncommon. The population also fluctuates with the movements of the large number of refugees.
While the history of smaller ethnic and religious groups are lost, historians in Iran, Turkey, Pakistan etc constantly view Afghanistan as a part of greater 'Turkistan', 'greater Persia' and so on. This makes the history of the country highly biased and unreliable, and it should be viewed as such.
On the other hand, the various peoples secured their own history better, the history of Pashtuns are best read from a Pashtun perspective, Hazaras from Hazara perspective, Tajiks from Tajik perspective, and always with a grain of salt. Going further back in history, before 1600AD, the people were grouped differently, Tajiks being simply Persian, Hazaras and Uzbek being Turkic/Mongol... and going even further back, Pashtuns are split between tribes of Greek, Jewish and Aryan ancestory, and the Baloch quite possibly being an ofshoot of ancient Persia as well.
This makes the history very interesting, but very difficult to dig up.
- Although they are split into many smaller ethnic groups, they are still in one larger ethnic group (Arabs). → JarlaxleArtemis 23:21, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
- Check the demographics section of this article. I don't think that there are many Arabs at all in Afghanistan. The tribes in Afghanistan are thought to be Turkic, Persian, Mongol and some other (Pashtun?). See the Arab artcile to see what group Arabs are. Jeltz talk 14:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
afganistan
Bold textWhat does afganistan import and export?
- Have you looked in the Economy of Afghanistan article? Jeltz talk 17:52, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)