Talk:South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation is part of WikiProject Bangladesh, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Bangladesh and Bangladesh-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not subsitute this template.
|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of the Organizations WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of organizations. We are developing a framework that will sort every category by location, field, ideology, and type. We need a few more people to help coordinate this ambitious project. If you have any technical experience with templates, or just have an interest in the topic, add your name, and check out the talk page to get involved. |
Contents |
[edit] Move request
SAARC is a abbriviation, of course. So, please tell me the reason why we don't redirect this page to "South_Asian_Association_for_Regional_Cooperation. Thank you. Smile 02:20, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)
[edit] stub
Well, it isn't really one anymore. Removed the template. --Twinxor 22:32, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] logo
Is it just me or does their logo bring back bad memories of health class? Kyaa the Catlord 10:53, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- Yes! I noticed it immediately and it's the only reason why I came to the discussion page! Barneygumble 14:12, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- I second that emotion. This page definitely needs a link to the article on "Fallopian_tubes". And if there were such a page, a link to the article on the Brazilian Institute for Oriental Studies.
- Fallopian Tubes? Now that you mention it, yes, that is what occured to me, though in a vague, peripheral manner. I wonder what it really represents, however. WikiSceptic 08:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- I see, 7 peacocks (7 founding countries) inside very likely a hand (representing union) that also looks like a fan made of peacock feathers (representing completeness). Peacock should be a South Asian symbol. Just speculating, but those of you who see fallopian tubes - I am sure you were not awake in class.
- Dear Mr. Anonymous - I have rubbed my eyes and taken a second dekko, and what I see still looks like it wandered by mistake out of gynaecology class! I can assure you that I am well awake. But this is not really important, except to say that the symbol is very tacky! WikiSceptic 08:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] wat abt SAFTA?
Is Afghanistan now a member of SAFTA too? If yes, then the SAFTA article needs to be updated. --Deepak|वार्ता 07:54, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Afghanistan, in case you did not notice it, has been approved as a member, but is not yet a member, until it completes certain formalities. I guess that admission to SAARC would imply automatic admission / accession to SAFTA. But is SAFTA really "South Asian Free Trade Agreement" or is is "South Asian Free Trade Area"? I guess the Agreement or treaty would inaugurate the FTA, but I doubt that the treaty would have exactly the same name as the FTA, for that would surely be recognized by its creators/drafters as unnecessary confusion? WikiSceptic 08:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Expand & Merge
I think that it would be great if the three principal blocks, Gulf Cooperation Council, SAARC and ASEAN would federate into an Asiatic Cooperation Council, to include Japan, China, Central Asian countries, Turkey, Siberian provinces of Russia (if not all of Russia), Iran, the Caucasus, Israel, etc., and then progress to common markets, custom unions, etc. If India had not been partitioned, and if Gandhi and Nehru had chosen cooperation, as had Canada, New Zealand and Australia, rather than secession from the British Empire, the British Indian railways would have probably been extended through Iran and Turkey to join up with the European railway network, and similarly, into the Persian Gulf and West Asian region, and even probably Egypt and Africa, thus easing passenger and freight transport. Muslims would benefit for Haj and Umrah, Christians for pilgrimages to Holy Land sites, and everyone for employment and markets. Such an idea is more difficult today, but not impossible! If India, Pakistan, China and Bangladesh among other manpower-rich states commit troops to stabilize Afghanistan and Iraq, and if Pakistan and Bharat can hand over their respective portions of Kashmir to the UN or alternatively to a committee of mutually agreed neutral states to administer under an interim arrangement like Kosovo until passions are sufficiently cooled, roads and rail networks can even pass through to Central Asia and Siberia. Indians would find Siberia, Baikal, Buryatia, etc., as more economic vacation locales, and Siberian hydrocarbons can be piped to South Asia instead of only to Europe. WikiSceptic 08:33, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I disagree with you to a certain extent. China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Mongolia have their own common cultural background and perhaps they should unite as the East Asian Union but they shouldn't merge with the South Asia Union. Asia is far too big to have one government or even currency, unlike Europe. Europe is basically a subcontinent in reality so if we have an Asian Union we might as well have a Eurasian union, but this too much unification is not good as it can prevent competition between the states and diversity. I think Eurasia should in the future be divided into six countries or unions: European Union, Southasian Union, Eastasian Union, Russian Union, Westasian Union, and Southeastasian Union. But no way it being just one country, it is just too big and diverse!
But this whole South Asian Association For Regional Cooperation was a great idea and a good start. Zachorious 22:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Status of Afghanistan
Does anyone know what has happened in regard to Afghanistan's accession into SAARC? Its membership was approved well over a year ago, but according to the SAARC website, Afghanistan at this time, is still not a member. Afghanistan will have to be removed from the article as a current member until such time as it is formally admitted into the organisation. Mrodowicz 19:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Becuase Afghanistan has singed a treaty of cooperation with other members of south asia countries for emergancy and disater purposes but Afghanistan as a nation is not fully recognized as a South asian country, mostly becuase of strong culture ties to the Middle-east and Iran and most Afghans do not consider them selves South Asian either.
- It dose not matter what Afghans consider themselves, S Asian, C Asian or Dutch for that matter, the fact is Afghanistan has joined SAARC.
