Talk:South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


[edit]

Is it just me or does their logo bring back bad memories of health class? Kyaa the Catlord 10:53, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
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)[reply]

the symbol is of a peacock which is a very visible creature in south asian culture and hence has been chosen. this is evident from the fact that the throne of the mughal emperors was called the peacock throne.--Rishab1996 (talk) 08:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

wat abt SAFTA?[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
well, it is the South Asian Free Trade Area, as per Reuters.--Rishab1996 (talk) 15:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Expand & Merge[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

the views expressed are Utopian, but unfortunately, utopia is too good to be true, asia, unlike europe is immensely diverse, owing to its sheer enormousness. Each sub-region has its own cooperation agency, like the SAARC, ASEAN, EAD, GCC among others.

About your rail projects, it definetly is easier said than done, the messy kashmir affair is not being solved by the UNO, and that has been proved by history. The only thing that has prevented another war from erupting over the issue are the nuclear arsenals of the three countries involved. To be fair, between India and pakistan, cross LOC trade does occur, but rail lines are not efficient enough because a small ceasefire violation might lead to the suspension of the service... An alternate like Wagah or rajasthan can be considered, with the rail lines going through nepal or bhutan to avoid a direct indo-china border dispute from stopping the service there.... of course connecting japan is a bit.... well, ambitious, so honk kong may be safely called the east end. an alternate parallel route could be the central asian countries, the "-stans", for people wanting to reach mongolia or kamchatka. a rail line from wagah, parallel to the grand trunk road can be easily made and from afghanistan, it can go through Iran, which is now possible, as the sanctions levied against Iran are more or less temporary now.... Then comes the tricky part, Iraq and syria and the middle east as a whole. We can go through iraq and bypass syria straight into turkey and the Bosporus, but in the long run it is unfeasible as any extension into africa, if considered, will need to go through syria to egypt....... --Rishab1996 (talk) 15:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Status of Afghanistan[edit]

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)[reply]

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.

Bold text

Ya I would Not be surprised if Afghanistan pulls out once it can stand on its own feet economically. Because there is a huge culture difference between Afghanistan and any of the other nation members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.10.102.231 (talk) 08:05, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As of the undersigned date, Afghanistan is a member of the SAARC. Moreover, Afghanistan's cultural links to South Asia pre-date Alexander the great.--Rishab1996 (talk) 15:30, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Map Colour coding[edit]

Is it possible to get more distinct colours to represent member and observer states on the map? I can barely tell apart because they're both similiar shades of blue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.84.167 (talk) 22:15, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About history[edit]

SAARC idea was firstly proposed by bangladeshi president ziaur rahmah in 1980. He sent an official letter to all other presidents. pakistan initailly non-agreed by hearing this idea for first time at that time.

But here saying idea was "discussed in at least three conferences: the Asian Relations Conference held in New Delhi on April 1947; the Baguio Conference in the Philippines on May 1950; and the Colombo Powers Conference held in Sri Lanka on April 1954." ---this is total false info. Is there any article supporting this thing that idea was discussed in those 3 conferences? If no proof can be provided, this line should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.108.116.129 (talk) 23:24, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:21, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation Secretariat[edit]

Not sufficiently separate for its own article Rathfelder (talk) 22:25, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SAARC Secretary-General Incorrect[edit]

I was just looking through the SAARC page when I noticed a couple of discrepencies when it came to the Secretary-General of SAARC. The man linked is both NOT the Secretary-General, but the hyperlink to his wikipedia page says he died in 2018. I looked on the SAARC website itself, and it states that the current Secretary-General is Esala Ruwan Weerakoon of Sri Lanka. [1]https://www.saarc-sec.org/

Is this an honest mistake? What happened? Theoceansandbox27 (talk) 00:13, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:54, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which is the capital of SAARC country?[edit]

Which is the capital of SAARC country 2001:DF6:2380:B56:60CD:83DC:11D9:1777 (talk) 13:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_Asian_Association_for_Regional_Cooperation&oldid=1194080485"