[PICTURE] Is Pakistan in Middle East or South Asia?

[DeadlyVenom]

I saw this new world bank map floating about social media.

It looks like they have shifted Pakistan and Afghanistan to be grouped with Middle East rather than their previous grouping as South Asian.



What do you make of this? It seems quite arbitrary.

I don't really even consider Iranians as Middle Eastern, but also don't consider Afghans as South Asians.

Pakistan is unique in that it can straddle multiple different, groupings but I do feel that either a seperate classification of Iran Afghanistan and Pakistan would be most appropriate, or just keeping as is within South Asia.

 

[sweep_shot]

Some Pakistanis probably qualify as Central Asians while some are proper South Asians.

Pakistan is very diverse.

 

[Local.Dada]

Yes Punjabis, Sindhis, Ganga-Jumna Mohajir bhayyas are as middle eastern as they get lol.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Geographically South Asian.
Culturally Middle Eastern.
Linguistically ambigious. Too many Arabic words and a script that is alien to South Asia.
Racially majority South Asian. A decent chunk have shared ancestry with Persian and central asian.

From what I gather from internet, they may not overtly want to be central asian, but they definitely do not want to be south asian(as it means accepting Indian/Hindu roots).

Almost every Muslim has a chart that shows his ancestors came on a horse with invading superior Muslims from outside of subcontinent. But their face shows they are as Kumar and Prasad as it gets.

Bottomline - They do not want to be associated with India and its people. But they often get lumped together with Indians.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Seems like they are dividing by religion rather than geography which is a strange take.

 

[Obaidd]

I think it has to do with how businesses engage with Pakistan. The same offices of large businesses that exist in MENA extend their operations into Pak and Afg. I think it’s rarer to see Pak and Ind in same market, because it’s tough if not impossible for a business to operate in Pak being HQ’d in India which is why we see multinationals operating their pak divisions through Dubai.

There are quite a few other appropriations as well in this map for example Mexico is not considered part of North America. Yes it’s an arbitrary division but the title of the map makes it clear - it’s ‘world regions according to the world bank’.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Pakistan was historically part of the Indian Subcontinent and Ancient Brahmins once meditated on its land. The downfall has been surreal.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

I saw this new world bank map floating about social media.

It looks like they have shifted Pakistan and Afghanistan to be grouped with Middle East rather than their previous grouping as South Asian.

View attachment 159522

What do you make of this? It seems quite arbitrary.

I don't really even consider Iranians as Middle Eastern, but also don't consider Afghans as South Asians.

Pakistan is unique in that it can straddle multiple different, groupings but I do feel that either a seperate classification of Iran Afghanistan and Pakistan would be most appropriate, or just keeping as is within South Asia.

Lol thankfully tha map wasn't issued by some Indian or they would have termed Pakistan as part of Akhand Bharat

 

[Varun]

Social media is such a time waster.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Lol thankfully tha map wasn't issued by some Indian or they would have termed Pakistan as part of Akhand Bharat

When I see India and Bangladesh coloured together I instinctively call it greater Bangladesh

 

[JaDed]

It didn’t know where to place Pakistan and Afghanistan much like Pakistanis, if you notice the caption it says Middle east and Pak-Afg..

 

[HalBass9]

After the May events, even the World Bank was like, y’all need to be isolated for a while.

But since Indians won’t stop bragging about the 71 war every 5 minutes, the World Bank basically said, we're lumping Bangladesh with you.

 

[sweep_shot]

When I see India and Bangladesh coloured together I instinctively call it greater Bangladesh

I also see it (northeast India and West Bengal) as Greater Bangladesh or occupied Bangladesh.

Maybe one day it will return to Bangladesh. Who knows?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I also see it (northeast India and West Bengal) as Greater Bangladesh or occupied Bangladesh.

Maybe one day it will return to Bangladesh. Who knows?

It should just revert to being called Bengal, it's traditional name before the British divided it up. It is somewhat pathetic that at the height of Indian nationalism, the hindutva are scared to reclaim their lost lands and still refer to their old territory as demarcated by the British Raj.

 

[sweep_shot]

It should just revert to being called Bengal, it's traditional name before the British divided it up. It is somewhat pathetic that at the height of Indian nationalism, the hindutva are scared to reclaim their lost lands and still refer to their old territory as demarcated by the British Raj.

Yup.

Sanghis love to alter history based on their agenda. This is why they have no credibility.

 

[Obaidd]

Indus naturally divides Pak into two halves. East of Indus (Punjab and Sindh) are more South Asian (or North Indian) whereas west of Indus in the north (kpk) is central Asian influenced while only Balochistan could be considered closer to ‘middle east’ which is a misnomer to begin with.

 

[LordJames]

I saw this new world bank map floating about social media.

It looks like they have shifted Pakistan and Afghanistan to be grouped with Middle East rather than their previous grouping as South Asian.

View attachment 159522

What do you make of this? It seems quite arbitrary.

I don't really even consider Iranians as Middle Eastern, but also don't consider Afghans as South Asians.

Pakistan is unique in that it can straddle multiple different, groupings but I do feel that either a seperate classification of Iran Afghanistan and Pakistan would be most appropriate, or just keeping as is within South Asia.

Geographically, Pakistan is not part of Middle east and the evidence is the Tethyan Magmatic Arc belt in Balochistan which is different to the Middle East belt and distinct.


Tectonically, Pakistan is part of South Asian geological system, situated on the boundary between the Indian and Eurasian tectonic plates

 

[Champ_Pal]

I also see it (northeast India and West Bengal) as Greater Bangladesh or occupied Bangladesh.

Maybe one day it will return to Bangladesh. Who knows?

I doubt even a dirt poor African nation wants to be associated with Bangladesh.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Geographically, Pakistan is not part of Middle east and the evidence is the Tethyan Magmatic Arc belt in Balochistan which is different to the Middle East belt and distinct.


Tectonically, Pakistan is part of South Asian geological system, situated on the boundary between the Indian and Eurasian tectonic plates

If Syrians, Palestinians, Jordanians and Lebanese are clubbed as Arabs, then so should Pakistan. I guess language is what is stopping that process.
If Pak adopts Arabic as national language, they should be put firmly under Middle East.

 

[amax]

Pakistanis are closest to north Indians and pashtun afghans the most(East), maps are just man made.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Middle East. Al Bakistan

 

[IMMY69]

Pakistan has political leaders and general living in the west (mainly in the UK) and eventually more and more settle outside of Pakistan so a sort of reverse zionism which means Pakistsn is now definitely in the middle east

 

[LordJames]

If Syrians, Palestinians, Jordanians and Lebanese are clubbed as Arabs, then so should Pakistan. I guess language is what is stopping that process.
If Pak adopts Arabic as national language, they should be put firmly under Middle East.

Pakistan is geographically not in Middle-East

Pakistanis are not Arabs so hoisting a language upon 250+ million people will take decades and Pakistan already has a weak education system so will take generations.

Urdu is closer to Arabic so using Urdu as a medium for learning Arabic is possible.

Culturally this is mostly true...
​

Pakistanis are closest to north Indians and pashtun afghans the most(East), maps are just man made.

​

 

[Suleiman]

Pakistan army volunteering to defend Saudi including the holy cities.. a lot of the security and army personnel in Saudi speaking Urdu, I would say this has been a long time.

Even though I have transcended beyond nationalities etc myself but yes Pakistan is and always was part of the Middle East. Most have the Arab trader and/or Arab invader gene in Pakistan and Muslim India, so this acknowledgement on maps was only a matter of time.

Ahlan Wa Sahlan

 

[KB]

As @Obaidd indicates, the World Bank’s categorisations do not reflect cultural classifications but are rather groupings for administrative and economic purposes.

This said, the question does touch on something deeper. Sitting at the cross-roads of various regions - Central Asia, West Asia and South Asia - even today, Pakistan’s geographic significance provides it with a larger than life personality than would otherwise have been the case for a nation of this size.

There is, in fact, a long history of ambivalence of place among some South Asian Muslim intellectuals. Intizar Hussain captures this beautifully in Basti, where a character remarks:

“Yaar, you Muslims are wonderful! You're always looking toward the deserts of Arabia, but for your graves you prefer the shade of India.”

Or take two of Iqbal’s line from a quatrain:

Koi dekhe to meri nai-navazi
Nafs hindi maqam-e-naghma tazi

Someone see how I play the flute
Breath Indian, tune Arabian

We might consider, too, in the nineteenth century the Urdu speaking elite of North India. Many that belonged to this group took pride in their foreign ancestry (real or imagined). Listen to Sayyid Ahmad Khan: “Our nation is of the blood of those who made not only Arabia, but Asia and Europe, to tremble. It is our nation which conquered with its sword the whole of India.”

Yet even within this association with an expansive Muslim world, many elites became deeply attached to their local North Indian towns. As the historian Christopher Bayly noted about qasbah towns, “these elites often sought out a more secure base and tradition within India. As they embellished their small rural seats with mosques, wells and groves, a definite sense of pride in home (watan) and urban tradition began to emerge.”

This ambivalence continues into the twentieth century. Under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Pakistan was rhetorically oriented more toward West Asia. Yet at the same time, Bhutto and his circle celebrated distinctly regional and folk traditions, such as devotion to Lal Shahbaz Qalandar at Sehwan Sharif.

Pakistani identity was imagined as both trans-regional and deeply rooted in local cultures.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

As @Obaidd indicates, the World Bank’s categorisations do not reflect cultural classifications but are rather groupings for administrative and economic purposes.

This said, the question does touch on something deeper. Sitting at the cross-roads of various regions - Central Asia, West Asia and South Asia - even today, Pakistan’s geographic significance provides it with a larger than life personality than would otherwise have been the case for a nation of this size.

There is, in fact, a long history of ambivalence of place among some South Asian Muslim intellectuals. Intizar Hussain captures this beautifully in Basti, where a character remarks:

“Yaar, you Muslims are wonderful! You're always looking toward the deserts of Arabia, but for your graves you prefer the shade of India.”

Or take two of Iqbal’s line from a quatrain:

Koi dekhe to meri nai-navazi
Nafs hindi maqam-e-naghma tazi

Someone see how I play the flute
Breath Indian, tune Arabian

We might consider, too, in the nineteenth century the Urdu speaking elite of North India. Many that belonged to this group took pride in their foreign ancestry (real or imagined). Listen to Sayyid Ahmad Khan: “Our nation is of the blood of those who made not only Arabia, but Asia and Europe, to tremble. It is our nation which conquered with its sword the whole of India.”

Yet even within this association with an expansive Muslim world, many elites became deeply attached to their local North Indian towns. As the historian Christopher Bayly noted about qasbah towns, “these elites often sought out a more secure base and tradition within India. As they embellished their small rural seats with mosques, wells and groves, a definite sense of pride in home (watan) and urban tradition began to emerge.”

This ambivalence continues into the twentieth century. Under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Pakistan was rhetorically oriented more toward West Asia. Yet at the same time, Bhutto and his circle celebrated distinctly regional and folk traditions, such as devotion to Lal Shahbaz Qalandar at Sehwan Sharif.

Pakistani identity was imagined as both trans-regional and deeply rooted in local cultures.

The conclusion I draw from this is Pakistan is a political entity, not a cultural one. It should have remained part of India and Bengal should also have stayed undivided.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

The conclusion I draw from this is Pakistan is a political entity, not a cultural one. It should have remained part of India and Bengal should also have stayed undivided.

Is India a cultural entity?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Is India a cultural entity?

Perhaps I should have used the word geographical rather than cultural, but culture stems from geography as well for the most part.

 

[topspin]

But their face shows they are as Kumar and Prasad as it gets.

Our features are different quite different. Pakistanis are lighter, stronger and taller.

Only Indian Punjabis and minority of non-Punjabi Indians resemble Pakistanis.

 

[ElRaja]

the seperation between south asia and the middle east is the indus river. pathans and balochis are not indian, punjabi, kashmiri and sindhis are an north indian ethnic group, since they occupy the indus. ethnicially pakistan is neither wholly middle eastern, nor indian, however urdu is an indian language, so linguistically, official, pakistan is a south asian country.