Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
(ASEAN)
ESTABLISHMENT
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, was established on 8 August 1967 in
Bangkok, Thailand, with the signing of the ASEAN Declaration (Bangkok Declaration) by the
Founding Fathers of ASEAN, namely Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and
Thailand.
Brunei Darussalam then joined on 7 January 1984, Viet Nam on 28 July 1995, Lao PDR and
Myanmar on 23 July 1997, and Cambodia on 30 April 1999, making up what is today the ten
Member States of ASEAN.
ASEAN covers an area of 4.46 million km, 3% of the total land area of Earth, with a
population of approximately 600 million people, and 8.8% of the world population. In 2010,
its combined nominal GDP had grown to US$1.8 trillion. If ASEAN was a single entity, it
would rank as the ninth largest economy in the world.
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
In their relations with one another, the ASEAN Member States have adopted the following
ASEAN COMMUNITY
The ASEAN Vision 2020, adopted by the ASEAN Leaders on the 30th Anniversary of ASEAN,
agreed on a shared vision of ASEAN as a concert of Southeast Asian nations, outward
looking, living in peace, stability and prosperity, bonded together in partnership in dynamic
development and in a community of caring societies.
At the 9th ASEAN Summit in 2003, the ASEAN Leaders resolved that an ASEAN Community
shall be established.
At the 12th ASEAN Summit in January 2007, the Leaders affirmed their strong commitment
to accelerate the establishment of an ASEAN Community by 2015 and signed the Cebu
Declaration on the Acceleration of the Establishment of an ASEAN Community by 2015.
The ASEAN Community is comprised of three pillars, namely the ASEAN Political-Security
Community, ASEAN Economic Community and ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community. Each pillar
has its own Blueprint, and, together with the Initiative for ASEAN Integration (IAI) Strategic
Framework and IAI Work Plan Phase II (2009-2015), they form the Roadmap for and ASEAN
Community 2009-2015.
ASEAN CHARTER
The ASEAN Charter serves as a firm foundation in achieving the ASEAN Community by
providing legal status and institutional framework for ASEAN. It also codifies ASEAN norms,
rules and values; sets clear targets for ASEAN; and presents accountability and compliance.
The ASEAN Charter entered into force on 15 December 2008. A gathering of the ASEAN
Foreign Ministers was held at the ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta to mark this very historic
occasion for ASEAN.
With the entry into force of the ASEAN Charter, ASEAN will henceforth operate under a new
legal framework and establish a number of new organs to boost its community-building
process.
In effect, the ASEAN Charter has become a legally binding agreement among the 10 ASEAN
Member States.
Enlargement of ASEAN:During the 1990s, the bloc experienced an increase in both membership and drive for
further integration. In 1990, Malaysia proposed the creation of an East Asia Economic
Caucus comprising the then members of ASEAN as well as the People's Republic of China,
Japan, and South Korea, with the intention of counterbalancing the growing influence of the
United States in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and in the Asian region as a
whole. This proposal failed, however, because of heavy opposition from the United States
and Japan. Despite this failure, member states continued to work for further integration and
ASEAN Plus Three was created in 1997.
In 1992, the Common Effective Preferential Tariff (CEPT) scheme was signed as a schedule
for phasing tariffs and as a goal to increase the regions competitive advantage as a
production base geared for the world market. This law would act as the framework for the
ASEAN Free Trade Area. After the East Asian Financial Crisis of 1997, a revival of the
Malaysian proposal was established in Chiang Mai, known as the Chiang Mai Initiative, which
calls for better integration between the economies of ASEAN as well as the ASEAN Plus
Three countries (China, Japan, and South Korea).
Aside from improving each member state's economies, the bloc also focused on peace and
stability in the region. On 15 December 1995, the Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free
Zone Treaty was signed with the intention of turning Southeast Asia into a Nuclear-WeaponFree Zone. The treaty took effect on 28 March 1997 after all but one of the member states
have ratified it. It became fully effective on 21 June 2001, after the Philippines ratified it,
effectively banning all nuclear weapons in the region.
Early 2011, East Timor plans to submit a letter of application to the ASEAN Secretariat in
Indonesia to be the eleventh member of ASEAN at the summit in Jakarta. Indonesia has
shown a warm welcome to East Timor.
Baluchistan conflict
The Government of Pakistan over Baluchistan, the country's largest province.
Recently, separatists have also clashed with Islamic Republic of Iran over its
respective Baloch region, which borders Pakistan. Shortly after Pakistan's
creation in 1947, the Army of the Islamic Republic had to subdue insurgents
based in Kalat who rejected the King of Kalat decision to accede to Pakistan,
reminiscent of the Indian Army's operation in the Principality state of
Hyderabad. The movement gained momentum during the 1960s, and amid
consistent political disorder, the government ordered a military operation
into the region in 1973, assisted by Iran, and inflicted heavy casualties on
the separatists. The movement was largely quelled after the imposition of
martial law in 1977, after which Baluchistan witnessed significant
development. After insurgency groups again mushroomed in the 1990s and
2000s, the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan and the war in North-West Pakistan
exacerbate the conflict, most recently manifested in the killings of nonBaloch settlers in the province by separatists since 2006.
On August 12, 2009, Khan of Kalat Mir Suleiman Dawood declared himself
ruler of Baluchistan and formally made announcement of a Council for
Independent Baluchistan. The Council's claimed domain includes "Baloch of
Iran", as well as Pakistani Baluchistan, but does not include Afghani Baloch
regions,and the Council contains "all separatist leaders including Nawabzada
Bramdagh Bugti." He claims that "the UK had a moral responsibility to raise
the issue of Baluchistans illegal occupation at international level."
Projects in Baluchistan
Saindak Copper Gold Project:
Saindak Copper-Gold Mine is located in Saindak town, district Chaghi
Reko Diq Copper Gold Project:Reko Diq is a small town in Chagai District, Baluchistan, Pakistan, in a desert
area, 70 kilometres north-west of Naukundi, close to Pakistan's border with
Iran and Afghanistan. The area is located in Tethyan belt that stretches all
the way from Turkey and Armenia into Pakistan.
Reko Diq has proven gold and copper reserves worth US $125 billion. It is
estimated that area has 12.3 million tons of world class copper and 20.9
million ounces of gold. However, later it has been claimed by several
Pakistani scholars that the gold and copper reserves worth is far more than
estimated earlier, that is 1000 billion dollars.
The Reko Diq Mining Project is a US$ 3.3 billion capital investment project
that promises to build and operate a world class copper-gold open-pit mine
at Reko Diq. TCC (Tethyan Copper Company), which is actually CanadianChilian based company, is responsible for minning at Reko Diq.
approximately 75 km (47 mi) east of Pakistan's border with Iran. The port is
located on the eastern bay of a natural hammerhead-shaped peninsula
jutting out into the Arabian Sea from the coastline.
Background:On 8 September 1958, Pakistan purchased the Gwadar enclave from Oman
for $3 million. Gwadar officially became part of Pakistan on 8 December
1958. At the time, Gwadar was a small and underdeveloped fishing village
with a population of a few thousand.
The Pakistani government integrated Gwadar into Baluchistan province on 1
July 1977 as the district headquarters of the newly formed Gwadar District.
In the 1993, the Government of Pakistan formally conceived the plan to
develop Gwadar into a major port city with a deep-sea port and connect it
with Pakistan's highway and rail networks. On 22 March 2002, the
Government of Pakistan began construction of Gwadar Port, a modern deepsea port, the first phase of which was completed in December 2005. Gwadar
Port became operational in December 2009.
The city underwent major construction from 2002-07. In 2002, Pakistan's
National Highway Authority (NHA) began construction of the 653 km-long
Makran Coastal Highway linking Gwadar with Karachi via Pasni and Ormara
and onwards with the rest of the National Highways of Pakistan, which was
completed in 2004. In 2003, the Gwadar Development Authority was
established to oversee the planning and development of Gwadar. In 2004,
Pakistan's NHA began construction of the 820-km long M8 motorway linking
Gwadar with Ratodero in Sindh province via Turbat, Hoshab, Awaran and
Khuzdar and onwards with the rest of the Motorways of Pakistan. In 2006,
the Gwadar Development Authority conceived, developed and adopted a 50year Master Plan for Gwadar. In 2007, the Civil Aviation Authority of Pakistan
acquired 4,300 acres to construct a new greenfield airport, the New Gwadar
International Airport, on 6,000 acres, at an estimated cost of Rs. 7.5 billion.
China has funded 80% of the initial $248 million construction of the
city.However China has not announced being requested to operate the port
by Pakistan.
Importance of Gawadar Port for China:Gwadar Port is being constructed in two phases with heavy investment from
Missing Persons In Baluchistan:The most pressing and hurtful issue right now, though, is that of the
missing people. Human rights groups and Baloch political parties claim as
many as 13,000 people are missing in the province, while the provincial
government acknowledges fewer than 1,000 people have been picked up.
Even if the true number lies somewhere in between, these statistics need to
be reconciled. After that, a promise needs to be given that no citizen of
Baluchistan need ever fear for his life just for exercising his right to political
dissent.
Target Killing in Baluchistan:According to Baluchistan police records, there were 256 incidents of
targeting in Baluchistan in 2009 that killed 200 people and injured 387. In
2010, 231 incidents were reported that killed 255 and injured 498. In the
first three months of 2011, at least 39 incidents have occurred, which killed
38 and injured 66. Baluchistan Constabulary Commandant Ghulam Shabbir
Shah, speaking in Karachi recently, said that target killings are set to break
all previous records in the province.
Clash of Civilizations
World Politics is entering in a new phase which will be end of history, the
return of traditional rivalries between nation states and the decline of
nation state from conflicting pulls of tribalism and globalism. Fundamental
ANALYSIS
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, many scholars predicted that the
future of world and where nations would advance. Huntingtons idea in the
clash of civilization is a representative case among the various views on
the new world and it caused lots of debates about the pros and cons of his
thought. In the clash of civilization, Huntington argues that conflicts of
contemporary world (after the end of Cold War) are not ideological nor
economical but cultural and phenomenon such as confrontations and
antagonisms among nations which are caused by clashes of different
civilizations would rise remarkably. However, Said criticized that the clash
of civilization is a creature of the imperative conception that the West
should hold the hegemony of new world order. This essay, therefore,
explores the theory of the clash of civilization and criticizes several points
which are mentioned in it.
A civilization is the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest
level of cultural identity people have short that which distinguishes human
from other species. It is defined both by common objective elements, such
as language, history,and religion. In short, while Huntington is
right to see religion as a factor in the coming era of world politics, the role
of religion will go well beyond serving as a touchstone for culture. Religion
is more than culture. It transcends civilizations. In the end, to listen to the
believers among us, it will transcend history itself.
Harvard Professor Samuel P. Huntington caused intellectual explosion by
publishing his article clash of civilizations in the American journal Foreign
Affairs in 1993. He asserts Civilizations are the largest aggregates that
command human loyalties and account for much of the bloodshed in the
recorded human history. Cold war marked a brief departure from it but now
old enemies could go to the past time, waging wars against each other.
The biggest threat to the west at present comes from China and Islam. He
argues that now the cold war had ended, future conflicts in the world
politics would be less between states and more between civilizations or
coalitions of culture.
He asserts his point of view,
In this emerging era of cultural conflict the United States must forge
alliances with similar cultures and spread its values wherever possible.
With alien civilizations the West must be accommodating if possible, but
confrontational if necessary. In the final analysis, however, all civilizations
will have to learn to tolerate each other.
There is now a danger of hot war of religion to succeed the cold war of
ideologies, the new trend between America and allies, on the one hand,
and Muslim countries such as Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Sudan, and
Somalia, on the other hand. Both American capitalism and Russian
Commission were born out of European culture.
in the Muslim world respect their mothers more than sons in the west.
There was ethnic cleansing which displaced thousands of Palestinians to
make room for the Jews. An ideology was formed in which someone from
the Ukraine who claims to have had a Jewish ancestor two thousand years
ago had more rights under Israels Law of Return than Palestinian who ran
away from Israeli borders in 1948.
UN
The world body UN should fear the dreadful end of League of Nations, so it
needs vitality and firmness to implement its fair decisions, irrespective US
influence which has divided the world.
Media power
Media power can be used for bridging the gulf among biased nations and
cultures.
Education system
Education system is a basic tool in polishing individuals with qualities of
compassion and Humanism.
__________________
Success is never achieved by the size of our brain but it is always achieved by the quality
of our thoughts.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Taimoor Gondal For This Useful Post:
Mehwish Pervez (Friday, December 28, 2012), pisceankhan (Monday, October 20,
2014), prince93 (Wednesday, April 04, 2012), Rescuer 1122 (Friday, December 28,
2012), Rushna Qureshi (Saturday, October 06, 2012)
#4
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Taimoor Gondal
Diplomat
Definition
To distinguish UAVs from missiles, a UAV is defined as a "powered, aerial
vehicle that does not carry a human operator, uses aerodynamic forces to
provide vehicle lift, can fly autonomously or be piloted remotely, can be
expendable or recoverable, and can carry a lethal or nonlethal payload".
Therefore, cruise missiles are not considered UAVs, because, like many
other guided missiles, the vehicle itself is a weapon that is not reused,
even though it is also unmanned and in some cases remotely guided.
percent think they largely kill civilians and another 39 percent feel they kill
both civilians and militants.
2. Tactical advantage
The drones program is effective in terms of getting terrorist operatives in
places where there's limited reach or no accessibility.
4. With the help of precision strikes predator strikes have successfully killed
top militant commanders and Al-Qaida operatives like Nek Muhammad,
Baitullah Mahsud, Ilyas Kashmiri etc.
5. No life loss to crew as the predator is operated without a pilot
6. Surveillance capability and updation of information of intelligence value.
Negative Fallouts
1. Sovereignty and Integrity
Compromising sovereignty and integrity as no international law permits
aggression and use of force against another sovereign nation.
Recommendations
1. Operation within our territory is the responsibility of state therefore
drone technology be transferred to Pakistan for carrying out operation even
in the airspace by LEAs themselves instead of US.
2. Sharing of Information between ISI & CIA to minimize collateral damage
and avoid incidents of targeting own check posts/Border Outposts and a
previous incident of innocent killings during a jirga.
3. Sending strong Message by Pakistani representatives at all international
forums highlighting the issues.
4. Constitution of commissions to inquire extra judicial killings and
document the decree for presentation at UNHRC and all forums for its
pursuance.
5. US be asked to avoid delivery of toxic/chemical munitions through
hellfire missiles as it bears negative externalities by causing severe skin
diseases to the nearby populace.
6. Elimination of all acts which gives US a reason to carryout drones
Critical Analysis:-
The New York Times reported in September 2008 that Pakistan regards the
Haqqani's as an important force for protecting its interests in Afghanistan
in the event of American withdrawal from there and therefore have been
unwilling to move against them. Pakistan presumably feels pressured that
India, Russia, and Iran are gaining a foothold in Afghanistan. Since it lacks
the financial clout of these other countries, Pakistan hopes that by being a
sanctuary for the Haqqani network, it can assert some influence over its
turbulent neighbour. In the words of a retired senior Pakistani official:
"[We] have no money.
All we have are the crazies. So the crazies it is." The New York Times and
Al Jazeera later reported in June 2010 that Pakistan's Army chief General
Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and chief of the ISI General Ahmad Shuja Pasha
were in talks with Afghan president Hamid Karzai to broker a powersharing agreement between the Haqqani network and the Afghan
government. Reacting to this report both President Barack Obama and CIA
director Leon Panetta responded with skepticism that such an effort could
succeed. The effort to mediate between the Haqqanis and the Afghan
government was launched by Pakistan after intense pressure by the US to
take military action against the group in North Waziristan. Hamid Karzai
later denied meeting anyone from the Haqqani network. Subsequently
Kayani also denied that he took part in these talks.
According to a July 2011 report published by West Point's Combating
Terrorism Center, the network acts as a key facilitator of negotiations
between the Pakistani government and the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan and as
the "primary conduit" of many Pakistani Taliban fighters into Afghanistan.
In September 2011, Sirajuddin Haqqani claimed during a telephonic
interview to Reuters that the Haqqani network no longer maintained
sanctuaries in northwest Pakistan and the robust presence that it once had
there and instead now felt more safer in Afghanistan: "Gone are the days
when we were hiding in the mountains along the Pakistan-Afghanistan
border. Now we consider ourselves more secure in Afghanistan besides the
Afghan people." According to Haqqani, there were "senior military and
police officials" who are aligned with the group and there are even
sympathetic and "sincere people in the Afghan government who are loyal
to the Taliban" who support the group's aim of liberating Afghanistan "from
the clutches of occupying forces." In response to questions from the BBC's
Pashto service, Siraj denied any links to the ISI and stated that Mullah
Omar is "our leader and we totally obey him."
The group's links to Pakistan have been a sour point in Pakistan United
States relations. In September 2011 the Obama administration warned
Pakistan that it must do more to cut ties with the Haqqani network and
help eliminate its leaders, adding that "the United States will act
Introduction
In 1987, the Government of Pakistan (GOP) with the assistance of the World Bank formulated its
long term strategy for development of the power sector in reliable power would spur economic
growth. With energy demand growing at 12 percent and supply at 7 percent per annum. Load
shedding was rampant with consequential output losses for industry and agriculture. It was
estimated that the annual gap of 2000 MW of electricity cost the country approximately $1
billion per year in lost GDP. Electricity was available to only 40 percent of the population and
per capita consumption of 404 kWh was only 4 percent of that in the United States and 24
percent of consumption in Malaysia.
IPPs
Pakistan had to catch up fast and the development of new capacity became the top priority, but
the Government of Pakistan (GOP) lacked the funds for infrastructure development.
Consequently, the private sector was invited to develop new generating capacity. It was
rationalised that the private sector would not only supplement public sector generation, it would
also mobilise additional equity and debt resources and improve the efficiency in the energy
sector.
The new energy policy was implemented in a period of high political volatility in the early
1990s. The first Benazir Bhutto government (elected in 1988) was dismissed by President
Ghulam Ishaq Khan in 1992. She was succeeded by Nawaz Sharif who initiated a number of free
market reforms and also signed Pakistans first IPP contract for the largest power sector project
with the Hub Power Company in
1992. Disagreements with the President led to the dismissal of this government also, and an
interim government was installed which held fresh elections in which the second Bhutto
government was elected in November 1993. During its tenure, the Bhutto government signed a
number of IPP contracts under the 1994 Power Policy and in June 1996, Pakistans first private
sector power plant, the Hub Power Company (Hubco) came into operation.
Current Situation
Currently the situation Installed capacity is as following .
a. Total installed capacity 20681 MW
b. WAPDA hydel 6,555 MW (31%)
c. WAPDA thermal power, 4829 MW
d. RPPs 365 MW
e. PAEC 665 MW
f. IPPs 7644 MW
Currently Production is 11500 MW and Demand is 15500 MWAdditional quantity is not being
produced due to lack fundsand circular debt problem.IPPs and Wapda owned plants also have
lost efficiency now only producing 50% of full capacity and even less.Production of additional
quantity will cause Govt to increase rates due to increase in thermal factor(variable costs of
electricity produced by thermal varies between Rs 12 to 19,while by Hydel variable cost is less
than Rs1).So the result is rampant load shedding, blow to agriculture and industry and high
Social cost.
Impacts of IPPs
Impacts of IPPs are both positive as well as negative, positive impacts include:
a. Enhanced the capacity of power sector
b. Supported the economic activity from 2000 to 2007
c. Provided a cushion time to built long term power projects
d. Provided vital support in short span of time
Negative impacts include:
a. Bulk tariff ceiling instead of competitive bidding resulted in high tariffs
b. Increase in Thermal component also contributed toward price hike ,i.e. 60%
c. Lack of transparency in contracts as discussed earlier
d. Since 2001 though it has supported eco activity but due to oil price hike and increase in
thermal factor it has caused following problems :
a) Higher power tariff causing inflation especially after 2005-2006
b) Costly export goods
e. Low performance by old plants has aggravated power shortage
f. IPPs are not environment friendly and cause lot of pollution
Geographical Importance:
Bridge between South Asia and South West Asia, Iran and Afghanistan are energy abundant
while India and China are lacking of. China finds way to Indian ocean and Arabian Sea
through Korakaram. China with its fastest economic growth rate of 9%, is developing its
southern provinces because its own port is 4500 km away from Sinkian but Gawadar is
2500 km away.
Pakistan offers to CARs the shortest route of 2600 km as compared to Iran (4500 km) or
Turkey (5000 km) land locked Afghanistan now at the phase of Reconstruction, finds its
ways through Pakistan. Gawadar port with its deep waters attracts the trade ships of China,
CARs and South East Asian Countries. ASEAN.
Economic significance:
SAARC, ECO. Iran is struggling to export its surplus gas and oil to eastern countries: Qatar
Pakistan and Turkmenistan Pipeline projects highlights the position. Pakistan would get 400
million dollar annually if IPT gets success. Mountain Ranges: Himalayas, Hindu Kush in the
North are plentiful in providing water and natural resources.
Political importance:
US interests in the regions to contain the Growing China, nuclear Iran, terrorist Afghanistan,
and to benefit from the market of India. Security and Business are two main US interests in
the region while Pakistan is playing a front line role against terrorism. Today the political
scenario of the region is tinged with pre emption policy and US invasion of Iraq and
Afghanistan. Irans nuclear program, Indias geopolitical muscles (new strategic deal with
US) to gain the hegemony and to counter the The Rise of China which has earned all the
qualities to change unipolar world into Bipolar world.
In all these issues, Pakistan is directly or indirectly involved, especially after Al-Qaeda
operations. The American think tanks have repeatedly accepted that war against terror
could never be worn without the help of Pakistan. Pakistan has rigorously fought, and
ongoing military operation in Wazirstan is also targeting the suspected Taliban in the
bordering area.
lobal Warming
The warnings about global warming have been extremely clear for a
long time. We are facing a global climate crisis. It is deepening. We
are entering a period of consequences.
(Al Gore)
Global warming is when the earth heats up (the temperature rises). It happens when
greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrous oxide, and methane) trap heat and
light from the sun in the earths atmosphere, which increases the temperature. This hurts
many people, animals, and plants. Many cannot take the change, so they die.
earths atmosphere.
2. The main reason of the increase in concentration of CO2 in last 150 years is the
combustion of fossil fuels and other human activities.
3. Increased agriculture, deforestation, landfills, industrial production and minning also
contribute a significant share of emissions.
4. The level of CO2 enhanced from 210ppm to 360 ppm in last 150 years.
5. N2O is 6-8% contributor of the total; green house effect.
6. Increased use of aerosols and air coolants have raise the amount of chlorofluorocarbons,
which contributes 24% of the total green house effect.
7. Oxides of sulfur, which are obtained by burning fuel in the engines, are also a potential
hazard.
8. Due to high levels of CFCs the ozone layer which is a protective covering of the earth is
depleting and a hole has been observed in it on the arctic region. This depleted ozone also
increases the influx of solar light specially UV rays.
Impact on Pakistan:
1. Pakistan produces less than 0.4% of the green house gasses which are
the major contributors of global warming.
2. Yet, it is the 12th country most at risk from the effects of global warming.
Politics
Most countries are Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC). The ultimate objective of the Convention is to
prevent "dangerous" human interference of the climate system. As is stated
in the Convention, this requires that GHG concentrations are stabilized in the
atmosphere at a level where ecosystems can adapt naturally to climate
change, food production is not threatened, and economic development can
proceed in a sustainable fashion.
The Framework Convention was agreed in 1992, but since then, global
emissions have risen. During negotiations, the G77 (a lobbying group in the
Conclusion:
Political and public debate continues regarding climate change, and what
actions (if any) to take in response. The available options are mitigation to
reduce further emissions; adaptation to reduce the damage caused by
warming; and, more speculatively, geoengineering to reverse global
warming. Most national governments have signed and ratified the Kyoto
Protocol aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
National Unity
National Purpose (shared values and beliefs) envisages: (1) a prosperous
and peaceful country where all citizens have right to worship, life, property
and speech. (2) Equality of opportunity, with merit as the final standard for
all jobs/slots and not the disqualifier it is today. (3) Liberal/Tolerant Modern
State with an Islamic Ideology. (4) Welfare State with both the State and
private sector working in cooperation with each other with a strong
institutional framework encouraging individuals and businesses to support
less affluent classes. (5) Strengthening democratic traditions by creating a
real grassroots democracy.
National integration is a process of achieving national cohesion, stability,
prosperity, strength, and feelings of being united as a nation. Pakistan has
faced varying degrees of religious, ethnic, linguistic, and political problems
that are often in conflict with our national interest. To guard against all
external as well as internal challenges to the solidarity and security of
Pakistan, a well knitted and integrated nation is a must. Lack of confidence
and faith in the future of Pakistan speaks volume of our failings. All the
turmoil and unrest in the country cannot be entirely placed on the external
forces and our enemies. The brute and the savage force in an individual,
which is basically harnessed by positive aspects of education, tends to get
unleashed in different directions and causes serious disruptions within
society.
Hamza Amir in his book Pakistan-an overdeveloped state has revealed the
fact that after independence, the governing class was highly educated, on
the pattern of the British mind set, while on the contrary the masses were
miserable illiterate. This huge gap created management crisis. Uniform
development across the country over the past sixty years would have solidly
integrated the Pakistani nation but that did not happen due to absolute
incompetence, poor leadership and corruption at all levels. The price
Pakistan is paying for its neglect is in the shape of an internally disjointed
nation forced to suffer the present-day indignities in the shape of terrorism
and insurgency.
interested.
Since the independence, the ruling elite with the same colonial mind set
segregated the Pakistani society on ethnic, linguistic, sectarian issues and
kept them in the abeyance of poverty and illiteracy.
Inequitable Distribution of wealth fueled by the feudal, profit oriented
industrialists, biased policy makers aggravated the situation. The
concentration of wealth, contrary to the Islamic code, by 22 families in
1960s and 500 groups at present, has alienated the majority from assuming
positive role in nation building process.
Unsatisfied Federating Units:
Strong Center, first operated under the provisions of the British made 1935
Act alienated the small provinces, generated sentiments of separatism,
violence, distrust. Frequent failure of Counsel of Common Interest, National
Finance Commission, disputed water distribution and energy resources, the
right of royalty, inequitable job distribution, have endangered the security
and prosperity of the country. Attempts to keep unity under bayonet bring
short relief but unending unrest and brutalities. Insurgency in Wazirstan and
Balochistan, Foreign Elements, are alarming indicators to the national Army.
Controlled Media in Pakistan has been projecting flowery image of the state
while the demon of corruption, hatred, injustice, in violence, and deprivation
kept on infecting its foundations.
Effects of disunity:
The crisis of management has created an air of uncertainty, disloyalty,
frustration, and insurgency. The Pakistan Army is at war with its own people
in Balochistan and FATA. The fragmented Pakistan with internal weakness
and external threats is unable to refuse the Americans Orders, to get its
legitimate right of Kashmir, to secure its borders with Afghanistan.
Foreign investors, especially the overseas Pakistanis are examining the fear
factors in opening new ventures due to corrupt financial institutions and
violent groups. Consequently the vicious circle of poverty expands
aggravating the already inflamed situation. The secret agencies of enemy
countries find local terrorists to disrupt the system. Under the thick air of
jealousy, non construction of Big dams is pushing he country into dark ages.
A common citizen suffers worst type of corruption and thus is uninterested in
paying taxes. Social values, crime rate, and national patriotism, religious
satisfaction are fast disappearing with growing poverty. Disengage of citizen
in election process is a clear indication of general masses hatred against the
political, religious and military leadership. Individuals are becoming if
oriented, preferring their self interest to the national interest.
Pragmatic Steps:
Many steps can be taken at Government, Society, and Individual level to
fight the menace of disintegration and harness the much needed national
unity. To create physical asset by educating the masses, proper allocating
the land, credit, Zakat and Usher, ensuring cost effective provisions of basic
--------- Improved efficiency in the public and Corporate sectors to provide
rule of Law.
Independence of Judiciary will strengthen democracy, restore trust between
Center and Provinces, and facilitate quick dispensation of justice.
Depoliticizing of Public departments to avoid political pressures. Peace inside
and outside the borders will provide sufficient resource, skills and
opportunities to focus on the national prosperity. Media with its magical
power can unite the warring factions by minimizing the differences through
open debates. Stable democratic system to work for welfare state. Patriot
intellectuals writing to bring harmony. Accountability at all levels. Autonomy
to the Provinces. Awakening of Islamic ideology.
The political and military establishment must now understand that the
military potential of any country is multiplied manifolds when it is backed by
a nation that is well-integrated. An integrated nation can cover up for
military shortfalls but military strength cannot cover up for the shortfalls of a
nation that lacks integration and cohesion. The Soviet Unions break-up in
1991 is an example that amply illustrates this aspect. Pakistan must,
therefore, accord top priority to uniform development throughout the
country in order to have a nation that can back its enviable military potential
in a solid manner; if not, then all will be lost.
Following the example of the armed forces it is necessary that Pakistanis
learn to work with each other in all sectors of national life. Army units are
formed on the basis of amalgamating soldiers from different areas. For
example a battalion of the Frontier Force Regiment (FFR) does not consist of
Pakhtuns alone but has a component of soldiers from other parts of Pakistan
amalgamated with the Pakhtuns. Thus they become one solidly integrated
entity the Pakistan army. Pakhtun, Punjabi, Baloch, Sindhi and Kashmiri
fellow soldiers posted anywhere in the country then willingly die for each
other and for Pakistan; such is the level of integration. Sadly, one cannot say
the same about the rest of Pakistan.
In the light of the military experience it just might be a good idea if all
businesses, factories, corporate entities, service providers etc located in any
province are made to follow a regulated system that absorbs people of other
provinces so that a bonding interaction is brought about in the workplace.
Lastly, it is time to understand that Pakistan can no longer be ruled from
Islamabad by an ever-weakening, but imposingly dominant, centre. To
continue doing this will be a step in the wrong direction. There is now no
alternative to allowing complete, undiluted and effective autonomy to the
provinces
2010 Floods in Pakistan:The 2010 Pakistan floods began in late July 2010, resulting from heavy
monsoon rains in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh, Punjab andBalochistan
regions of Pakistan and affected the Indus River basin. Approximately onefifth of Pakistan's total land area was underwater, approximately 796,095
square kilometres (307,374 sq mi). According to Pakistani government data
Causes:
The floods were driven by unprecedented monsoon rain. The rainfall
anomaly map published by NASA showed unusually intense monsoon rains
attributed to La Nia. On 21 June, the Pakistan Meteorological Department
cautioned that urban and flash flooding could occur from July to September
in the north parts of the country. The same department recorded aboveaverage rainfall in the months of July and August 2010 and monitored the
flood wave progression. Discharge levels were comparable to those of the
floods of 1988, 1995, and 1997. The monsoon rainfall of 2010, over whole
country, was excess of 87 per cent and was highest since 1994 and ranked
second highest during last 50 years of period.
In response to previous Indus River floods in 1973 and 1976, Pakistan
created the Federal Flood Commission (FFC) in 1977. The FFC operates
under Pakistan's Ministry of Water and Power. It is charged with executing
flood control projects and protecting lives and property of Pakistanis from
the impact of floods. Since its inception the FFC has received Rs 87.8 billion
(about 900 million USD). FFC documents show that numerous projects were
initiated, funded and completed, but reports indicate that little work has
actually been done due to ineffective leadership and corruption
Effects:1. Food
5. Economic effects
On 7 September 2010, the International Labour Organization reported that
the floods had cost more than 5.3 million jobs, stating that "productive and
labor intensive job creation programmes are urgently needed to lift millions
of people out of poverty that has been aggravated by flood damage".
Forecasts estimated that the GDP growth rate of 4% prior to the floods
would turn to -2% to -5% followed by several additional years of belowtrend growth. As a result, Pakistan was unlikely to meet the International
Monetary Fund's target budget deficit cap of 5.1% of GDP, and the existing
$55 billion of external debt was set to grow. Crop losses were expected to
impact textile manufacturing, Pakistan's largest export sector. The loss of
over 10 million head of livestock along with the loss of other crops would
reduce agricultural production by more than 15%. Toyota and Unilever
Pakistan said that the floods would sap growth, necessitating production cuts
as people coped with the destruction. Parvez Ghias, the chief executive of
Pakistan's largest automotor manufacturer Toyota, described the economy's
state as "fragile". Nationwide car sales were predicted to fall as much as
25%, forcing automakers to reduce production in October2010 from the
prior level of 200 cars per day. Milk supplies fell by 15%, which caused the
retail price of milk to increase by Pk Rs 4 (5 US cents) per liter.
DAMAGES
Causes
In the month of July Pakistan received below normal monsoon rains;
however in August and September the country received above normal
monsoon rains. A strong weather pattern entered the areas of Sindh from
the Indian states of Rajasthan and Gujarat in August and gained strength
with the passage of time and caused heavy downpours. The four weeks of
continuous rain have created an unprecedented flood situation in Sindh.
The District Badin in Sindh province received record breaking rainfall of
615.3 millimeters (24.22 in) during the monsoon spell breaking earlier
recorded 121 millimeters (4.8 in) in Badin in 1936. The area of Mithi also
received record rainfall of 1,290 millimeters (51 in) during the spell, where
maximum rainfall was recorded 114 millimeters (4.5 in) in Mithi in 2004. The
heavy cloudburst during last 4872 hours displaced many people besides
destroying crops in the area. The Met Office had informed all district
coordination officers, Provincial Disaster Management Authority, chief
secretaries and chief ministers about the heavy monsoon rain-spell two days
earlier to take precautionary measures.
Qamar uz Zaman Chaudhry, Director General Pakistan Meteorological
Department said: "the rains in Sindh are the highest ever recorded monsoon
rains during the four weeks period of August and September, 2011. Before
the start of these rains in the second week of August, Sindh was under
severe drought conditions and it had not received any rainfall for the last 12
months. The last severe rainfall flooding in Sindh occurred in July 2003," he
said and added, "but this time the devastating rains of Mithi, Mirpurkhas,
Diplo, Parker, Nawabshah, Badin, Chhor, Padidan, and Hyderabad etc during
the four weeks period have created unprecedented flood situation in Sindh."
According to Dr. Qamar, the total volume of water fallen over Sindh during
the four weeks is estimated to be above 37 million acre feet, which is
unimaginable. The August monsoon rainfall, over province of Sindh (271 %
above normal) is the heaviest recorded during the period 19612011.
more. There is a need of warm shelters, beds and blankets. The main need,
which cannot only be provided by the provincial government, is, however,
the beginning of a rehabilitation process.
So far, the provincial government has not received any financial support
from the federal government or international donors. The chief minister of
the province has already initiated a meeting with international donor
agencies to convince them of the necessity to help and support the people of
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Regarding the ongoing war on terror in the region, it is
even more important to support this crisis-ridden province.
In general, Pakistan is in need of international support. Many regional
organisations, which help affected families, are charity based or depended
on external funding. Also the financial support of the Pakistan government
does not meet the needs of the people so far. The government has issued so
called Watan Cards with a balance of 20.000 Rupees (approx. 180 EUR) to
affected families. This amount is, however, not sufficient for the
reconstruction of houses. Thus, main problems are the rehabilitation and
reconstruction of houses and livelihoods, as well as the resettlement of
homeless people. If such processes are not initiated in the upcoming
months, a crisis after the crisis will emerge and aggravate the security
situation in the region. In this regard, Pakistan needs assistance by the
international donor community, also because the government lacks
functioning institutions to handle such issues.
3. Civil-Military Relations
Currently, military and civil government institutions are struggling on issues
of distribution of relief aid. The question of dividing the government
resources is central. Different stakeholders battle for the greatest share of
resources which in turn undermines the efficiency of the state and its ability
to address problems.
Pakistans image on the outside, but also inside the country, is rather
negative. Both media and the establishment created an extremely negative
image of the governments crisis management and portrayed the military as
saviour of the people. However, in the case of Punjab, it was initially the
local government, not the military, that came to the peoples assistance.
is in the hands of only 20% of people), crop cultivation, size of land, access
to water etc.
2. Resettlement programmes for people who live near the rivers
3. Anti-corruption programmes
4. Programmes for the social sector such as education and health facilities
5. Support in regard to the war on terror and its impact on the society
6. Adjustment of aid policy of the international donor community, because it
is virtually an extension of the policy of the war on terror (For example,
Germany has concentrated its help only on Khyber Pakhtunkhwa although
other provinces are equally affected by the flood and problems of militancy)
7. Exchange of international donors, civil society and the government to
address and reassess the needs of the people in order to implement aid
programmes properly
8. Discontinuation of the sale of military equipment by supplier states
(fighter jets from USA and China, Negotiations on buying Submarines from
Germany and France). It is the responsibility of supplier states, which are at
the same time donors of aid, to prevent Pakistan to spend millions of dollars
for military equipment.
9. Exchange of regional experiences (India, Bangladesh or Sri Lanka)
towards the establishment of institutional and social structures and how to
meet natural disasters
10. Transparency in regard to the implementation of studies such as the
post-disaster survey Damage and Needs Assessment of the World Bank
and Asian Development Bank (e.g. objections in terms of validity of data)
Caused by four strains of virus spread by the mosquito Aedes aegypti, there
is no vaccine which is why prevention methods focus on mosquito control.
Pakistani authorities in Lahore have blamed the crisis on prolonged monsoon
rains and unusually high seasonal temperatures.
But furious locals say the outbreak is yet another example of government
inefficiency, citing a failure to take preventive measures to kill off the
mosquitos and lengthy power cuts.
In northwestern province Khyber Paktunkhwa, at least 130 people have been
diagnosed and six have died. Southern province Sindh has seen 400
suspected cases and six deaths.
Banners emblazoned with giant sketches of mosquitos and public warning
messages such as Eliminate dengue, Have peace are hung across avenues
and crossings in Lahore, a city of eight million.
At Lahore General Hospital, where most cases have been reported, the
corridors were packed with patients and relatives making it difficult to
breathe.Outside, medics set up large tents to accommodate family members
and patients waiting for treatment, offering some shelter in the sweltering
heat.Doctor Zafar Ikram said the hospital was working beyond capacity to
deal with the influx of patients.
I think more people are coming because there is greater awareness about
dengue due to the media spotlight and people are scared, so anyone with a
normal fever comes to hospital for the (dengue) test, Ikram told AFP.
At the Mayo hospital, hundreds of people queued up in front of registration
counters, giving blood samples and collecting reports.
Teams from the World Health Organisation and Sri Lanka are now helping
with the efforts. Schools and colleges initially shut have since reopened.
Government response
Government of Pakistan and Punjab, Pakistan are working on the preventive
measures to reduce the spread of the epidemic. The Government of Punjab
has opened a hotline called Punjab Health Line Project For Dengue which can
be reached at
the signs and symptoms of dengue, reach for help for suspected cases and
ultimately help identify areas where the epidemic may have reached.
Spraying teams have been organized for the purpose of fumigating, spraying
and fogging areas where the Aedes mosquitoes have known to infect people
with the virus. Directions are in place for spraying especially in educational
institutes. The government threatened to take action against any private
school that did not observe to take these measures. Mobile teams operate
around the clock to treat affectees on the spot in rural areas. A Special
Tribunal for dengue directly reports to the provincial government. Chairman
Dengue Emergency Response Committee Khwaja Saad Rafique has also
advised private schools to spray twice a week. In early September 2011, the
Government of Punjab ordered the schools, colleges and universities in
thePakistan to close down for 10 days for intensive spraying. Article 144 has
been implemented in Lahore for the prevention of dengue. After an appeal
by the Punjab, Pakistan, private hospitals have agreed to provide free
treatment to dengue patients.
Sino-Pak Relations
People's Republic of ChinaPakistan relations began in 1950 when Pakistan
was among the first countries to break relations with the Republic of China
on Taiwan and recognize the PRC. Following the 1962 Sino-Indian War, both
countries has placed considerable importance on the maintenance of a
extremely close and supportive relationship. Since then, the two countries
have regularly exchanged high-level visits resulting in a variety of
agreements. The PRC has provided economic, military and technical
assistance to Pakistan and each considers the other a close strategic ally.
Bilateral relations have evolved from an initial Chinese policy of neutrality to
a partnership that links a smaller but militarily powerful Pakistan, partially
dependent on China for its economic and military strength, with China
attempting to balance competing interests in the region. Diplomatic relations
were established in 1950, military assistance began in 1966, a strategic
alliance was formed in 1972 and economic co-operation began in 1979.
China has become Pakistans largest supplier of arms and its third-largest
trading partner. Recently, both nations have decided to cooperate in
improving Pakistan's civilian nuclear program.
Favorable relations with China is a pillar of Pakistan's foreign policy. China
supported Pakistan's opposition to the Soviet Union's intervention in
Afghanistan and is perceived by Pakistan as a regional counterweight to
India and the United States. China and Pakistan also share close military
relations, with China supplying a range of modern armaments to the
Pakistani defense forces. China supports Pakistan's stance on Kashmir while
Pakistan supports China on the issues of Xinjiang, Tibet, and Taiwan. Lately,
Important events:1950 - Pakistan becomes the third non-communist country, and first Muslim
one, to recognize the People's Republic of China.
1951 - Beijing and Karachi establish diplomatic relations.
1963 - Pakistan cedes the Trans-Karakoram Tract to China, ending border
disputes.
1970 - Pakistan helps the U.S. arrange the 1972 Nixon visit to China.
1978 - The Karakoram Highway linking the mountainous Northern Pakistan
with Western China officially opens.
1980 - China and the U.S. provide support through Pakistan to the Afghan
guerrillas fighting Soviet occupational forces.
1986 - China and Pakistan reach a comprehensive nuclear co-operation
agreement.
1996 - Chinese President Jiang Zemin pays a state visit to Pakistan.
1999 - A 300-megawatt nuclear power plant, built with Chinese help in
Punjab province, is completed.
2001 - A joint-ventured Chinese-Pakistani tank, the MBT-2000 (Al-Khalid)
MBT is completed.
2002 - The building of the Gwadar deep sea port begins, with China as the
primary investor.
2003 - Pakistan and China signed a $110 million contract for the
construction of a housing project on Multan Road in Lahore.
2007 - The Sino-Pakistani joint-ventured multirole fighter aircraft - the JF17 Thunder (FC-1 Fierce Dragon) is formally rolled out.
2008 - Pakistan welcomes the Chinese Olympic Torch in an Islamabad
sports stadium, under heavy guard amidst security concerns.
2008 - China and Pakistan sign an free trade agreement.
2008 - Pakistan and China to build a railway through the Karakoram
Highway, in order to link China's rail network to Gwadar Port.
2008 - The F-22P frigate, comes into service with the Pakistani Navy.
2009 - The ISI arrest several suspected Uyghur terrorists seeking refuge in
Pakistan.
2010 - Pakistan and China conduct a joint anti-terrorism drill.
2010 - China donates $260 million in dollars to flood hit Pakistan and sends
4 military rescue helicopters to assist in rescue operations.
2010 - Wen Jiabao visits Pakistan. More than 30 billion dollars worth of
deals were signed.
2011 - Pakistan is expected to buy air to air SD 10 missiles from China for
its 250 JF 17 thunder fighter fleet
Military Relations:The People's Republic of China enjoys strong defense ties with Pakistan. This
relationship between two adjoining Asian countries is important in the
world's geo-strategic alliances. The strong defense ties are primarily to
counter regional Indian and American influence, and was also to repel Soviet
influence in the area. In recent years this relationship has strengthened
through ongoing defence projects and agreements between Pakistan and
China.
Since 1962, China has been a steady source of military equipment to the
Pakistani Army, helping establish munition factories, providing technological
assistance and modernizing existing facilities. The countries are involved in
the joint venture of several projects to enhance military and weaponry
systems, which include collaborating in the development of JF-17 Thunder
fighter aircraft, K-8 Karakorum advance training aircraft, space technology,
AWACS systems, Al-Khalid tanks and the Babur cruise missile. The armies
have a schedule for organising joint military exercises.
China is the largest investor in the Gwadar Deep Sea Port, which is
strategically located at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz. It is viewed warily
by both America and India as a possible launchpad for Chinese naval
operations in the Indian Ocean. However the Gwadar Port is currently
delayed due to a multilateral diplomatic standoff between the project leaders
and the Singapore government.
China has offered Pakistan military aid in order to fight against terrorism in
Pakistan. Pakistan has purchased military equipment from China in order to
bolster their efforts against Islamic militants.
In the past, China has played a major role in the development of Pakistan's
Issues: East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) (also known as the Turkistan
Islamic Movement (TIM) is a Waziri based mujihadeen organization that is
said to be allied with the Taliban, which has received funding from rogue
elements in the ISI. As these militants are labeled as terrorists from the
Chinese province of Xinjiang, Pakistan's inability to prevent this is a potential
source of conflict.
The U.S. War On Terror has the Chinese wary of U.S. influence in the region,
and as Pakistan is a US ally and major recipient of US military and economic
aid, China is obligated to step up its support in order to maintain its
influence in the region. As political alliances shift, Pakistan may have allies in
the United States and China that may begin to see each other as rivals.
Similarly, the warming of Sino-Indian relations puts Pakistan's traditional
alliance with China against India at risk. While the level of cooperation
between Pakistan and China is far closer than that of India, it poses a future
problem for Pakistan-China relations.
2011 Hotan Attack:The 2011 Hotan Attack was a series of coordinated bomb and knife attacks
that occurred in Hotan, Xinjiang, People's Republic of China on July 18,
2011. While many had always suspected Pakistani involvement in terrorism
in Xinjiang, the 2011 Hotan attack marked the first incident of
acknowledgement of this by authorities in China.
Analysis of Pak-US vs Pak-China relations:Decision makers in Pakistan are often torn between opting for strategic
relations with the US or China: ties with either of the two should be mutually
exclusive. However, as Pakistanis wonder whether Pakistan is a US ally or
target, China with its quiet unobtrusive help continues to win the hearts and
minds of the people of Pakistan. The question here is, why is it that the US
continues to pump money, train Pakistani security forces and provide
technical support, yet it continues to draw flak? It is worth examining the
reason for this dichotomy.
The Pak-US military relations have been like a rollercoaster ride. Historically,
no US ally has faced as many sanctions from it as Pakistan. A brief history of
the Pak-US military relations indicates that they commenced in 1954/55,
with the signing of the SEATO/CENTO pact, after which Pakistan started
receiving weapons and training from America. In July 1957, Pakistan
permitted the US to establish a secret intelligence facility in the country and
for the U-2 spy plane to operate from Badaber, near Peshawar. But when the
plane was shot down by the Soviet army and its pilot captured alive on May
1, 1960, it embarrassed the US and brought Soviet ire on Pakistan. Since
the Pakistani government was kept in the dark regarding the clandestine US
operations, it asked the US to wind up its activities in Pakistan.
During the Indo-China war in 1962, the US supply of defence equipment to
India, despite Pakistans objections, soured the Pak-US relations. On the
contrary, the US did not come to Pakistans aid either in the 1965 or the
1971 Indo-Pak wars, despite a pact for mutual defence, forcing Pakistan to
denounce its SEATO and CENTO membership. In addition, the Pak-US
relations underwent a severe blow with Pakistans nuclear tests on May 28,
1998, and the ensuing sanctions. The ouster of then premier Nawaz Sharif in
1999 in a military coup led by General Musharraf gave the US government
another reason to invoke fresh sanctions under Section 508 of the Foreign
Appropriations Act, which included restrictions on foreign military financing
and economic assistance.
Now let us examine Pak-China relations briefly. The relationship between the
two countries began in 1950s when Pakistan was among the first countries,
and the only Muslim nation, to recognise the Peoples Republic of China and
tried to build good relations with the newly independent country. Pakistan
also helped China become a member of the United Nations and has been
instrumental in helping it to maintain relations with the Muslim world. It has
also played a leading role in bridging the communication gap between China
and the West, through Henry Kissingers secret visit in 1971, which became
the forerunner of President Nixons historic Beijing tour, establishing to the
world that China was a lawful entity.
Today, China has come a long way from those turbulent times. It is a factor
have fought three major wars, one undeclared war and have been involved
in numerous armed skirmishes and military standoffs. The Kashmir dispute
is the main center-point of all of these conflicts with the exception of the
Indo-Pakistan War of 1971, which resulted in the secession of East Pakistan
(now Bangladesh).
There have been numerous attempts to improve the relationshipnotably,
the Shimla summit, the Agra summit and the Lahore summit. Since the early
1980s, relations between the two nations soured particularly after the
Siachen conflict, the intensification of Kashmir insurgency in 1989, Indian
and Pakistani nuclear tests in 1998 and the 1999 Kargil war. Certain
confidence-building measuressuch as the 2003 ceasefire agreement and
the DelhiLahore Bus servicewere successful in deescalating tensions.
However, these efforts have been impeded by periodic terrorist attacks. The
2001 Indian Parliament attack almost brought the two nations on the brink
of a nuclear war. The 2007 Samjhauta Express bombings, plotted by an
Indian Army officer which killed 68 civilians (most of whom were Pakistani),
was also a crucial point in relations. Additionally, the 2008 Mumbai attacks
carried out by Pakistani militants resulted in a severe blow to the ongoing
India-Pakistan peace talks.
Background: Born out from the furnace of animosity, India and Pakistan, the twin brothers
have a history of unique relations. There is much in common between
Republic of India and Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The diplomatic relations
developed soon after independence but these relations did not ensure good
friendship. The blaming process started soon after the inception of Pakistan
when during the worlds biggest mass migration both states were unable to
provide security to minorities. At that time there were 682 princely states
and their future was to be decided according to their own will. Junagadh and
Kashmir are two of these states which are still a bone of contention between
India and Pakistan. Junagadh was composed of 88% Hindu Majority with a
Muslim ruler named Nawab Mahabat Khan. The ruler voted for Pakistan but
India did not accept it on the plea of heavy Hindu majority. The other reason
projected by India was that the state of Junagadh was encircled by Indian
state and giving it to Pakistan would contradict the two nation theory. The
stand of Pakistan was on the basis of the Muslim ruler and the maritime link
of Pakistan with junagadh coastal line.
One the other hand, the ruler of Kashmir, Hari Singh, wanted to join India
but the majority of Muslim population was in the favour of Pakistan.
Maharaja Hair Singh made a stand still agreement with the Government of
Pakistan. However, the rumoures spread in Pakistan that Mahraja Hari Singh
was going to accede with India. The forces of Pakistan invaded in Kashmir in
1947 and Hari Singh asked India for help. Indian Armed forces violating the
1965 and 1971 Wars:The Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 was a culmination of skirmishes that took
place between April 1965 and September 1965 between Pakistanand India.
This conflict became known as the Second Kashmir War fought by India and
Pakistan over the disputed region of Kashmir, the firsthaving been fought in
1947. The war began following Pakistan's Operation Gibraltar, which was
designed to infiltrate forces into Jammu and Kashmir to precipitate an
insurgency against rule by India. The five-week war caused thousands of
casualties on both sides. It ended in aUnited Nations (UN) mandated
ceasefire and the subsequent issuance of the Tashkent Declaration.
1971 was a black year in the history of Pakistan as she lost its eastern wing
as India intervened to favour Bengali people and seized the Qasim part. 90,
000 Pakistani soliders surrendered in Bangladesh. In July 1972 P.M India
Gandhi and PM Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto met in Indian Hill station of Simla and
signed an agreement to return 90, 000 Pak personnel, and that India would
get its captured territory in the west. They also agreed that from then on,
they would settle their disputes through peaceful bilateral negotiations.
Eventually, the trade relation restarted in 1976 but the Afghan crisis of 1979
again disrupted the peaceful process started in 1976.
Pakistan supported Taliban and India favoured Soviet Union. India was also
worried about US military aid to Pakistan, Pakistans purchase of arms from
us and the advancement in her nuclear programme. The change in
leadership brought a new era of relation between the two rivals. In Dec 1988
Benazir Bhutto Shaheed and Rajiv Gandhi resumed talks on different issues
melding cultured exchange, civil aviation and not to attack each other
nuclear facilities. At that time BB said.
Burry the Hatchet; we have had enough of it. Lets start a new chapter.
India has a new generation leadership. Rajiv & I belong to a new generation.
We have some kinship. He father was assassinated and so was my father. He
lost his brother and so have I we both can start from clean state.
In 1997, high level talks were resumed after 3 years. Prime Minister of India
and Pakistan met twice and foreign secretaries conducted 3 rounds of talks
in which they identified 8 outstanding issues to focuss. These 8 issues were
Kashmir issue
Water crisis
Sir creek issue
Rann of kutch
MFN status
Siachen issue
State sponsored issue
Nuclear Deterrence
In September 1997 the talks broke down on structural issue where as in May
1998 the situation became harder because of nuclear experiment conducted
by Pakistan. The environment further became deplorable when Indian Air
lines Flight IC 814 was hijacked in 24 Dec 1999. The plan landed in Lahore
for refuelling but the final destination was Kandhar, Afghanistan. Rivalry
increased when attack was conducted on Indian parliament on Dec 2001.
India blamed Jash-e-Mohammad for that act. The Samjhota express carnage
of 18th February 2007 added fuel to fire. The series of blaming each other
started again where as Pakistan tried to project cordial relations.
Mumbai Attacks:In Nov, 2008, a series of ten co-ordinated attacks were committed by
terrorist which began across Mumbai which is the Indian financial capital and
the largest city. The attack was started on 26 November 2008 and ended on
29 November 2008. In these attacks 173 people were killed including 35
foreigner where as 38 were wounded. India blamed Lashkar-e-Taiba and
gave evidences that weapon, candy wrappers, telephone sets and branded
milk Packets used by the terrorists belonged to Pakistan. But it was also
found that the terrorist were drunk as the Lashkar-e-Taiba elements did not
drink, and were speaking Hyderabadi language. Additionally, Hermant
Kurkure was the first man to be murdered in that attack. He was the man
who was on the hit list of Indian Dons because he arrested General Parohit,
who was the master mind of Samjhota Carnage. Another reason was that
Obama Discussed to solve Kashmir issue to bring stability in the South Asian
region. This attack was done to divert his attention. The lok sbha election
could not be ignored as the current government needed the Pakistan card to
flame the sentiments of Indian masses.
In spite of this deteriorated situation Pakistan did not give up to create
friendly atmosphere. Currently, the government of India is not that much
brutal. Recently Indian minister of state for external affairs said they were
not worried about Pakistan purchasing of armaments but if these weapons
will be used against India, they were ready to fight. In addition, Pakistan
nukes were unsafe.
Bit recently the statement of Indian Army Chief Gen Deepak Kapoor
regarding his armys capacity to fight on two fronts, upset a lots of people in
Pakistan. This also shows that there is a conflict of interest between Indian
army and Indian Government.
India and Pakistan must work jointly to coeate a peaceful atmosphere.
Sharing a long border with common geographic importance can increase to
their worth if the joint venture is adopted.
Since 1947: Since Iran had its security concerns from the expansionist designs of former
Soviet Union and an uneasy relationship with Arab world, therefore,
emergence of a none-Arab Muslim country on its neighbourhood provided
differences, Iran did not support Pakistan on the issue of Kashmir, once the
later was presenting a resolution in United Nations on Human Rights
violations in Kashmir in 1996. It was a serious setback to Pakistani efforts
and India which had already developed its relations with Iran, got an
opportunity to fish in trouble waters, for its own strategic interests.
Thereafter, Indian spying agency RAW, made inroads into Balochistan and
other parts of Pakistan for causing internal destabilization, which is
continuing unabated even today.
On its part, Pakistan however, continued maintaining its brotherly relations
with Iran. Pakistan always has persuaded Iran on a number of occasions for
the reconciliation to shun the differences. Pakistan also tried to convince Iran
that the enemies of both have spread these misperceptions, may be for the
time being portraying as their friend. It whole-heartedly supported Iranian
viewpoint on the issue of its controversial nuclear programme. Through a
progressive reconciliation and diplomatic efforts, both countries come closer
to each other in last few years. Regretfully, on October 18, 2009, a suicide
attack allegedly of Jundallah militant group killed over forty people including
senior commanders of Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) in Sistano-Balochistan.
The people and the Government of Pakistan strongly slammed the attack
and shared the grief and sorrow of the Iranian people over the massive loss
of innocent lives. Regretfully, immediately after the terrorist attack, a
number of Iranian leaders and high-level officials including supreme leader
pointed fingers at Pakistan. Pakistan Government however strongly negated
its involvement in the attack and assured Iran for an all out support to trace
and punish all those responsible for the attack if found on Pakistani soil. The
incident however deteriorated the steadily improving relationship between
two brotherly Muslim countries. Nevertheless, an unanalyzed allegation from
senior Iranian leadership has provided a serious setback to the sincerity of
Government and the people of Pakistan. Indeed, after the Mujahedeens
interim Government and later Talibans taken over of Afghanistan, India was
practically evicted from that soil. Thereafter, it needed some space for the
promotion of militancy in Pakistan. This was only possible by creating a rift
in the bilateral relationship of Iran and Pakistan, who over the years, have
been considering Afghanistan as their strategic rear, of course not on
physical terms. Yet, the concept perhaps misled both in 1990s, once they
were endeavouring to secure their respective interests.
Now once that phase is over, there is a need to learn from the past for a
positive move forward through consensus building. Under the changed global
environment, there is a need that both countries to forget past annoyances
and forge a new long-term common vision reflecting their common security
and economic interests. The fleeting rip in the Pak-Iran relations has no
sound basis, thus can be revamped through enhanced interactions at all
level including by the masses from both sides. Indeed, the renaissance of
cultural and religious affinities between Iran and Pakistan would go a long
way. For this purpose, both need to ban the fissiparous forces persuading
both or any of them. Mutual trust deficit, prevailing over the years has to be
restored on priority. Both need to realize the looming threats around them
and in the regional and global context. Presence of the extra regional forces
in their neighbourhood, otherwise friendly to none, provides them yet
another cause for the convergence.
NUCLEAR:
Pakistan has publicly defended Irans right to nuclear technology. Some
American analysts also suspect Pakistani scientists employed by the
Pakistani military of helping Iran acquire nuclear technology, although
Pakistan officially denies any involvement. Henry Sokolski, former deputy for
nonproliferation policy in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, explained in
2003 that the notion that Pakistan wasnt involved is getting less and less
tenable. Since then, inspectors have found in Irans possession documents
from Pakistani scientist Dr. A.Q. Khan detailing how to shape uranium for
nuclear warheads, while in 2004 then-Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf
officially pardoned Dr. Khan for his sale of nuclear technology. According to a
report by the Congressional Research Service published in 2005, Dr. Khan
could not have functioned without some level of cooperation by Pakistani
military personnel, who maintained tight security around the key nuclear
facilities, and possibly civilian officials as well. On March 15, 2010, Pakistan
rejected a US media report asserting that Khan provided nuclear related
information and material, including drawings, centrifuge components, and a
list of suppliers, to Iran. Abdul Basit, a spokesman for the Pakistani Foreign
Office, described the claims, published by the Washington Post, as "yet
another repackaging of fiction, which surface occasionally for purposes that
are self-evident."
Over the past several years, Pakistan has increasingly called for peaceful
reconciliation on the international nuclear standoff, despite increasing
concern from the UN and Washington.
ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIP:
The two countries initiated significant cooperation in the energy sector in
1991, when Iran began negotiating an oil deal with Pakistan and Qatar. This
initial collaboration, however, was limited and did not progress meaningfully.
Iran again attempted negotiating with Qatar regarding the construction of
gas pipelines to Pakistan in 1995, however was unsuccessful. Cooperation
regarding energy has nonetheless increased since the 1990s and helped
provide the foundation for a more thorough bilateral trade network between
Iran and Pakistan in recent years. By 2005, Pakistan was actively seeking
Iranian investment in bilateral trade and energy cooperation.Pakistan and
Iran have deepened their economic partnership to such an extent that, in a
joint statement issued in May 2010, the two countries expressed satisfaction
with an increase in bilateral trade, which surpassed $1.2 billion in the
previous financial year. In 2009, Pakistan increased its non-oil exports to
Iran by 80 percent, reaching $279 million. Similarly, Iranian non-oil exports
to Pakistan increased by 11 percent, totaling $278 million for the year.
Despite this growth, Karachi Chambeer of Commerce and Industry President
Abdul Majid Haji Mohammad said the lack of a banking system remains a
major obstacle to Iran-Pakistan trade.
Since 2005, Islamabad has increasingly turned to Tehran to supply Pakistans
growing energy needs. In August 2008, Iran agreed to finance a robust
energy project that would allow Pakistan to import 1,000 megawatts of
electricity to overcome its power shortage. The project, a $60 million
endeavor, consists of running a 100-kilometer electric line to help augment
the 40 megawatts of electricity Pakistan already receives daily from Iran. In
April 2010, Iranian Ambassador to Pakistan Mashallah Shakeri spoke before
the Rawalpindi Chamber of Commerce and Industry, stressing Irans
commitment to economic relations with Pakistan. According to the envoy,
Iran intends to supply the 1,000 megawatts to Pakistan at a discounted rate.
Iran and Pakistan have long discussed the construction of a 2,600-kilometer,
$7.5 billion Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline (IPI) that would pump gas from
Irans South Pars field to Pakistan and India. Tentative talks on the pipeline
began in 1994, however tense political relations between India and Pakistan
frustrated realization of the project. International concern over Irans nuclear
program further delayed agreement and in November 2007 Iran and
Pakistan accused India of hesitating because of pressure from the United
States. In February 2010, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki
accused the US of interfering with the planned pipeline by attempting to
sway New Delhi away from the IPI. Indeed, Washington has repeatedly
urged India not to follow through with the deal while Iran faces sanctions for
its nuclear enrichment program. Both Russia and China have taken
significant interest in the pipeline, with Russias Gazprom offering to help
supply oil and China holding talks with Iran and Pakistan in 2008 to replace
India in case New Delhi chose to reject the partnership.
In May 2009, Iran and Pakistan signed a purchase agreement stipulating
that Iran will initially transfer 30 million cubic meters of gas to Pakistan per
day, with the volume eventually increasing to 60 million. The deal, to which
India was not a party, ensures gas supplies to Pakistan for a period of 25
years. On June 13, 2010, the two sides formally concluded the $7.5 billion
agreement over the objections of US Special Representative for Pakistan and
DIPLOMATIC/MILITARY RELATIONSHIP:
Iran has developed deep economic and political ties with Pakistan, an ally of
the United States and a nuclear neighbor. In 2007, the Prime Minister of
Pakistan, Shaukat Aziz, said that Pakistan shares extensive ties with Iran
based upon faith, belief, joint history and culture. Expansion of cooperation
in the fields of trade and investment can further strengthen the bilateral
ties. Iran and Pakistan cooperate in a number of trade groups and agreed in
June 2008 on a list of 300 tradable items in an effort to stimulate economic
relations. Iran is active in the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO)a
trade and investment group that includes all of the central Asian countries,
founded by Iran, Turkey and Pakistan. Additionally, both Iran and Pakistan
also hold observer status in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)
an Asian regional economic and security group. China and Russia are
reportedly considering inviting Iran and Pakistan to full membership in the
SCO so as to participate in resolving the conflict in Afghanistan. "In the
current global context, the top priority is finding a solution to the Afghan
issue," Secretary-General Muratbek Sansyzbayevich Imanaliev said during a
news conference in Beijing in February 2010.
Pakistan has helped encourage trilateral trade with Iran and Turkey in
commercial goods and development of infrastructure beyond the programs
administered by regional organizations such as the ECO.
Iran has involved itself in the political and military instability in Pakistans
Afghan and Iran border regions. In June 2009, the Iranian Embassy in
Pakistan donated $250,000 as humanitarian aid for Pakistans unstable Swat
province. In a statement, the embassy said that "Iran denounces terrorist
acts in Pakistan's northern areas and announces its readiness to renew
support for peace and stability in Pakistan." In July 2009, Iranian
Ambassador to Pakistan Mashaallah Shakeri called on the Pakistani
government to secure the release of Heshmatollah Attarzadeh Niyaki, an
Iranian diplomat kidnapped by gunman in Peshawar in 2008. While speaking
before the Iranian parliament in July 2009, Iranian Foreign Minister
Manouchehr Mottaki stated that he believed that the current situations [in
western Pakistan] are improvingcriminal acts [have been] reduced and
controlled in [the] last year. Mottaki further indicated that Iran had received
a good degree of cooperation from the Pakistani government in
implementing new security measures on the border.
Speaking in July 2009, Former Interior Minister and Chairman of the
Pakistan Peoples Party Sherpao Aftab Ahmad Khan Sherpao praised an Iraqi
security forces raid on a People's Mujahedin of Iran camp located north of
Baghdad. Iranian authorities reacted warmly to news of the raid, which
targeted a militant Iranian exile group hostile to the Islamic Republic.
Sherpao explained his support for the raid by stating that no country should
permit its territory to be used for hostile acts against another sovereign
state. He further added that "Iran is our brotherly country and we always
want Iran to prosper."
In August 2009, Iran took part in a meeting of the Friends of Democratic
Pakistan. During the summit, which was held in Turkey and largely focused
on the security situation in Pakistan, Foreign Minister Mottaki discussed the
importance of bilateral ties with his Pakistani counterpart, Shah Mahmood
Qureshi. The two also spoke about the need to combat terrorism and
establish stability in Pakistan, with Mottaki adding that he considers
Pakistan-Iran-Afghanistan relations to be an appropriate model for regional
conflict resolution.
The two countries brotherly relations were threatened in October 2009
following attacks against the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
(IRG) in Sistan-Baluchistan province. President Ahmadinejad publically
accused certain officials in Pakistan of involvement in the attacks.Tehran
further demanded the extradition of Abdolmalek Rigi, the chief of suspected
terrorist group Jundallah. Pakistani officials denied any involvement in the
attacks, rejecting Iranian Interior Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjars
accusation that Jundallah received financial aid from Pakistan. Pakistan
subsequently released 11 Iranian security officers accused of illegally
crossing the border. Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari met with Najjar in
Islamabad a week after the attacks. Zardari stated that the attackers were
the enemies of both countries and vowed to cooperate with Iran in their
capture. At the beginning of November 2009, however, the IRGC accused
Pakistan of releasing the leader of Jundallah immediately before the October
18 bombing in Sistan-Baluchistan, thereby implicating the Pakistani
government in the attacks. According to the deputy head of the IRGC,
Brigadier General Hossein Salami, the Jundallah leader, Abdolmakel Rigi,
was arrested on September 26 in Pakistans Baluchistan province. But he
was released after an hour with the intervention of the Pakistani intelligence
service. In March 2010, upon receiving assurances from Islamabad that
authorities would take measures to improve security in the area, Iran
reopened its border with Pakistan. Iran had closed the border to trade four
months prior in response to the October IRGC attack.
Deputy Foreign Minister of Iran Hassan Qashqavi said in January 2010 that
the Pakistani government should take serious measures to stem terrorist
activities across the border of the two countries. According to the minister,
"the Pakistani government is expected to live up to its promises and take
more serious measures to stem the terrorist and evil activities. The same
month, an Iranian Foreign Ministry official claimed there is a hidden agenda
behind the recent destabilizing measures on Iran's eastern borders with
Pakistan and Afghanistan.
On January 16, 2010, officials from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran met to
discuss regional security and terrorism, agreeing on a joint framework for
cooperation in tackling political volatility in the area. The three agreed that
regional stability and security could only be advanced through sincere
adherence to the principle of national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi stated that "it is important
to consult amongst ourselves so that we are on the same page and we have
closer positions on different issues that confront our neighborhood." A joint
declaration from the meeting called for Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran to
coordinate efforts to combat extremism as well as drug and weapons
smuggling. The ministers also raised Iranian concerns regarding the
expanded presence of US forces in Afghanistan. A day after the meeting, the
Iranian ambassador to Pakistan, Mashallah Shakeri, announced that the third
Iran-Afghanistan-Pakistan summit will be held in Tehran in the near future.
In January 2010, Iranian First Vice-President Mohammad Reza Rahimi
insisted that Iran considers durable security and stability in Pakistan to be of
paramount importance to Iranian interests.Referencing recent efforts by
Tehran to establish sustainable security in Pakistan, Rahimi stated that "Iran
believes that comprehensive expansion of ties with Pakistan plays a major
role in materializing the interests of the two countries and the region." He
called for the fortification of the Iran and Pakistans common borders and
added that "terrorist groups should not be allowed to disturb security of the
two countries' border regions."
During the first Meeting of the Heads of Interpol of the Economic
Cooperation Organization, held on June 29, 2010, Interior Minister Nijjar
urged the associations members to collaborate more closely on security
issues. The minister proposed the creation of a regional police headquarters
and encouraged more rapid sharing of information on criminal investigations.
Ambassador Shakeri has said that Iran is determined to continue its
involvement in Pakistani development despite ever-increasing security
challenges. In a February 2010 message commemorating the 31st
anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the ambassador
noted that "Pakistan, in its capacity as a Muslim neighbor, has a special
status in the macro-strategy of the foreign policy of Iran, with durable
security, stability and all-round development of Pakistan being Iran's desire."
During a six-day visit to Iran in February 2010, Pakistani National Assembly
Speaker Fahmida Mirza met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani, and Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki.
Mirza and Larijani issued a joint statement calling for the expansion of ties
between Pakistan and Iran in the political, economic, and cultural spheres.
Iran and Pakistan also agreed to increase their parliamentary cooperation on
global issues at international bodies. In addition, the two countries
underlined the need to adopt a comprehensive political approach in the
campaigns against terrorism, drug trafficking, and organized crime.
During an April 2010 appearance before the Rawalpindi Chamber of
Commerce and Industry, Iranian Ambassador Shakeri reaffirmed his
Analysis of Relations:
Overall, the genesis of cooperation between the two countries revolved
around the following focal points:
i. Common faith, geography, culture and traditions.
ii. Similar economic and political outlook.
iii. Identical strategic thinking, and defence cooperation particularly during
the cold war, and after the Islamic Revolution.
iv. Like mindedness on most of the matters relating to the Muslim world.
v. Common bilateral, regional, and international approach.
vi. Homogeneity of stands on regional and international problems.
vii. Convergence of interests on Nuclear Non-Proliferation, (NNP), matters.
viii. Extension of political, diplomatic and moral support to the Kashmir
liberation struggle.
ix. Harmonious position on the establishment of the New International
Economic Order, (NIEO).
x. Desirability of the existence of multi-polarity in the regional and world
politics.
Pakistan-US Relations
Pakistan United States relations refers to bilateral relationship between
the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the United States of America. Pakistan
came into existence just as the cold war was starting. The world was split
into two camps soviet and US. Infant Pakistan and India had to pick their
camps. The United States established diplomatic relations with Pakistan on
October 20, 1947. The relationship since then was based primarily on U.S.
economic and military assistance to Pakistan. Pakistan is a Major non-NATO
ally of the United States. The history of PakistanAmerican relations has
been defined as one of "Roller Coaster"
1950s Era:When Pakistan was formed in 1947, she needed both economic (due to
initial problems) and military (Indian threat) assistance for its survival. In
the early 1950s the US had delineated a program known as Marshal Plan
which aimed at the recovery of Europe and extending assistance to various
Asian countries. After Partition, Liaqat Ali khan (1st PM) was invited by
Soviets and Americans. He chooses sanity over inhumanity and visited US,
thus strengthening PAK-US relations. India established relations with
Soviets.
On 19th May, 1954, Pakistan signed the Mutual Defense Assistance
Agreement with the U.S; also Pakistan joined SEATO in 1954 to contain the
expansion of communism in South East Asia. This membership of SEATO
committed Pakistan fully to the Western block. In 1955 and alliance, the
Baghdad Pact, was formed between Britain, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Pakistan
(its name changed to CENTO). Between 1954-65 Pakistan received military
assistance of 1.5 billion dollars and around 3 billion dollars of loan.
1960s Era:The U.S extended unlimited military support to India during Sino-Indian
border clash in 1962. Pakistan protested against it but U.S paid no heed to
the protest of Pakistan although India was not the ally of U.S but was
Pakistan. When India attacked Pakistan in 1965, it frequently used American
weapons against Pakistan. Pak US relations suffer a set back when US places
arms embargo on both nations, knowing well that Pakistan was totally
dependent on US arms and India did not use any US arms. Soviets speeded
up arms supplies to India.
Pakistan gained air superiority by using US supplied F-86 Sabers and F-104
Star fighters. Pakistans old enemy King Zahir ensured safety of Pakistans
peace and stability. Indeed Pakistan is still paying a huge price of its US
assistance.
1990s Era:After10 years of partnership in Afghan Jihad, US attitude towards Pakistan
started changing dramatically and in October 1990 US President George
Bush refused to certify that Pakistan is a non-nuclear state and does not
possess nuclear weapons nor it is engaged in their manufacture. As a result
Pressler amendment was imposed on Pakistan as a punishment for its loyalty
during Afghan crisis, supply of forty F-16 aircraft to Pakistan was withheld
and amount of $ 1.2 billion was suspended even though Pakistan had paid
for this. Instead of strengthening relations and crafting new ways of
cooperation Pak-US relations went all time low especially from 1990-1993.
Afterwards some efforts were made to normalize the relations, Defense
secretary William Perry paid a visit to Pakistan in January 1995. Moreover
because of this visit the Pak-US defense consultative group was revived
which had not met since 1990. The Clinton administration also took interest
to put back relations to normal course and to revise Pressler amendment.
Therefore Brown amendment came according to which embargoed military
equipment worth about $368 million was released. For Pakistan the symbolic
significance of Brown amendment was more important than the material
benefit as after 1990 it was the first concrete step towards the normalization
of relations between Pakistan and US.
The irony about US non-proliferation policy in South Asia was that India was
also involved in the nuclear proliferation activities but all the sanctions,
embargos and penalties were just for Pakistan. In May 1998 as a result of
nuclear tests conducted by Pakistan a second set of sanctions were imposed
by invoking the Pressler, Glenn and Symington amendment which prohibits
military and economic assistance to any country that delivers or receives
nuclear assistance. When in October 1999 President Musharraf came more
Democracy Sanctions were enacted on Pakistan.
Instead it has kept on accusing Pakistan from time to time and demands to
do more. These kinds of US accusation harms Pakistans image in
international community and are disliked at Pakistans end. Osama raid has
further tensed the already cold relations between the two partners and has
brought the future of US-Pakistan relations under intense consideration.
Today the people of Pakistan have given even more sacrifices then the
NATO/US troops in Afghanistan. Pakistani public already fed up by the mess
created by Afghan war wants US to end this menace. Amidst national,
economic, social, religious crisis, unstable political regime, escalating drone
attacks, loss of civilian lives and news of Osamas downfall has created
trouble, which is spreading like a wild fire. The demand of Go America Go is
being chanted all across Pakistan. This shows a growing wedge between the
two strategic partners. A Pakistani private channels survey explored that
77% Pakistanis see US as their enemy. A new survey conducted by
Washingtons Pew Research Centre also shows that only 11 per cent of
Pakistanis view the US and President Obama favorably.
The US- Pak relations have not proved much fruitful for Pakistan, and the
nation feels betrayed by the US administrations. US wants Pakistan to
become its vessal state, where all policies are made only to serve the
interests of US. The government should devise such policies that ensure to
safeguard our own land and people not the US interests. Therefore, it is now
time for politico-military leadership of Pakistan to sit and review their policies
before this unconditional assistance to US costs the lives of the entire nation.
Albeit despite growing hatred towards American policies and its presence in
the region the war against terrorism has now become Pakistans own war
and therefore needs genuine concern of our government.
Present relations
Present U.S.-Pakistan relations are a case study on the difficulties of
diplomacy and policy making in a multi-polar world. The geopolitical
significance of Pakistan in world affairs attracts attention from both India and
China, making unilateral action impossible from the U.S. All the while,
Pakistan remains a key factor for U.S. success in Afghanistan. The two
countries have attempted to build a strategic partnership since 2009, but
there remains a significant trust deficit which continues to hinder successful
cooperation in combating common threats. Despite recent setbacks, both
Pakistan and the U.S. continue to seek a productive relationship to defeat
terrorist organizations.
As on 8 February 2011, U.S. administration is reported to suspend high level
contacts with Pakistan and may also suspend economical aid.All this
happened when Raymond Davis, an alleged private security contractor, was
on an American diplomatic mission in Pakistan shot dead two Pakistani locals
last month in what he said was in self-defense after they attempted to rob
him. Pakistan acted tough on him despite U.S. demands that he be freed
because he enjoys diplomatic immunity.
U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W. Patterson addressed senior
bureaucrats at the National Management College and emphasized that the
United States will assist Pakistans new democratic government in the areas
of development, stability, and security. The United States Agency for
International Development (USAID) and the United Nations World Food
Program, in Pakistan, officially announced the signing of an agreement
valued at $8.4 million to help ease Pakistan's crisis.
The CIA had long suspected Osama Bin Laden of hiding in Pakistan. India
and U.S. have time to time accused Pakistan of giving safe-haven to the
Taliban. However, Pakistan has denied these accusations repeatedly.
On 14 September 2009, former President of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf,
admitted that U.S. Foreign Aid to Pakistan was diverted by the country from
its original purpose to fighting the Taliban, to prepare for war against
neighboring India.The United States government has responded by stating
that they will take these allegations seriously. However Pervez Musharraf
also said '"Wherever there is a threat to Pakistan, we will use it [equipment
provided by the U.S.] there. If the threat comes from al-Qaeda or Taliban, it
will be used there. If the threat comes from India, we will most surely use it
there".
In late 2009, Hillary Clinton made a speech in Pakistan about the war
against the militants where she said "we commend the Pakistani military for
their courageous fight, and we commit to stand shoulder to shoulder with
the Pakistani people in your fight for peace and security."
On December 1, 2009, President Barack Obama in a speech on a policy
about Pakistan said "In the past, we too often defined our relationship with
Pakistan narrowly. Those days are over.... The Pakistani people must know
America will remain a strong supporter of Pakistans security and prosperity
long after the guns have fallen silent, so that the great potential of its people
can be unleashed."
In the aftermath of the thwarted bombing attempt on a Northwest Airlines
flight, the U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has issued a
new set of screening guidelines that includes pat-downs for passengers from
countries of interest, which includes Pakistan. In a sign of widening fissures
between the two allies, Pakistan on January 21 declined a request by the
United States to launch new offensives on militants in 2010. Pakistan say it
"can't launch any new offensives against militants for six months to a year
because it wants to 'stabilize' previous gains made. However the U.S. praises
Pakistan's military effort against the militants. Furthermore Pakistan
president, in meeting with the U.S. delegation, had said Pakistan "had
suffered a... loss of over 35 billion dollars during the last eight years as a
result of the fight against militancy." But the President also said for "greater
Pak-U.S. cooperation".
In October 2009, the U.S. Congress approved $7.5 billion of non-military aid
to Pakistan over the next five years. In February 2010, U.S. President Barack
Obama sought to increase funds to Pakistan to "promote economic and
political stability in strategically important regions where the United States
has special security interests". Obama also sought $3.1 billion aid for
Pakistan to defeat Al Qaeda for 2010.
In February 2010, Anne W. Patterson (U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan) said
that the United States is committed to partnership with Pakistan and further
said Making this commitment to Pakistan while the U.S. is still recovering
from the effects of the global recession reflects the strength of our vision.
Yet we have made this commitment, because we see the success of
Pakistan, its economy, its civil society and its democratic institutions as
important for ourselves, for this region and for the world.
Between 20022010, Pakistan received approximately 18 billion in military
and economic aid from the United States. In February 2010, the Obama
administration requested an additional 3 billion in aid, for a total of 20.7
billion.
In mid February, after the capture of Taliban No.2 leader Abdul Ghani
Baradar in Pakistan the White House 'hails capture of Taliban leader'.
Furthemore White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that this is a "big
success for our mutual efforts(Pakistan and United States)in the region" and
He praised Pakistan for the capture, saying it is a sign of increased
cooperation with the U.S. in the terror fight. Furthermore Capt. John Kirby,
spokesman for Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has
said 'We also strongly support Pakistani efforts to secure the border
region,Kirby added, noting that Pakistan has lost soldiers in that
effort.'Mullen, (President Barack Obama's senior military adviser)has made
strengthening "U.S. military relationship with Pakistan a top priority". The
U.S. and Pakistan have a robust working relationship that serves the mutual
interests of our people,' Kirby said. "We continue to build a long-term
partnership that strengthens our common security and prosperity."
In March, Richard Holbrooke U.S. special envoy to Pakistan had said U.S.Pakistani relations have seen 'significant improvement' under Obama.
Furthermore he also said "No government on earth has received more highlevel attention" than Pakistan.
In December 2009, President Obama stated "In the past, we too often
defined our relationship with Pakistan narrowly, those days are over. Moving
forward, we are committed to a partnership with Pakistan that is built on a
foundation of mutual interests, mutual respect and mutual trust." This was
believed to be an indirect apology to Pakistan for being treated differently
and more harshly compared to both India and Israel during the Cold War
period.
The Raymond Davis affair substantially deteriorated Pakistan-U.S. relations
in early 2011.
The SCO stands for and acts on a new security concept anchored on mutual
trust, disarmament and cooperative security; a new state-to-state
relationship with partnership instead of alignment at its core, and a new
model of regional cooperation featuring concerted efforts of countries of all
sizes and mutually beneficial cooperation.In the course of development,
aShanghaispirit gradually took shape, a spirit characterized by mutual trust,
mutual benefit, equality, cooperation, respect for diversified civilizations and
common development.
Current observers:India currently has observer status in the SCO. Russia has encouraged India
to join the organisation as a full-time member, because they see it as a
crucial future strategic partner. Factors working against India joining the SCO
is its long rivalry with Pakistan and its close ties to China which has also
troubled ties with India resulting in the Sino-Indian War of 1962.
Additional factors working in favour of India joining the SCO are its major
military presence in Central Asia, its close military ties with several Central
Asian countries (especially Tajikistan and Russia) and also its deep interest
in the region's energy resources. In 2010, India showed a keen interest in
joining the group, We are interested in SCO membership. It is a very
important organisation concerning the region, sources within the Indian
government said. China has also shown its interest for a greater role of India
in Asia club.
Iran currently has observer status in the organisation, and applied for full
membership on March 24, 2008. However, because of ongoing sanctions
levied by the United Nations, it is blocked from admission as a new member.
The SCO stated that any country under U.N. sanctions cannot be admitted.
Mongolia became the first country to receive observer status at the 2004
Tashkent Summit. Pakistan, India and Iran received observer status at the
2005 SCO summit in Astana, Kazakhstan on July 5, 2005.
Pakistan currently has observer status in the SCO. Former Pakistani
President Pervez Musharraf argued in favour of Pakistan's qualification to join
the organisation as a full member during a joint summit with China in 2006.
Factors working against Pakistan's joining the SCO as a member include its
persistent military rivalry with fellow SCO-observer India and strained
relation with Russia because of the latter's strong relations with India. China
has said that it would convey Pakistans desire to all SCO member states. In
turn, Musharraf was formally invited to the sixth summit of the SCO to take
place in Shanghai in June. The Prime Minister of Pakistan Yousaf Raza Gillani
once again argued in favour of Pakistan's qualification to join the
SCO And Pakistan:For too long Pakistan has been woefully subservient to Western interests. By
joining hands with its eastern counterparts through the SCO, Pakistan has
the potential to reinvent itself as a sovereign state beholden to no foreign
power, deriving inspiration from China's model of progress through its
process of reinvention and self-reliance.
As Pakistan continues to demonstrate increasing capitulation to US interests,
it would be beneficial to explore possibilities in enhancing the nation's
already robust alliance with China. Pakistan has much to learn from China's
example in improving living standards for its citizens. Rejecting the primacy
of any single system, the Chinese have elegantly crafted their own form of
economics by seamlessly blending free markets with Communism, insisting
on modernisation squarely on its own terms. China's great leader, Deng
Xiaoping has been credited with the grand achievement of lifting the largest
number of people out of poverty in the shortest time ever in human history.
Its dramatic economic transformation has been underlined by pragmatism
and resolute political will as demonstrated by its succession of exemplary
leadership. Never in history has a large economy grown as fast and for such
a sustained period as China's since 1979. From 1978 to 2005 China's GDP
increased from US$147.3 billion to US$2.235 trillion, representing an
average annual growth rate of 9.6 percent.
With its increasing economic clout, China presents a wealth of possibilities
for Pakistan and the world. Pakistan and China are hugely different yet at
the same time acutely similar: both possess a population made up of diverse
ethnic groups and languages; while our cities experience boom, both our
rural areas remain underdeveloped.
The emergence of the SCO may play an invaluable role in helping countries
like Pakistan protect and preserve their highly coveted resources, preventing
Pakistan and other countries from becoming pawns in the escalating energy
war. Through the SCO Pakistan has a chance to enhance its comprehensive
strategic partnership with China to promote national and regional stability.
At the very least, the SCO represents an acknowledgement of the need for
the East to organise itself into a cohesive political and economic force. As the
world's economy sinks deeper into recession, the chance for the region to
unite itself through the SCO platform presents bright prospects amidst the
looming spectres of terrorism and economic collapse.
Conclusion:To pen the discussion off, It can be said that the SCO may have the ability to
oppose the West's mendacious grab for the region's prized energy reserves.
Water dispute
The main reason for the dispute over Kashmir is water. Kashmir is the origin
point for many rivers and tributaries of the Indus River basin. They include
the Jhelum and Chenab rivers, which primarily flow into Pakistan while other
branchesthe Ravi, Beas, and the Sutlejirrigate northern India. The
Boundary Award of 1947 meant that the headwaters of Pakistani irrigation
systems were in Indian territory. Pakistan has been apprehensive that in a
dire need, India (under whose portion of Kashmir lies the origins and
passage of these rivers) would withhold the flow and thus choke the agrarian
economy of Pakistan. The Indus Waters Treaty signed in 1960 resolved most
of these disputes over water, calling for mutual cooperation in this regard.
But the treaty faced issues raised by Pakistan over the construction of dams
on the Indian side which limit water flow to the Pakistani side.
Background:The waters of the Indus basin begin in the Himalayan mountains in the state
of Jammu and Kashmir. They flow from the hills through the arid states of
Punjab and Sindh, converging in Pakistan and emptying into the Arabian Sea
south of Karachi. Where once there was only a narrow strip of irrigated land
along these rivers, developments over the last century have created a large
network of canals and storage facilities that provide water for more than 26
million acres (110,000 km2) - the largest irrigated area of any one river
system in the world.
The partition of British India created a conflict over the plentiful waters of
the Indus basin. The newly formed states were at odds over how to share
and manage what was essentially a cohesive and unitary network of
irrigation. Furthermore, the geography of partition was such that the source
rivers of the Indus basin were in India. Pakistan felt its livelihood threatened
by the prospect of Indian control over the tributaries that fed water into the
Pakistani portion of the basin. Where India certainly had its own ambitions
for the profitable development of the basin, Pakistan felt acutely threatened
by a conflict over the main source of water for its cultivable land.
Soon after the partition of India the problem over water sharing from river
Sutlej started between the two sides of Punjab divided by the Line of Control
(LoC). As the boundary between India and Pakistan was not demarcated till
July 1947, it was impractical to deal with the allocation of waters. To remedy
the legal vacuum created by the partition, the chief engineers of East Punjab
(Indian side of Punjab) and West Punjab (Pakistani side of Punjab) signed a
standstill agreement on December 20, 1947, providing, interalia that until
the end of current rabi crops on March 31, 1948, the status quo would be
maintained with regard to water allocation in the Indus Basin irrigation
system .On April 1, India discontinued the delivery of water from the
Ferozepur headworks to Dipalpur Canal and to the main branches of the
Upper Bari Doab Canal. This act was publicly criticised in Pakistan and some
policy and non-policy makers even advocated for going to war to restore the
water supply from the river Sutlej to West Punjab.
Indus Basin Water Treaty (1960):The Indus System of Rivers comprises three Western Rivers the Indus, the
Jhelum and Chenab and three Eastern Rivers - the Sutlej, the Beas and the
Ravi; and with minor exceptions, the treaty gives India exclusive use of all of
the waters of the Eastern Rivers and their tributaries before the point where
the rivers enter Pakistan. Similarly, Pakistan has exclusive use of the
Western Rivers. Pakistan also received one-time financial compensation for
the loss of water from the Eastern rivers. The countries agree to exchange
data and co-operate in matters related to the treaty. For this purpose, treaty
creates the Permanent Indus Commission, with a commissioner appointed by
each country.
The complicated origins of the Indus river system plays a key role in the
water debates, as the rivers originate in and pass through a number of
countries. According to the Indus Water Treaty, the following three rivers are
for use by Pakistan:
1. The Indus River: originates in Chinese-controlled Tibet and flows through
Jammu & Kashmir.
2. The Chenab: originates in Indias Himachal Pradesh state, travels through
Baglihar Dam:Baglihar Dam, also known as Baglihar Hydroelectric Power Project, is a runof-the-river power project on the Chenab River in the southern Doda district
of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. This project was conceived in
1992, approved in 1996 and construction began in 1999. The project is
estimated to cost USD $1 billion. The first phase of the Baglihar Dam was
completed in 2004. With the second phase completed, on 10 October 2008,
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India dedicated the 450-MW Baglihar
hydro electric power project to the nation.
Kishanganga Dam:In the Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir, the construction work on the
controversial 330 MW Kishen Ganga power project will start soon, after
being defunct for eighteen years. Recently, the project was awarded to
Hindustan Construction Company (HCC) with a timeline of seven years. The
330 MW Kishanganga hydro-electric power project involves damming of
Kishanganga or Neelam River and the proposed 103 metre reservoir will
submerge some parts of the Gurez valley of India. The water of Kishen
Ganga River will be diverted through a 27 kilometre tunnel dug through the
mountains toBandipore where it will join the Wular Lake and then Jhelum
River.
Similarly, Pakistan has decided to construct a 969 MW hydro power project
across the Jhelum; the country has placed the project in the hands of a
Chinese consortium. Pakistan claims that the Indian dam project will violate
the Indus Waters Treaty and has threatened to begin formal arbitration
proceedings against India over the matter.
Pakistani writers warn that the dam will deprive Pakistan of 321,000 acres
feet of water during the agricultural season, greatly affecting wheat
production in the Punjab province and leading to crop failures. There are
some warnings that the dam will adversely affect 13 million acres of irrigated
land around the Chenab and Ravi rivers, forcing Pakistani farmers to change
crops, and in the face of starvation, deepening Pakistans dependence on
food imports and burdening the country's national exchequer.
Wullar Barrage/Tulbul navigation project:Wular Lake (also spelt Wullar), India's largest fresh water lake is located in
Bandipore district in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. It is is also one
of the largest freshwater lakes in Asia. The lake basin was formed as a result
of tectonic activity and is fed by the Jhelum River. The lake's size varies from
12 to 100 square miles (30 to 260 square kilometers), depending on the
season
The Tulbul Project is a "navigation lock-cum-control structure" at the mouth
of Wular Lake. According to the original Indian plan, the barrage was
expected to be of 439 feet (134 m) long and 40 feet (12 m) wide, and would
have a maximum storage capacity of 300,000 acre feet (370,000,000 m3) of
water. One aim was to regulate the release of water from the natural storage
in the lake to maintain a minimum draught of 4.5 feet (1.4 m) in the river up
to Baramulla during the lean winter months. The project was conceived in
the early 1980s and work began in 1984.
There has been an ongoing dispute between India and Pakistan over the
Tulbul Project since 1987, when Pakistan objected that the it violated the
1960 Indus Water Treaty. India stopped work on the project that year, but
has since pressed to restart construction. The Jhelum River through the
Kashmir valley below Wular Lake provides an important means of transport
for goods and people. To sustain navigation throughout the year a minimum
depth of water is needed. India contends that this makes development of the
Tulbul Project permissible under the treaty, while Pakistan maintains that the
project is a violation of the treaty. India says suspension of work is harming
the interests of people of Jammu and Kashmir and also depriving the people
of Pakistan of irrigation and power benefits that may accrue from regulated
water releases.
Recent Developments:In February 2010 both countries started the dialogue process again and the
foreign secretaries of the two countries met in New Delhi but the dialogue
ended on a bitter note. Pakistan was adamant to discuss the water issue
while India was stuck on discussing terrorism. At the SAARC Summit in
Thimphu, the prime ministers of both countries promised to continue
Internal Issues of Water:Amidst this shortage of water, Pakistan is also confronted with a number of
internal factors that amount to further strain. One columnist warned that
with Pakistan's population set to jump to 250 million in just a few years'
time, a shortage of water, along with that of oil, sugar, and wheat, will
become a major problem. Pakistan is also estimated to be losing 13 million
cusecs [approximately 368,119 cubic meters/second] of water every year
from its rivers into the sea, as it does not have enough reservoirs or dams to
store water. Further tensions arise from allegations of inequitable distribution
of water between various Pakistani provinces. The Indus River System
Authority (IRSA), which allocates water to provinces, averted a major
political controversy between provinces in June 2009 by declaring that there
would be no cuts in their water supply.
Consequences of Water Shortage:The discussion of water easily ignites popular passion because Pakistan is
increasingly confronted by an impending water crisis. In early 2009, it was
estimated that Pakistan is on the brink of a water disaster, as the availability
of water in Pakistan has been declining over the past few decades, from
5,000 cubic meters per capita 60 years ago to 1,200 cubic meters per capita
in 2009. By 2020, the availability of water is estimated to fall to about 800
cubic meters per capita. M. Yusuf Sarwar, a member of the Indus Basin
Water Council, has warned that the lessening flow of water in rivers and
shortage of water generally could cause Pakistan to be declared a disasteraffected nation by 2013. Dr. Muhammad Yar Khawar, a scientist at the
University of Sindh, released research last year based on sample surveys
that warns that less than 20 percent of below-surface water in the Sindh
province, previously thought to be a viable water source, is acceptable for
drinking.
Modus operandi
The protests have shared techniques of civil resistance in sustained
campaigns involving strikes, demonstrations, marches and rallies, as well as
the use of social media to organize, communicate, and raise awareness in
the face of state attempts at repression and internet censorship.
Background
Numerous factors have led to the protests, including issues such as
dictatorship or absolute monarchy, human rights violations, government
corruption (demonstrated by Wiki leaks diplomatic cables), economic
decline, unemployment, extreme poverty, and a number of demographic
structural factors, such as a large percentage of educated but dissatisfied
youth within the population. The catalysts for the revolts in all Northern
African and Persian Gulf countries have been the concentration of wealth in
the hands of autocrats in power for decades, insufficient transparency of its
redistribution, corruption, and especially the refusal of the youth to accept
the status quo. Increasing food prices have also been a significant factor, as
they involve threats to food security worldwide and prices that approach
levels of the 20072008 world food price crises. Amnesty International
singled out Wikileaks release of US diplomatic cables as a catalyst for the
revolts. These events will continue to be magnified and accelerated by the
growing role of social media. Indeed, the Arab Media Influence Report
recently released by the Dubai-based News Group notes a number of
significant trends:
There are 65 million Internet users in the Arab world and the number is
expected to grow to 80 million by 2012. In percentage terms, 30.8 percent
of the population is online, while the global average is 28.7 percent. In
August 2010, Arabic became the fastest growing language on Face book.
There are 17 million Face book users in the region, larger than the number
of newspaper subscribers.
While by no means the only factor, social media will surely play a critical role
as the dynamic change launched by the Tunisian fruit seller continues to play
out across the region.
In recent decades rising living standards and literacy rates, as well as the
increased availability of higher education, have resulted in an improved
human development index in the affected countries. The tension between
rising aspirations and a lack of government reform may have been a
contributing factor in all of the protests.Many of the internet-savvy youth of
these countries have studied in the West, where autocrats and absolute
monarchies are considered anachronisms. A university professor of Oman,
Al-Najma Zidjaly referred to this upheaval as youthquake.
Tunisia and Egypt, the first to witness major uprisings, differ from other
North African and Middle Eastern nations such as Algeria and Libya in that
they lack significant oil revenue, and were thus unable to make concessions
to calm the masses.
Economic impact
Political turmoil in the Middle East has powerful economic and financial
implications, particularly as it increases the risk of stagflation, a lethal
combination of slowing growth and sharply rising inflation. Indeed, should
stagflation emerge, there is a serious risk of a double-dip recession for a
global economy that has barely emerged from its worst crisis in decades.
Severe unrest in the Middle East has historically been a source of oil-price
spikes, which in turn have triggered three of the last five global recessions.
The Yom Kippur War in 1973 caused a sharp increase in oil prices, leading to
the global stagflation of 1974-1975. The Iranian revolution in 1979 led to a
similar stagflationary increase in oil prices, which culminated in the recession
of 1980-1981. And Iraqs invasion of Kuwait in August 1990 led to a spike in
oil prices at a time when a US banking crisis was already tipping America
into recession.
We dont know yet whether political contagion in the Middle East will spread
to other countries. The turmoil may yet be contained and recede, sending oil
prices back to lower levels. But there is a serious chance that the uprisings
will spread, destabilizing Bahrain, Algeria, Oman, Jordan, Yemen, and
eventually even Saudi Arabia.
Even before the recent Middle East political shocks, oil prices had risen
above $80-$90 a barrel, an increase driven not only by energy-thirsty
emerging-market economies, but also by non-fundamental factors: a wall of
liquidity chasing assets and commodities in emerging markets, owing to
near-zero interest rates and quantitative easing in advanced economies;
momentum and herding behavior; and limited and inelastic oil supplies. If
the threat of supply disruptions spreads beyond Libya, even the mere risk of
lower output may sharply increase the fear premium via precautionary
stockpiling of oil by investors and final users.
The latest increases in oil prices and the related increases in other
commodity prices, especially food imply several unfortunate consequences
(even leaving aside the risk of severe civil unrest).
First, inflationary pressure will grow in already overheating emerging market
economies, where oil and food prices represent up to two-thirds of the
consumption basket. Given weak demand in slow-growing advanced
economies, rising commodity prices may lead only to a small first-round
effect on headline inflation there, with little second-round impact on core
inflation. But advanced countries will not emerge unscathed.
Indeed, the second risk posed by higher oil prices a terms-of-trade and
disposable income shock to all energy and commodity importers will hit
advanced economies especially hard, as they have barely emerged from
recession and are still experiencing an anemic recovery.
The third risk is that rising oil prices reduce investor confidence and increase
risk aversion, leading to stock-market corrections that have negative wealth
effects on consumption and capital spending. Business and consumer
confidence are also likely to take a hit, further undermining demand.
If oil prices rise much further towards the peaks of 2008, the advanced
economies will slow sharply; many might even slip back into recession. Even
if prices remain at current levels for most of the year, global growth will slow
and inflation will rise.
US have a deep rooted political and economic interest in Middle East and
North Africa. He has a strong military presence in Arabian Peninsula and
Indian Ocean to protect its energy interests. Since World War II, but more
diligently since the mid 1950s, the United States has followed two
simultaneous strategies to exercise its control over the Arab peoples across
Arab countries. The first, and the one most relevant to Arabs, was based on
the early US recognition and realization (like Britain, France, and Italy before
it) that Arabs, like all other peoples worldwide, wanted democracy and
freedom and would struggle for them in every possible way.
For the United States, this necessitated the establishment of security and
repressive apparatuses in Arab countries, which the US would train, fund,
and direct in order to suppress these democratic desires and efforts in
support of dictatorial regimes whose purpose has always been and continues
to be the defense of US security and business interests in the region.
These interests consist principally in securing and maintaining US control of
the oil resources of the region, ensuring profits for American business, and
strengthening the Israeli settler-colony.Much of this was of course propelled
by the beginning of the Cold War and the US strategy to suppress all forms
of real and imagined communist-leaning forces around the world, which
included any and all democratic demands for change in the region.
This strategy, which was formalised in the Eisenhower Doctrine issued in
1957, continues through the present. The Eisenhower Doctrine, issued on 5
January 1957, as a speech by the US president, declared the Soviet Union,
not Israel or Western-supported regional dictatorships, as the enemy of the
people of the Middle East. US will continue playing its role in Middle East for
its economic and political interests in one way or other.
The French and the British have continued to play important neo-colonial
roles in the region, economically, militarily, and in the realm of security
"cooperation". They have strengthened their position by increasing their
security and diplomatic "assistance" to their allies among Arab dictators.
Now they have find an opportunity to reestablish their base in Middle East
like US to secure pursue their economic, military and political interests in
form of supporting the Rebels against the Qadafi in Libya.
Conclusion
On a systemic level, the Arab uprising will create a new political and
economic reality in the Middle East and transform the regional balance of
power. While Western influence in the region will inevitably decline as a
result, the Arab revolutions also have an undeniable potential to enhance
regional cooperation, reduce the appeal of terrorism and help break the
current deadlock in the peace process. The great Arab hope is that Tunisia
and Egypt will write a new Revolutionary and Democratic Manifesto for the
Arab peoples.
Recommendations
Media has emerged as a powerful tool in awareness of general public and
accountability of governments in their governance.
Center of power lies with the people.
Government needs to solve the issues at the gross root level.
Corruption and accumulation of wealth in few hands can lead to revolution.
Public satisfaction and democratic system of government are integral
components to success.
Analysis:The killing of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi after being captured alive by the
freedom fighters is a clear violation of international humanitarian law. While
the National Transitional Council is set to formally announce Libyas
liberation, NATO has specified that it will end its armed campaign in Libya by
October 31.
NATOs air strikes on Libya have been carried out on the basis of the UN
Security Council Resolution 1973. This is a binding Chapter VII resolution,
which under Paragraph 4 authorizes member states to take all necessary
measures.to protect civilians and civilian populated areas. Therefore,
NATO utilized this resolution, as the legal basis for carrying out systematic
air strikes on Libya for seven months. Many states, including Russia and
China, have been extremely critical of the use of force in Libya, and view it
as a mechanism to bring about regime change and not to protect the
civilians - a norm, which as of yet has not reached the status of customary
international law, but is actively promoted by the UN Secretary Generals
office.
Thus, presently humanitarian intervention cannot be used as a legal basis to
violate the territorial sovereignty of a State and is prohibited under Article
2(4) of the UN Charter. It is, therefore, no surprise that the Security
Councils permanent members, like Russia and China, who are themselves
confronting secessionist movements, have recently vetoed a draft Security
Council resolution on Syria; on the basis of upholding the right to noninterference and in the interest of peace and security in the Middle East.
Russia, China and many other emerging powers, feel that if the draft
resolution had been approved, then NATO could have misused it to conduct
armed operations inside Syria, as it did in Libya, on the pretext of protecting
the civilians.
The Russian Ambassador to the UN, Vitally Churkin, has recently stated:
The international community is alarmed by statements that compliance with
[the] Security Council resolutions in Libya in the NATO interpretation is a
model for future actions of NATO in implementing [the] responsibility to
protect.
From a human rights perspective, especially in the light of genocide and
crimes against humanity recently committed in Rwanda, Bosnia and Sudan,
the right of humanitarian intervention seems at first to be the right course of
action. However, in practice, such a right is often exercised unilaterally or by
a small group of States, acting with ulterior motives, with little regard for the
interest of civilian populations, who they claim to be protecting. Many states
contradictorily hold the right applicable in certain circumstances and not in
other similar situations. Such behaviour is destabilising and retards
international peace and security.
Recently, the principle of State sovereignty has confronted numerous
challenges. Religion, globalisation, human security and international trade
have all tested the norm and have facilitated its evolution in different ways.
At times, this transformation has been positive, while, in other
circumstances, a contrary determination can be made. However, if
humanitarian intervention is to be an acceptable norm of international law,
numerous safeguards have to be incorporated in international law before this
right can be exercisable. This would most certainly require changes in the
UN Charter and the international law governing the use of force.
Furthermore, the necessary mechanisms must be put in place to more
effectively determine facts, in order to establish State responsibility. This
would, in turn, require a State to contract away other forms of sovereignty
that even States, which actively advocate for the right of humanitarian
intervention will find difficult to agree to.
If the right of humanitarian intervention was exercisable immediately at the
discretion of any State, then humanitarian imperialism would, most
probably, be the result. Then, the US conducting drones strikes and armed
operations deep inside Pakistan to extirpate alleged terrorists and militants
on the premise that Pakistan has failed in its responsibility to protect its
citizens would become easily justifiable under international law.
Pak-U.S Relations
While history has been unkind to Pakistan, its geography has been its great benefit.
(Stephen P Cohen)
Geography
West-Iran, Afghanistan and Wakhan link to CARs
South-Arabian sea
North-China
East-India
Energy richer, most conflicted and most populous region
Trade route, sea route, energy corridor, Geostrategic location
History
A diplomatic blunder to engage in alignment policy in 1953
Serious of engagements and estrangements
MEDO in 1954
SEATO in 1954 withdrawal in 1972
CENTO/Baghdad Pact in 1955 withdrawal in 1979
Must help its afghan partners to rework their relationships with Pakistan
Must clearly define its agenda of exit till 2014
Must engage Pakistan in peace talks with Taliban
Must engage Pakistan in army training and development programmes
Must end Indian consulates and Moulvi Fazal ullahs TTP s activities in Afghanistans
Eastern provinces
Provided civil government with more administrative powers
Engage regional security forces in peace activities