Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pakistans Foriegn Policy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Pakistans Foriegn Policy

    Can some one explain why most of our numbers wouldn't give a **** if we go up in flames.
    Iran is pissed with us for the whole Taliban fiasco and our present govt is doing nothing to help or better our present situation.
    There has been no samjohta between the two countries.
    China was not happy with our Kargil incident, and japan slapped sanctions on us for becoming nuclear.
    The Taliban are more a liability than an asset.
    But still our foriegn policy sucks.
    We are on the verge of being isolated, and none of our traditional allies are coming to our rescue.
    The US is working towards India to counter the china market.
    Most of the arabs countries don't like us and we have virtually no trade or agreements with them.
    Some of CIS like Uzbek and Tajik are against us due to our involvement with the taliban.
    And my personal opinion is that is the Taliban are worse for Islam than Kafirs.
    We are in deep ****.
    How can we change this and increase our intl investment with these countries.
    Also please provide concrete facts and sites which i can use for my paper - if you don't know this my term paper for my college.
    Pakistans Foriegn policy Empahsis on its neighbhours.
    The recent "Pakistan Calling" is filled with info on it but i wanted additional info.
    Kmailik and NYA you MUST ANSWER THIS POST!!!!
    You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

    #2
    CM sahib, Hazar Janab. Here is what I think. And I am in total agreement with your analysis, except one. There is NONE foreign policy of Pakistan.

    Since independence, various govts tried various approaches but none coherent one. Playing ping-pong with capitalism while using an Islamic Racquet. Our experience with socialistic approach of Bhutto was also pretty fruitless and futile. In the 50’s and 60’s, our only foreign policy was to somehow internationalize Kashmir and strengthen bonds with the Gulf Arab States. Ayub missed an opportunity to set some kind of precedence with oil rich nation, and Bhutto followed the suit. No long term trade agreements exists with our Gulf brothers, and the only country that we have some trade agreement is UAE, of which we are guaranteed to import 20% of our oil consumption, the rest comes from the open market and we pay an arm and a leg, with some little bit of Kherat from Saudi Arabia and some handout by Kuwaitis.

    More recently, again the only focus that our foreign initiatives have had is to put Kashmir in the center stage of all our foreign interests and concern.

    Although the relations with our neighbors are not very cordial, but I believe that Pakistan, being more open, needs to show to its neighbor that want to live peacefully and should court their markets for our products. I know this is more of a commercial approach to foreign relations, but that’s the new trend. If one can foster economic development, one helps stabilize the region. Our immediate foreign policy goal should be to enter into peace negotiations with India, and abandon our nuclear ambitions.

    I have to get going, but I will add more of what I think. Kmailik will give you his views also. I haven’t seen him here today, may be he got arrested for smoking pot in public. I smoke indoors. A habit I perfected while I was a student.

    Comment


      #3
      Let me guess you studied in Amsterdam.
      If you did, then you must be a master in another Dutch art!!!
      Thanks for the the UAE thing and opening of trade - gave me a new front for my paper.
      You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by CM:
        Can some one explain why most of our numbers wouldn't give a **** if we go up in flames.
        Iran is pissed with us for the whole Taliban fiasco and our present govt is doing nothing to help or better our present situation.
        There has been no samjohta between the two countries.
        China was not happy with our Kargil incident, and japan slapped sanctions on us for becoming nuclear.
        The Taliban are more a liability than an asset.
        But still our foriegn policy sucks.
        We are on the verge of being isolated, and none of our traditional allies are coming to our rescue.
        The US is working towards India to counter the china market.
        Most of the arabs countries don't like us and we have virtually no trade or agreements with them.
        Some of CIS like Uzbek and Tajik are against us due to our involvement with the taliban.
        And my personal opinion is that is the Taliban are worse for Islam than Kafirs.
        We are in deep ****.
        How can we change this and increase our intl investment with these countries.
        Also please provide concrete facts and sites which i can use for my paper - if you don't know this my term paper for my college.
        Pakistans Foriegn policy Empahsis on its neighbhours.
        The recent "Pakistan Calling" is filled with info on it but i wanted additional info.
        Kmailik and NYA you MUST ANSWER THIS POST!!!!


        How naive and improvident of you dear..!!


        Comment


          #5
          not true at all. being the first Muslim Nuclear country this was expected.

          these same countries supported Taliban... now that they dont have any interest in them they have found reasons to put sanctions on Taliban and Pakistan. China is still Pakistans ally. Saudi, Iran, Libya and other muslims countries are seeking nuclear technology. and soon will be dependent on Pakistan.

          The foreign policies of countries are driven by demand/supply. U.S supplied billions of dollars worth of arms to Pakistan while it was developing nukes and was ruled by a dictator. Now with the new dictator lets return the favors and help fellow muslim countries in the process.

          Comment


            #6
            CM buddy - I'm working on three projects simultaneously at work today, and as yet I don't have the time to reply to all your queries.

            BUT I know you are raring for Ahmadi and myself to get at each others throats??, maybe we can oblige? A lot of what you say is really how the WEST has seen PAK's position since October 12, and I don't really agree, as I am from the 'positivist' school of thought when it comes to Pakistan, but I will provide you more of my input later...?

            P.S. One more thing for all you to think about? -

            " Isn't it interesting that when any 'negative' aspect of Pakistan is pointed out, some people then jump forward and start 'totally agreeing' with it, and proclaiming that they are ashamed that is happening in to 'THEIR COUNTRY PAKISTAN'??!" - some patriotism!

            LET HOSTILITIES RESUME !

            [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 16, 2000).]

            [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 16, 2000).]

            [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 16, 2000).]

            Comment


              #7
              While taking a break, I found this new article on how 'satisfied' the Americans are about the CE's achivements in domestic and foreign policies so far, BUT I don't really care for their 'approval' or otherwise, though it just shows that when Pakistan starts taking revolutionary measures on the economy (documentation, GST etc) the world starts to take notice of Pakistan?
              http://www.washtimes.com/world/default-200061522194.htm


              Pakistani progress pleases officials in U.S.
              By Ben Barber

              THE WASHINGTON TIMES


              U.S. officials say they are satisfied that Pakistan's military leader Pervez Musharraf has begun to tackle thorny problems that had raised concern about the direction in which he is leading his nuclear-armed nation.But it is still not clear whether the general has the support to fully confront what one analyst called "Pakistan's demons." These include Islamic militancy, terrorism, corruption, a poor economy and nuclear brinksmanship with India over Kashmir."Clearly he is attempting to grapple with a number of these problems," Assistant Secretary of State Karl Inderfurth said in an interview yesterday.Another official at State, where Pakistani Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar holds talks today, said Pakistan "is taking steps to contain terrorists operating out of Afghanistan and is being more active about the whole issue of militancy in Pakistan."Officials also were heartened by Gen. Musharraf's success in facing down the nation's merchants, who this week abandoned a two-week strike against new tax audits. The International Monetary Fund demanded the audits before it makes needed loans."General Musharraf may have arrested Pakistan's slide toward extremism and chaos," said Stephen Cohen of the Brookings Institution, a former State Department South Asia analyst.Gen. Musharraf this week ordered that thousands of religious schools known as madrassas —which have been recruiting grounds for militant groups —teach less ritual and more science and technology.But he has backed down from a plan to soften the anti-blasphemy laws in the face of Islamists who took to the streets two weeks ago."We're not really sure whether he's in charge or it is a junta in which two more hawkish and Islamist generals hold sway," said one U.S. official who spoke on the condition he not be identified.The two are Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmad, head of the Inter-Service Intelligence agency, and Gen. Abdul Aziz Khan, chief of general staff of the army. The military overthrew the civilian government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in October and installed Gen. Musharraf as chief executive of Pakistan.
              Despite his internal reforms, Gen. Musharraf remains hawkish toward India.Tension along the border remains high, and one source said India in recent weeks came close to crossing the Line of Control (LOC) dividing Kashmir.
              "The Indians had planned a fairly big bash," former Rand Vice President George Tanham said yesterday, citing "a good American source.""The Indians have rethought it and won't do it."This week, Mr. Sharif said from jail that the Pakistani army lost hundreds of soldiers during fighting last year in Kargil, on the Indian side of the LOC. Pakistan previously had insisted there were no regular Pakistani soldiers fighting with militant groups in Kargil. U.S. diplomats have repeatedly asked Gen. Musharraf to use his influence to get Afghanistan to clamp down on terrorists, especially accused terror mastermind Osama bin Laden.Pressure from Gen. Musharraf is credited for the closure by Afghanistan's Taleban rulers of a training camp for Islamic militants at Rishkore outside Kabul. However, the trainees reportedly have moved to other camps.Gen. Musharraf also has halted the carrying of weapons in public by Islamic militants, but U.S. officials are not sure how widely this has been enforced.Mr. Tanham said Gen. Musharraf seemed poorly prepared to run the country."He was a special forces guy, but he had to [take charge] for the good of the country and the army," he said.
              "He can't turn the country around fast. We and the Pakistanis need to be patient. And we're not."I think he's done reasonably well. He can't alienate everyone."

              P.S. Was not Indonesia one of the countries that 'lectured' Pakistan on restoration of democracy, when the CE visited that country a while ago. Well now Indonesia' President Wahid has just arrived in PAK for a 2-day visit!



              [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 16, 2000).]

              Comment


                #8
                Indo has always been a friend of pak even under suharto who was a American puppy.
                Back in 1992-1996 (that's when i was there)
                Delegation after delegation came to set up trade and stuff - most of them went back empty handed as the pak delegation was not willing to compromise.
                Did you know that pak printed Indo money stamps etc for its first 5 years of independence.
                Magawati is an excellent candidate after Wahid.
                I had the privilage to meet both of them.
                And what they say about Wahid is right, he may be blind and sick, but he could con you out of your house money actually everything in 10 minutes flat.
                Even though his body has betrayed him, his mind hasn't.
                All most all countries are lecturing Pak on returning to democract rule - as it sounds nice to the public which is pretty stupid.
                But most of our allies are actually happy with the change - NS was a dip-**** and couldn't do a thing.
                Mussarf on the other hand is a good able man.
                Only the US is pissed at us.
                With the French taking over rule in the EU look for our exports and relations with the EU to soar as never before.
                That is if our stupid people in power can move fast enough to pick up and go with full force towards the EU.
                Have you read the recent Pakistan Calling - one of the best mags out of pak on FP and politics.
                I am starting it today - the cover promted me to type this post.
                As for you and NYA - that would be a very pleasent side affect which will watch with a cold coke and a pack of doritos!!
                Now go work.
                You can answer this some other time.
                As for the US - i would say one thing to them if i was in power.
                "GET LOST AND LEAVE THIS TO US!!!!"
                Actually it would be alot ruder but as Sabah Baji doesn't want me to use foul language i will control myself and beat some punk up in the zentrum!
                You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

                Comment


                  #9
                  Going to lunch - but thought I'd post this very 'understanding' viewpoint on PAK foreign policy from the German Ambadssador in PAK:-
                  http://www.thefridaytimes.com/news5.htm

                  "No one can isolate a country like Pakistan..." - Hans Joachim Daerr,
                  Germany's ambassador to Pakistan

                  Hans Joachim Daerr, Germany's ambassador to Pakistan, is one of the most outspoken members of Islamabad's diplomatic corps. At the height of the 1999 Kargil conflict between India and Pakistan, Ambassador Daerr created quite a stir within the Pakistani establishment when he reportedly said that the people occupying the heights in Kargil "didn't fall from heavens". Of late, he has been urging Islamabad to calibrate its Afghan and Kashmir policies to bring them in line with the ground realities. TFT's Imtiaz Gul spoke with Ambassador Daerr to ascertain his views on various issues since the 1999 coup in Pakistan. Excerpts:

                  TFT: How does Germany perceive Pakistan?

                  HJD: Germany has traditionally taken a positive line on Pakistan. The image may have been affected by certain developments lately but overall it remains positive.



                  TFT: You do not think issues like the nuclear tests, fundamentalism and military rule, besides many other issues like discrimination against minorities and human rights violations have made a difference to Pakistan's image?

                  HJD: Nuclear tests have certainly not helped matters because Germany is against proliferation. Of course we realise that Pakistan followed India in conducting the tests, so our concern on this issue and the resultant criticism applies to both India and Pakistan. Kargil is perceived entirely as Pakistan's doing and the conflict has only served to increase tension in the region. On social issues Pakistan does not convey a positive image because of severe deficiencies in the areas of human rights, democracy and good governance.



                  TFT: How do you evaluate the failure of political governments in Pakistan?

                  HJD: The last four elected governments [since 1988], had the voters' support and when Pakistan returned to democracy the environment was very positive. But these governments frittered away that capital. Peoples' hopes were dashed. There has been no real reform and corruption has been a major issue. None of these governments had a real agenda for socioeconomic reform.



                  TFT: What do you think accounts for such poor performance?

                  HJD: The political regimes, despite claims to being democratic, had little respect for democracy. The Pakistani society is still very traditional and many of the old social structures, including feudal structures still exist. It is difficult to institute reforms but a beginning has to be made. No one expected the previous governments to produce miracles but they failed even to make a beginning. There was little attempt at real progress.



                  TFT: The parties also lack internal democracy?

                  HJD: Yes that indeed is a problem. None of the political parties is based on sound democratic foundations.



                  TFT: How do you look at the reform agenda of the present regime - the small steps being taken with the local government plan and reforms in the banking sector?

                  HJD: I think it is unfair to say these are small steps. These are in fact very comprehensive steps in the given situation. Look at the tax reforms, the approach towards devolution and decentralisation, the electoral reforms, the deweaponisation campaign. This is as comprehensive as it can get. They are all difficult tasks. If the government could successfully implement even a part of this agenda it could really change Pakistan in a positive way.



                  TFT: Do you think the reforms could lead Pakistan to institutional governance rather than personalised rule?

                  HJD: Devolution could indeed lead to institutional progress. The plan to build democracy up from the grassroots level is a very important approach. The only contradiction I see there is the plan to hold elections on a nonparty basis. You cannot start to build democracy at the grassroots without political parties. There can be no democracy without political parties.



                  TFT: There is a perception in the West that Pakistan's foreign policy is almost entirely linked to the issue of Kashmir.

                  HJD: It is difficult to comment on the Kashmir issue because of its complexity. It is also wrong to blame only Pakistan. Let me put it this way: For decades Pakistan hoped for a positive solution of the problem but bilateral negotiations with India have not produced any result. At the same time the Indians have failed to succeed in winning the hearts of Kashmiris. They have committed human rights violations and the elections there have been massively manipulated. Pakistan has expressed the desire to deescalate tensions and begin substantial talks. The chief executive has said that Pakistan is ready to "talk with India at any level, anytime and anywhere". However, viewed against what happened in Kargil, the world community expects Pakistan to first take visible and verifiable steps towards deescalation. Thereafter, India and Pakistan have to move together, step by step.



                  TFT: Does "visible and verifiable steps" mean disengaging from the militant Kashmiri groups?

                  HJD: One can debate the issue of the extent of Pakistan's involvement in cross-border infiltration in Kashmir but it certainly has leverage with some of these groups. The chief executive would not have suggested using his influence with Kashmiri militants had it not been so. What is important is a very serious reduction if not complete cessation of armed actions by militants who cross over to the other side.



                  TFT: Pakistan seems to be losing out to India not because its stand is wrong but because India offers a more lucrative market to the world.

                  HJD: Well I would not deny that the overall geopolitical situation always plays a role in assessment of conflicts and political problems but I would not go so far as to say that the international community has let down Pakistan and Kashmir on purely economic considerations. Self-determination can in many cases be granted within the framework of autonomy. The Indian constitution in principle grants autonomy to the Kashmir region.



                  TFT: But that autonomy remains a dream.

                  HJD: Yes, owing to the situation there, that part of the constitution has not been implemented.



                  TFT: You have been also suggesting that Pakistan review its Afghanistan policy. What would that entail?

                  HJD: In the case of Afghanistan there is no easy way out, no simple recipe. But the process has to begin with a major reassessment of Pakistan's policy on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis. I think most analysts would agree that the present policy is cost-prohibitive with little benefits. I do not want to be unfair, there is no quick fix but there are two basic approaches that can be pursued: either on the 6+2 track by getting all the interested parties to convince their proxies inside that country to settle matters. However, there is not much hope in the immediate future to get all the concerned parties to agree to a solid concerted policy. The other approach is to help Afghans to agree among themselves to finish fighting. The only hope is to gather all the relevant forces on the loya jirga platform. The process has to involve all the parties. No one party can enforce peace through military victory. The reconstruction and peace-time administration of Afghanistan cannot be done by one party alone, and certainly not by the Taliban because they are just not qualified to run the affairs of that country.



                  TFT: Do you really think Pakistan can influence the Taliban?

                  HJD: While it is wrong to assume that Taliban are totally pliable to policy initiatives from Islamabad, it is equally wrong to aver that Islamabad has no leverage whatsoever with the Taliban. Pakistan does carry a lot of influence with the Taliban and that can be used to soften their position towards the Northern Alliance.



                  TFT: What about the EU and German economic assistance to Pakistan?

                  HJD: The present conditions were slapped on Pakistan following the nuclear tests. They are linked to Pakistan's movement on the nonproliferation issue. I think one of the important preconditions for getting back into the normal mode would be for Pakistan to sign the CTBT. As far as German assistance is concerned, several bilateral projects are still going on in the areas of poverty alleviation and basic human needs. But the big chunk, which relates to financial aid for bigger projects, remains suspended.



                  TFT: There is fear of Pakistan's isolation?

                  HJD: I do not see any danger of that. Do not confuse international criticism with isolation. Pakistan is not isolated and I do not know who would want to isolate Pakistan. No one can isolate a country like Pakistan. All it needs to improve the international situation is a sustained period of political stability and economic revival.



                  Comment


                    #10
                    CM - I will write more on this later next week, when I get more time, but I thought I should give you some pointers to Pakistan's foreign policy in the past. I totally disagree with the doom-mongers who claim that Pakistan has NEVER had a foreign policy what - rubbish! Take the 1970's and Zulfikar Bhutto's foreign policy - who I think was an expert when it came to foreign policy (although I cannot stand his domestic ploicies). If Pakistan did not have a good foreign policy in the 1970's how come then Bhutto managed to achieve the following:-
                    1) Lay the foundations of Pakistan's nuclear programme, in cooperation with countries like Libya and Saudi Arabia? He once famously said " The people of Pakistan will eat grass, but we will have a nuclear capability..." or word to that effect?
                    2) With Saudi Arabia, Bhutto's Pakistan was in the forefront in setting up the OIC?
                    3) Bhutto connvinced the Gulf Arab states to impose an oil embargo on the west after the 1973 Yom Kippur war, to get them to pressure Israel - this famously brought the west an energy crisis?
                    4) Bhutto in his time as foreign minister and then as Prime Minister was instrumental in bringing the USA and China together?
                    5) During the 1970's Pakistan built up its warm ties with the Gulf states i.e by the migration of millions of Pakistani's to the Gulf?


                    NOTE - many claim that Bhutto was overthrown in a CIA-backed coup because of his nuclear ambitions, and the oil embargo? (King Faisal of Saudi Arabia was also killed in suspicous circumstances after the oil embargo?)

                    Read - "Zulfi Bhutto of Pakistan" by Stanley Wolpert.

                    AFGHANISTAN. If the Taliban are such a damn menace to the west, then maybe the west should answer the following questions:-
                    1) Why has it long been rumoured that the CIA actually helped the rise of the Taliban in the early years?
                    2) Recently the state dept said that Afghanistan had become a centre for terrorism - THEN WHY DID THEY NOT PUT IT IN THE STATE DEPT LIST OF TERRORIST-SUPPORTING STATES?!!
                    3) Why did Madelaine Albright say that apart from the Osama issue and terrorist bases, that the Taliban had been quite cooperative/helpful to the USA ?!!!
                    4) Why is it that the US oil and gas companies continue to sign agreements on pipelines with the Taliban government?

                    Its simple - When the Taliban expel Osama the USA will recognise the Taliban.

                    I'll find out the books I read on the CIA help for the Taliban?

                    [This message has been edited by kmailik (edited June 17, 2000).]

                    Comment


                      #11
                      CM bhai jaan,
                      Policies for a country are formed according to her identity, and goals as a nation.....
                      We DO NOT have a foriegn policy...or for that matter anyother policy.
                      We are trying to balance out , Islamism , democracy, preservasion of two nation theory, our identity as someone who is different then India , and in the proces have managed to thoroughly confuse ourselves...That is of course reflected in both our internal and foriegn policy.
                      We dont know if our goal is to be a prosperous progressive and free nation , or if it is to regress into a society with 1400 year old customs....since we dont have the vision and foresight to shape us into the former , nor do we have the moral courage to denounce the latter, we have come to a unique compromise....We will keep on doing what suits us for the time ( for short term , individual benefits) and we will blame things not going right on , Islam not being correctly implimented....This we have been repeating like a parrot for past 50 years....
                      So aimlessness, disorganization, and short term personal benefits are the guidelines of our foreign policy....

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Nova makes an excellent observation. Pakistan’s foreign (and internal) policies are described very eloquently and painted on the back of every Raksha in Lahore:

                        “Yeh sab tumhara Karm hey Aaka, key batt ab tak bani hovi hey”

                        Comment


                          #13
                          It is a high time for pakistan to have a foreign policy.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Dear ZZ, we have one and it revolves around India. It is not that we don’t have one. What we need is to focus on other externalities and make appropriate changes. What we need, according to many professionals, is an integrated approach in our foreign affairs and relations. Had we had stable governments with scintillating politicians, like Indra Gandhi or Z. Bhutto, the current pathetic state of affairs will not prevail. Indian leadership, on the other hand, knows what is good for India and makes changes as deemed necessary. No doubt, that progress in India is slow, but I give Indian leadership credit for adjusting sails when the wind changes.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              ZZ said:-

                              " It is a high time for pakistan to have a foreign policy."

                              Yes follow the foreign policy principles of India! summed up in just ONE word INDECISION!

                              - Indecision over Kargil...!
                              - Indecision over Kandahar...!
                              - Indecision over Sri Lanka...!
                              - Indecision over Fiji...!
                              - Indecision over Sierra Leone...!

                              In fact INDECISION in domestic affairs as well - (Kashmir?) Bihar, Tripura, Nagaland, Assam, anti-Christian attacks etc etc etc

                              GOOD ADVICE ZZ?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X