What's new

Pakistan demands apology over drone strike

Did Afghanistan invaded Pakistan in the PAST? Did it took advantage of our vulnerable moments during our wars with India?
Yes to the first question -under Daud an Afghan Lashkar was sent to try and occupy parts of FATA, and attempts were also made to stoke separatist rebellions in FATA - both failed. During the times of Soviet influence in Afghanistan, Khad/KGB also carried out numerous terrorist attacks in Pakistani cities.

I know that the case of Durand Line is complicated. However, why Durand Line has not been fenced since independence?
It does not have to be fenced, the Afghans have to simply abide by the Durand Agreement signed by their rulers and accept Pakistani sovereignty over the areas governed by Pakistan currently.

Forget about Afghan Pakhtoons for a moment. Do Pakistani pakhtoons have problem with this fencing of Durand Line?
Again, fencing is not the issue - acceptance of Pakistani sovereignty and abiding by an international agreement is.

Border disputes do not justify our support for extremist elements in Afghanistan.
The use of Afghanistan to destabilize Pakistan, and the impact of a civil war in Afghanistan on Pakistan (millions of refugees etc.) justifies our intervention in Afghanistan.
India and China have border disputes too. These states do not try to overrun each other by using extremist proxies over these matters.
Much larger states, different dynamics.

My point is that supporting Taliban has done us no good either. Taliban gave sanctury to arab terrorists, which led to US invasion and vice versa.

Had Taliban handed over OBL and his goons to US, this mess would not have happened. Pakistani authorities also requested Taliban leadership to hand over OBL to US, but Taliban leadership showed a middle finger in response.

And you are contended with supporting these kinds of proxies which do not listen to even our demands?

The Taliban in fact did offer to shift OBL to a neutral country to be brought to trial. It was a very reasonable proposal - the US refused to consider it.

Mullah Zaeef: "We are not against India. There are people who encourage India to do something against Pakistan in Afghanistan, and in the same way, there are people who encourage Pakistan to do something against India. They share a long border. If India and Pakistan have problems, they should sort it out there."

Q: "You called ISI [i.e. the Inter-Services Intelligence of the Pakistan military] a global evil. You seem to be angry with Pakistan."

Mullah Zaeef: "The ISI would say one thing to the Americans and the opposite to the Taliban. When the U.S. wanted the Taliban to hand Osama [bin Laden] over to them [after 9/11], Pakistan emboldened the Taliban by assuring that Pakistan would stand by the Taliban under any circumstances. Even today Pakistan's policy is not good for Afghans. The ISI should not have done anything wrong here. But, unfortunately, they are still doing a lot of wrong things. They arrested Afghan people and sold them to the Americans…"


Check this interview: MEMRI Mobile - - Former Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef

These are the views of a prominent Taliban figure. Get the picture?
So long as Pakistan is not threatened by Afghanistan, I fail to see what the issue is with his views.

Regarding Karzai: Pakistan needs to send a strong message to this clown that if he would shelter balochi terrorists, he would face severe consequences.
He is sheltering Baluch terrorists, there cannot be any more damning evidence than the embassy cables - Musharraf was screaming this for years, to the world and to the US. And the Americans would have us believe that the first they heard of it was in a 'chat with Karzai'. The guy is being sheltered under their noses in Kabul, we are telling the Yanks where he is, and they claim that this is the first they knew of it. Utter BS and lies.

The US and Karzai are clearly in cahoots in sheltering Baluch terrorists, and I see no reason why Pakistan should trust either of them.


Did you checked the link provided by me?

ISAF objectives

NATO-ISAF, as part of the overall International Community effort, and as mandated by the United Nations Security Council, is working with Afghanistan to create the conditions whereby the Government of Afghanistan is able to exercise its authority throughout Afghanistan.

Transition

Transition – Inteqal in dari and pashtu - is the process by which responsibility for Afghanistan will be gradually handed over to the Afghan leadership 1.

At the London Conference in January 2010, the Afghan Government and the International Community pledged to the development of a plan for transition, which they later endorsed at the follow-up Kabul Conference in July 2010.

Implementation of this plan is scheduled to start in the spring of 2011 and it is expected that, by the end of 2014, the Afghan authorities will have taken the lead throughout the country. As Afghan leadership expands, NATO-ISAF’s presence in Afghanistan will evolve progressively from a mentoring to an enabling and sustaining role, beyond 2014, until that time whereby the Afghan leadership is capable of taking full responsibility for its country.
Great - if they do accomplish what they are setting out to do, there will be no civil war, and 'Plan B or Plan C' will never be put to use.

So we have not learned our lesson yet?

Once again, supporting anti-NATO Taliban is not the solution to our problem. This strategy has already backfired upon us.

Do you think that WORLD will be silent spectator to our role in bringing back Taliban to power once again, regardless of any reason? Their will be serious ramifications for us.

Pakistan needs to actively engage US and Afghan government to chalk out an appropriate solution for Afghan problem which is acceptable to all sides.
We have learnt our lesson and we are pursuing a different strategy that incorporates engagement with the various power centers in Afghanistan.
However, we need to do something about Haqani Network as well.

As long as we will keep these kinds of proxies, tensions will continue to increase between US, Afghan government, and Pakistan.

If we feel justified in taking action against extremist groups (TTP and its cohorts) challenging us; The ISAF feels justified in taking action against extremist groups (Haqani and Co.) challenging its mission.
In due time - I don't see the US/Afghanistan handing over a known terrorist leaders being sheltered in Kabul to Pakistan anytime soon, nor do I see the US taking any sort of military action to eliminate the Taliban groups led by Qari Zia-ur-Rehman and Mullah Fazlullah hiding in Eastern Afghanistan and carrying out attacks in Bajaur and Mohmand.

Where is the pressure on the US to eliminate threats to Pakistan from terrorists?

Where is the condemnation of the US for sheltering terrorists in Afghanistan?
 
Agnostic Muslim, I have question for you. Is Pakistan Army not a slave for U.S? The drone attacks, CIA operatives, operation in this region and that region. And Now Pakistan fixing itself for an operation in North Waziristan after U.S pressure. Is this not slavery? Pakistan itself has over 3 million homeless, displaced people, Pakistan has over 1 million Afghan refugees, Pakistan has lost more civilians than in Afghanistan, Pakistan has lost more soldiers than NATO and U.S combined. And we should do more, more and more? This useless Army does nothing against the real oppressors the U.S. In fact it needs America more then America need Pakistan for this fight to end.
 
I believe hundred and two percent that if Pak army will do operation in North Waziristan , it will do for its people (like in Swat and South Waziristan). But this is not suitable time for operation because public opinion is against it.
 
First:
Karzai will need to understand that playing games against us is dangerous for him and his government. While the US/NATO/ISAF will have to leave one day, Pakistan is not going anywhere. If he thinks that he can persuade India to play a bigger role against Pakistan, then he better think again. Financial support is one thing, but India will never face Pakistan head-to-head for Afghanistan.

Second:
The Pakistani Army may be reluctant to open another front in this WoT against itself. We are limited by our equipment and funds. Another propability is that the Military does not place enough trust in the US to engage long enough in the region to see long-lasting results. There are concerns that an anti-Pakistan government may come to power.
There is nothing wrong in a pro-Indian government, but an administration that is bears hostility towards Pakistan can not be tolerated for security concerns.

The US needs to allay some of the concerns by assuring a long-term engagement with the Afghan people and pledging full support and commitment after the war to help develop Afghanistan's law/order, infrastructure, health and education sector.

Third:
The US needs to acknowledge that Pakistan has already done a lot in this war and to end the "Do More" rhetoric. We need the support of the International Community to combat this global threat. We have neither the finances nor the equipment to deal with this situation and still maintain a sizeable deterrence on our Eastern border. While secrecy over sensitive technology is understandable, we need access to and ToT of some older aircraft to upgrade the capabilty of the PAF.

The US knows more than anyone that air support is crucial to success on the battlefield.

We have been the only US ally in this region and it may be time for the US to start trusting Pakistan a bit more. I agree that there have been episodes of mistrust and even frustration, a new start to our ties alongwith military support can really bring about a difference in our effort against militancy.
 
Agnostic Muslim, I have question for you. Is Pakistan Army not a slave for U.S? The drone attacks, CIA operatives, operation in this region and that region. And Now Pakistan fixing itself for an operation in North Waziristan after U.S pressure. Is this not slavery? Pakistan itself has over 3 million homeless, displaced people, Pakistan has over 1 million Afghan refugees, Pakistan has lost more civilians than in Afghanistan, Pakistan has lost more soldiers than NATO and U.S combined. And we should do more, more and more? This useless Army does nothing against the real oppressors the U.S. In fact it needs America more then America need Pakistan for this fight to end.
I am not sure I understand you. Were you not in the 'Stop Maligning the Army' thread narrating an incident in which your relatives were killed by the Taliban in Swat, and the Army did nothing to help them at the time because the Army and GoP were engaged in 'dialog' to implement NAR in Swat?

You criticized the Army for not acting then, and now it appears you are criticizing them for possibly choosing to act against the Taliban in NW.

What exactly do you want? Do you want them to act or not act? If you want them to act, as you would have liked them to have done in Swat, then why oppose an operation in NW?
 
Are you sure it is 'fake condemnation'?

The COAS does not usually comment on events/issues, as you pointed out. The couple of times that I can remember him issuing 'condemnations and warnings', Pakistan did in fact follow through on them and made sure the events were not repeated.

The first I can recall was a US special forces raid in Angorr Adda, in which several civilians were mistakenly killed. I believe the COAS indicated that the next time the security forces had been ordered to shoot down any choppers carrying out such raids in Pakistani territory, and I do not believe that the US has repeated such a SF raid since.

The second incident I recall was with the killing of three FC at a checkpost a few months ago, after which Pakistan shut down a major NATO supply route until it received assurances to prevent a repeat and an apology.

So far the COAS warnings and condemnations have not been 'fake' or 'empty threats' - we will have to wait and see what this particular one amounts to. Let us not be so quick to condemn without all the facts available.

Yes I'm sure these are nothing but hollow sentiments from Kiyani. He is seen as USA's right hand man in region. He's green-lighted drone attacks from day one and allowed them to occur in designated and marked out regions. Kiyani is what Omar Suleiman of Egypt was to the CIA. The same type of much needed asset.

Can you re-call the US forces killing 11 Pakistani soldiers in Gora Pai?

The NATO supply route shut-down was posturing also. As soon as US began plans on re-supplying through alternative routes in central asia the ARMY immediately realized it wouldn't be able to make a quick buck and re-opened its supply lines. I say re-opened the supply lines, but in fact they didn't even do that do as supplies were still being channeled through normally. All the did was keep all the tankers hold up outside the border in khyber so when they did eventually open the border it was a bottle-neck on about 200+ convoys.

The *PEOPLE* have done more, as i remember seeing youtube clips of ordinary citizens torching the depots in protest.

I know this because I am from KP and i'm not using recycled, google-searched articles for my info. I have seen it first-hand.

Lastly, if you think PAF is going to shoot down a drone keep dreaming.
 
I am not sure I understand you. Were you not in the 'Stop Maligning the Army' thread narrating an incident in which your relatives were killed by the Taliban in Swat, and the Army did nothing to help them at the time because the Army and GoP were engaged in 'dialog' to implement NAR in Swat?

You criticized the Army for not acting then, and now it appears you are criticizing them for possibly choosing to act against the Taliban in NW.

What exactly do you want? Do you want them to act or not act? If you want them to act, as you would have liked them to have done in Swat, then why oppose an operation in NW?

Im saying they do nothing unless they are under pressure from their boss, U.S of A. Swat operation was started under intense pressure after Swat Sharia deal, and S. Wazisristan was started under intense pressure, and now N. Waziristan is coming on its way.

BTW, before operation Rah e Rast, which country was whining the most claiming Taliban were 60 kilometers away from Islamabad? U.S.... Which further pressured Pakistan to take action.
 
Agno seems not be following - if Op/Ed pieces and the responses by our members are any guide, what a majority of Pakistanis want, regardless of where they stand on the issue of Islamization (read Arabization) in Pakistan, what a majority want is for the Pakistan armed forces to be out of politics of being in crude confrontation with whom ever run the government --- See, it can't be that there is smoke and no fire -- it is undeniable that some pretty nasty elements seem to have some really good friends in the armed forces, especially the army --- See, we all know that the politicians and especially the so called "religious" types are duplicitous and traitorous, we don't expect the same from the army -- and yet some insist that we have not the right to expect that.

So, we want a clean, professional, lethal army that is nationalistic, patriotic, is Pakistan's army, not some ideology's army -- and we will get it, please do take a careful look at events in the region, if you care about the Pakistan armed forces, for their evolution and not a "clean slate" approach.
 
Can some one explain to me why a Jirga was being held in a taliban training center?

The strikes occurred three minutes apart and took place in the Datta Khel area of the North Waziristan tribal region - the main sanctuary for Al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters along the Afghan border.

"Militants were using this house as a training centre and used to meet here," a security official in Peshawar told the AFP news agency.

He said 10 other fighters were critically injured.

Dozens die as US drone hits Pakistan home - Central & South Asia - Al Jazeera English
 
Agno seems not be following - if Op/Ed pieces and the responses by our members are any guide, what a majority of Pakistanis want, regardless of where they stand on the issue of Islamization (read Arabization) in Pakistan, what a majority want is for the Pakistan armed forces to be out of politics of being in crude confrontation with whom ever run the government

That does not seem to be what the majority of members posting here want, since they are criticizing the Army for the Davis release, when the Army did nothing but follow the PPP/PML-N lead. Therefore the objective of such criticism appears to be that they wanted the Army to intervene. No evidence has been provided so far that the Army coerced the PPP and PML-N to release Davis for example, and the chain of events clearly indicates that the PPP was in favor of releasing Davis from day 1.

There is an apparent hypocrisy here - a demand for the 'Army to save Pakistan' through intervention in politics and policy making, and then another demand for the Army to stay out of politics and not confront the elected institutions. If the latter is what you (and all these members and op-ed writers you speak of) want, then there should be no criticism of the Army for essentially following the PPP/PML-N line on the Davis issue.

I am following the hypocrisy on display here quite well - it is you who cannot make up his mind on what he wants the Army to do exactly - influence policy or step back, as is evident from your criticizm of the Army on the Davis issue and calls for the Army to 'help Pakistan win'.

BTW, please do point out in my past posts on this thread where I appear to call for the Army to intervene in policy making and overrule the elected representatives? In fact my entire argument on the Davis issue has been that the Army acted constitutionally in support of the PPP and the PML-N, which was the appropriate thing to do.

--- See, it can't be that there is smoke and no fire -- it is undeniable that some pretty nasty elements seem to have some really good friends in the armed forces, especially the army --- See, we all know that the politicians and especially the so called "religious" types are duplicitous and traitorous, we don't expect the same from the army -- and yet some insist that we have not the right to expect that.
I am sorry, but how does that relate to my posts so far? If that is a rebuttal of any specific argument I have made, I would appreciate you pointing out which one. Poor generalizations such as the one made here by you are conducive to nothing by senseless point scoring through meaningless rhetoric.
So, we want a clean, professional, lethal army that is nationalistic, patriotic, is Pakistan's army, not some ideology's army -- and we will get it, please do take a careful look at events in the region, if you care about the Pakistan armed forces, for their evolution and not a "clean slate" approach.
I fail to see how the Army is anything but what you claim 'you want it to be'. In fact it acted in the manner that it should on the Davis issue, or for that matter since Kiyani took over. So the 'evolution' is in progress, in terms of a military that adheres to the dictates of the elected government, and the Davis release was a 'fine', though unpopular, example of that adherence to the dictates of the elected representatives.
 
Yes I'm sure these are nothing but hollow sentiments from Kiyani. He is seen as USA's right hand man in region. He's green-lighted drone attacks from day one and allowed them to occur in designated and marked out regions. Kiyani is what Omar Suleiman of Egypt was to the CIA. The same type of much needed asset.
And is that why Pakistan's nuclear weapons program has continued to accelerate, with two new Plutonium production reactors coming online and construction on the fourth one starting at Khushab? Is that why Pakistan has pushed though civilian nuclear reactor deals with China? Is that why Kiyani, the Pakistan Army and the ISI (run by a man that enjoys his confidence) are continuously maligned in the US for 'supporting enemies of the US'?

For an 'indispensable ally of the US' Kiyani sure has allowed a lot of policies the US intensely dislikes to continue, and for a 'right hand man' he sure has been vilified in Western media a lot.

I therefore fail to see any basis in your claim.

Can you re-call the US forces killing 11 Pakistani soldiers in Gora Pai?
Yes I do, right after the new government was elected and a few months after Kiyani took charge, with the economy tanking, foreign reserves fast depleting, and inflation sky rocketing.

What about it? Not exactly the most opportune time to take on the US, given the beginning of a 'new' relationship between the elected government, new COAS and the US.

The NATO supply route shut-down was posturing also. As soon as US began plans on re-supplying through alternative routes in central asia the ARMY immediately realized it wouldn't be able to make a quick buck and re-opened its supply lines. I say re-opened the supply lines, but in fact they didn't even do that do as supplies were still being channeled through normally. All the did was keep all the tankers hold up outside the border in khyber so when they did eventually open the border it was a bottle-neck on about 200+ convoys.
IIRC, 50% of NATO supplies were already being routed through the northern route, long before the incident that forced the supply line closure, so to argue that there was some sort of new 'shift' in the supply route used by NATO, that forced the Army to re-open the closed supply route, is simply a disingenuous claim. The Army was aware of the fact that the US had been increasing the amount of supplies it moved in from the Northern route for a while by then.

And the US did in fact apologize for that incident, IIRC.
The *PEOPLE* have done more, as i remember seeing youtube clips of ordinary citizens torching the depots in protest.

I know this because I am from KP and i'm not using recycled, google-searched articles for my info. I have seen it first-hand.
Some commentators have argued that the people 'torching depots' were in fact ISI/PA, or hired by them. I am glad you can corroborate that these were 'ordinary people'.

BTW, burning down depots and trucks, regardless of the reasons behind such acts, is simply not justifiable. Most of those trucks/depots are run by and/or owned by Pakistanis are they not? People (Pakistanis typically) get killed or injured in such attacks. Please advise these 'PEOPLE' to refrain from such criminal activities next time.

Lastly, if you think PAF is going to shoot down a drone keep dreaming.
The PAF can shoot down a drone, but whether it does so, will depend upon a change in the following position:

Some ”revelations” are less surprising, such as Zardari’s government signing off on controversial drone attacks while simultaneously condemning them as a breach of sovereignty, confirming analysts’ suspicions. "I don't care if they do it as long as they get the right people. We'll protest in the National Assembly and then ignore it,” he was quoted as saying in a cable.

Zardari’s political opponents may find it hard to extract mileage from the revelations, however. Opposition leader Mr. Sharif, who plays on anti-Americanism to cement his base with the Pakistani right, repeatedly reassured Ambassador Patterson of his “pro-American” credentials in a February 2008 cable. And according to the Guardian newspaper, Maulana Fazlur Rehman, leader of the country’s largest Islamist party, hosted a dinner for the ambassador where he solicited her backing for becoming prime minister, and made it clear that his votes were “up for sale.”​
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia...aks-gets-muted-political-response-in-Pakistan

Or are you another one of those hypocrites who wants 'representative government and the Army to follow the dictates of the elected officials' but at the same time holds the Army responsible for not acting in violation of the elected government and 'shooting down the drones' or 'prosecuting Davis'?
 
There is an apparent hypocrisy here - a demand for the 'Army to save Pakistan' through intervention in politics and policy making, and then another demand for the Army to stay out of politics and not confront the elected institutions. If the latter is what you (and all these members and op-ed writers you speak of) want, then there should be no criticism of the Army for essentially following the PPP/PML-N line on the Davis issue.

I am following the hypocrisy on display here quite well - it is you who cannot make up his mind on what he wants the Army to do exactly - influence policy or step back, as is evident from your criticizm of the Army on the Davis issue and calls for the Army to 'help Pakistan win'.

That's exactly what has been happening in this thread!

It is less about half people wanting this, and half wanting that, rather more about the same people wanting this as well as that. Many in here that I see, criticize the Army for not taking the decisions the government should take, and in the next post, the same people go on to point out how it is the intervention of the Army that has led to this situation. If I were to judge, then such disorientation, and lack of goal and focus in the majority are the main reasons why Pakistan is so fragile today.


It is said that crisis can bring the best and worst out of anyone. I hope people of Pakistan show their best in these times. In such situations it is very convenient to play the blame game, but for once, they should try to see what they themselves have done for the betterment of the country.
 
Drone Attacks: the Level of Sovereignty

By Dr. Raja Muhammad Khan

On March 17, 2011, a CIA driven US drone attack killed forty-six innocent tribal of the Madakhel tribe on the open fields of Nevi Adda Shega in Dattakhel, North Waziristan Agency.


Notables of the tribe had convened a jirga for reaching on to some consensus on the issue of chromites mine located in the area. Among dead there were personnel of the Khasadar force and other local officials of this Tribal agency. This drone attack was one of the deadliest, ever since 2007. In so far over 250 drone attacks since 2004, thousands of innocent tribal have either lost their lives, wounded or disabled.

North Waziristan Agency has been the main target of these attacks since 2009. Perhaps, this is because that, US has been pressurizing Pakistan to launch a military operation in this agency. US believes that Haqqani network is operative in the area which also supports the Afghan Taliban, embattling the US and NATO forces, occupying Afghanistan. In a recent statement on March 18, 2011, General David Petraeus, ISAF commander, has once again stressed Islamabad to launch a military operation in North Waziristan. He said that, “The fact is that it’s hugely important that there’s a campaign in Northern Waziristan that is putting enormous pressure on the Al-Qaeda sanctuaries there.”

Pakistan, however, had a different point of view and believes that, any military actions on its territory has to be undertaken, keeping ground realities in view. After all Pakistan cannot kill its masses on the desires of a foreign power. Why cannot ISAF seal the Afghan side of the Pak-Afghan border, thus ceasing the chances of any infiltration from the Pakistani side?
The current drone attack has lot of connotations.

Just a day earlier, Pakistan released a US national, Raymond Davis, a CIA operative, involved in the murder of two Pakistani citizens. Besides, he was involved in spying activities in various parts of the country. His linkages with the militants in Pakistan were no more a secret. Furthermore, he remained non-cooperative during the investigation process.

There must have been many more reasons of his significance for the US, as a man not less than President Obama himself stressed Pakistan for his release.

Generally, it was expected that his release would obliged US and pave the way for the restoration of the Pak-US bi-lateral relationship, to which there came a chill, sequel to his arrest. But, U.S has behaved otherwise. On March 17, 2011, just a day after the release of Raymond Davis, US drone fired twelve missiles on the innocent Pakistanis, killing 46.

This inhuman act of United States otherwise had no logics was a clear indication that, it does not care Pakistan and would take its own course, while dealing with Pakistan and Pakistanis. As per Brigadier (retired) Mahmood Shah, former Secretary FATA, “This is an arrogant US response. Twelve missiles in one day is not routine.

The message was clear and categorical: we will do what we want.” As per Mr Khalid Aziz, a former Chief Secretary of the FATA and the current analyst believes that this drone attack is an indication of the America’s continuous “unhappiness with the Pak command structure.”

What has been transpired from the US response that, it is not obliged, if Pakistan has released Mr. Raymond Davis? US would continue following its policy of dictating its own terms and conditions. It can target any one; militant or otherwise, at anytime and anywhere, without taking Pakistan into confidence.

Under such a situation, “Relations are bad and will get worse and will take away from the war on terror.” As a sovereign and independent state, for how long Pakistan would afford the US drone attacks is indeed a big question mark. After all; “We are not Djibouti or Algeria, we are a nuclear state, and we are Pakistani.

The Americans need to respect us.” There have been 19 drone attacks in North Waziristan, since January 1, 2011, killing about 95 people. Should American have such a killing license for Pakistanis?

Prime Minister and Army Chief, General Kayani has condemned the attack and sent strong messages to US for stoppage of such acts in the Pakistani territory. US ambassador in Pakistan, Cameron Munter was summoned in the Foreign Office and handed over a demarche on the drone attack in Dattakhel area of North Waziristan by Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir.

In retaliation to the US drone attacks Pakistan has also decided to pull out from the tri-lateral ministerial meeting (between Pakistan, US and Afghanistan), scheduled to be held on March 26, 2011. Earlier, it was planned from February 23-25 in Washington. Pakistan is also of the opinion that, “fundamentals of our relations need to be revisited.”

After all United States should not treat Pakistan as a client state. US should, “hold back those who have been trying to veer the Pakistan-US relationship away from the track.” US ambassador has apparently acknowledged the Pakistani concern and promised to visit United States for a consultation with the Obama administration.

As per defence analyst, General retired Talat Masood, “the relationship between Pakistan and US is becoming very awkward and unsustainable in the way it is preceding in every aspect.” The former Foreign Minister, Makhdom Shah Mehmood Qureshi, said in a conference that, “US drone attack in North Waziristan was a gift to the Pakistani nation,” especially after the release of the Raymond Davis.

On their part the people of Pakistan have strongly reacted against the drone attack as well as the release of the Raymond Davis. The head of the NWA Peace Committee, Malik Jalal Sarhadi Wazir has said that, US is indulging in to the “worst form of human rights violation.” He said that US atrocities have compelled us to wage Jihad against it and also to take revenge for the atrocities on our tribesmen.

They totally reject the presence of al Qaeda and Taliban in Fata.
According to Rahimullah Yusufzai, an analyst on the Pak-Afghan affairs, “Both sides need each other and both sides know it, so there won’t be a break. But, there is no sincerity in the relationship, it is purely opportunistic. So things are bad and will be bad every step of the way.” Pakistan feels that US should be equally responsive if a success is to be attained in the global war on terror. So far there has been one sided affair.

Pakistan has done for the US what all it could do, even at the cost of its national interest. Now US must respect the independence and sovereignty of Pakistan. Its spying agency should not play the double games with Pakistan. However, authorities in Pakistan should safeguard the national interest of Pakistan, and secure the people’s lives at least in our own country. If every American (from President to man in street) was worried for the release of a murderer (Raymond), why we have forgiven him on so many accounts and allowed him an honourable exit.Besides, we are so tolerant a nation to stomach daily drones, killed thousands so far.

In the history of nations, sovereignty and independence are snatched and respected if not cared by others. After all, in the presence of UN Charter, international humanitarian law and global institutions, why should US be allowed to launch drone attacks on Pakistanis, killing thousands and their people on spying mission or visit visas should kill innocent Pakistani nationals.

Just imagine, could US eliminate, invade or even interfere in the tiny Communist state of Cuba, situated next door to it? Therefore, the need of the hour is that we must learn to live as a nation without compromising our respect, nationality, integrity, independence and above all the sovereignty.


-The writer is an analyst of international relations. Email; drmk_edu@yahoo.com
 
Back
Top Bottom