Pakistan seeks Russia, South Korea and New Zealand's support for Nuclear Suppliers Group membership

[VCheng]

Just a little correction, the problem is not just that. It is not only about support at this NSG matter and it is more about the lack of trust/support on an international level regarding many issues. However if you want to limit this to NSG may be it will help contain the debate here. So, why don't you go ahead and answer this same question you have just posted.

I was merely trying to keep this thread on topic, that is all.

Q1: Why does Pakistan have no support for its NSG bid?

A1: Pakistan has no support for its NSG bid because it is isolated in the international community.

Q2: Why is Pakistan isolated in the international community?

A2: Pakistan is isolated in the international community because it has failed to offer anything that others find useful to offer something in return.

Q3: Why does Pakistan not have anything to offer that the international community finds useful for mutual benefits?

Your turn.

 

[war&peace]

The current state of our foreign policy is inhibited by the current as well as future state of our economy.

The biggest challenge is the U.S appointing Bharat as its regional sheriff here.

We have two choices here, either submit to this new dynamic and be like what Egypt is to Israel OR put our national interests first, team up with China and make the difficult decisions to make the economy work.

The good news is we won't submit like Israel's Arab neighbors, the bad news is we are not willing to put in the hard yards to really stand-up.

The interesting part is that we know what's or who's stopping us and we know the solutions but we are not ready to take the big step...how unfortunate.

 

[GURU DUTT]

The interesting part is that we know what's or who's stopping us and we know the solutions but we are not ready to take the big step...how unfortunate.

and what is the next bid step and how your going to go for it despite your past baggage ?

 

[Arsalan]

So the question is: Where's your minister for external affairs? Or is there no one because he/she will be a lame duck considering that foreign affairs are fully controlled by the Pak Army?

That is the reason that many like to believe in but it is nothing but a myth. The lace of a proper foreign policy and a foreign minister is solely the incompetence of our government. It is not like the army chief have asked NS not to appoint a FM as he himself will like to go on all those trips and meetings, that is quite lame if you think about it.

 

[VCheng]

That is the reason that many like to believe in but it is nothing but a myth. The lace of a proper foreign policy and a foreign minister is solely the incompetence of our government. It is not like the army chief have asked NS not to appoint a FM as he himself will like to go on all those trips and meetings, that is quite lame if you think about it.

Would such an appointment, were it to happen, come with any real authority to effect changes?

 

[Arsalan]

I was merely trying to keep this thread on topic, that is all.

Q1: Why does Pakistan have no support for its NSG bid?

A1: Pakistan has no support for its NSG bid because it is isolated in the international community.

Q2: Why is Pakistan isolated in the international community?

A2: Pakistan is isolated in the international community because it has failed to offer anything that others find useful to offer something in return.

Q3: Why does Pakistan not have anything to offer that the international community finds useful for mutual benefits?

Your turn.

I wont say that we don't have anything to offer. It is more like we have not offered anything. It is more about the presentation and communication then actual potential. Now one can attribute it to lack of proper policy, good leader to give us the right direction, the overall emotional and somewhat volatile nature of our public or whatever. If these things are dealt with we do have a lot to offer for sure. It is the same Pakistan for crying out loud that the west was best friends with, who was at the front line in cold war, which was called on number of occasions in case of a regional crisis.

Would such an appointment, were it to happen, come with any real authority to effect changes?

Lolz, why not? For sure it will. There is no doubt that a good foreign minister a d a sound foreign policy can and implemented by government, only if they gave it any importance at all.

 

[VCheng]

If these things are dealt with we do have a lot to offer for sure.

Such as?

(Remember these have to be things that others will find useful enough to offer something in return.)

Lolz, why not? For sure it will. There is no doubt that a good foreign minister a d a sound foreign policy can and implemented by government, only if they gave it any importance at all.

Case in point: Pakistan's Defense Minister?

 

[Arsalan]

Such as?

(Remember these have to be things that others will find useful enough to offer something in return.)

Our unique position in the Muslim world of being a nuclear power, our history of being a respected nation among these states and ability to regain that position. The ability to bring them together on different issues.
Our strategic geographic positioning.
Our decades old relations with China and US. As discussed in another thread a few hours ago by @Irfan Baloch , We did played a role in bringing China and US close and bring down the hostilities, there is not reason the future wont see us doing the same again.
Our rapidly expanding market potential
Growing economy, no matter how slow it is but growing and with the base being setup, the potential to grown further.
Being the world 6th largest population, that by no means is a thing to simply ignore. Pakistan is a huge consumer market.
The massive opportunity of investments in energy sector with an ever increase energy requirement and analyzes and studied production potential.


If you want to look at the positive side, believe in that and strive to achieve these goals, there is a lot that can be done. Else one can just sit back and criticize the army the politicians the policies and the public all he wants, that sure wont improve anything either. What do you think?

Case in point: Pakistan's Defense Minister?

What about him?
You understand that the military is responsible to evaluating and selecting the hardware? the ministry will approve those procurement and finalize the terms.

 

[VCheng]

Our unique position in the Muslim world of being a nuclear power, our history of being a respected nation among these states and ability to regain that position. The ability to bring them together on different issues.
Our strategic geographic positioning.
Our decades old relations with China and US. As discussed in another thread a few hours ago by @Irfan Baloch , We did played a role in bringing China and US close and bring down the hostilities, there is not reason the future wont see us doing the same again.
Our rapidly expanding market potential
Growing economy, no matter how slow it is but growing and with the base being setup, the potential to grown further.
Being the world 6th largest population, that by no means is a thing to simply ignore. Pakistan is a huge consumer market.
The massive opportunity of investments in energy sector with an ever increase energy requirement and analyzes and studied production potential.

But none of these have been shown to be useful enough to others to offer something in return.

What about him?
You understand that the military is responsible to evaluating and selecting the hardware? the ministry will approve those procurement and finalize the terms.

Exactly my analogy, if applied to the Foreign Minister too.

 

[OrionHunter]

That is the reason that many like to believe in but it is nothing but a myth. The lace of a proper foreign policy and a foreign minister is solely the incompetence of our government. It is not like the army chief have asked NS not to appoint a FM as he himself will like to go on all those trips and meetings, that is quite lame if you think about it.

Proof that the PA calls the shots in foreign policy is the Pak chief always meeting presidents and Prime ministers when the army chiefs have nothing to do with policy which is the prerogative of an elected democratic government. What business does an army general have with heads and duly elected representatives of other nations?

Can you name me one DEMOCRATIC country that allows their chiefs and sundry generals to hob nob with heads of other nations discussing policy? Shouldn't your defence minister or defence secretary be meeting with foreign dignitaries instead of Raheel Sharif for discussing security and related issues?

Here, for example....

With David Cameron

With Defence Secretary Michael Fallon. Where's your defence minister? Or defence secretary?

With US Secretary of State

With Ghani

With Iranian President Hassan Rouhani

It does seem without a doubt that the PA is calling the shots in Pakistan!

 

[Khan_21]

I have to agree, you guys need a dedicated young,energetic and most importantly an empowered foreign minister who can steer the country from this deadlock . There needs to be a complete recalibration of Pakistani foreign policy vis-a-vis its neighbours and its international partners.
In Afghanistan you have a willing partner in terms of Ashraf Ghani who can address your legitimate concerns, make peace with Afghanistan that is a start I would say. Stop punching above your weight as articulated by Hussain Haqqani, you should not be in eternal state of hostilities with India.
India is just too big for Pakistan as Pakistan is for Afghanistan. Sane logic should dictate our outlook our polices and not so called " Ghairat"

May sound harsh, but this is coming from an Afghan who genuinely wants Pakistan to succeed because that will help Afghanistan succeed.

/Peace

.

Well the difference is both India and Pakistan are on par in alot of fields when considered per capita/person . Pakistan even performs better in alot of indexes like Poverty , Sanitation , Life Happiness , road infrastructure etc etc . Militarily while India is the bigger country the difference is not that vast .

It wasn't until 2008 that they passed us in income . We will narrow that gap soon with CPEC and the recent growing economy .

As for Pak-Afg thing . Both economically and militarily when considered overall and in terms of per capita/person there is no competition .

i agree with the policy thing .

 

[Arsalan]

But none of these have been shown to be useful enough to others to offer something in return.

Have we been able to present the world with this properly? I dont think so. There have been some serious lapses in exploiting our own potential. HOWEVER, this wont mean that we wont be able to do so in future as well.

Exactly my analogy, if applied to the Foreign Minister too.

Well then that is a mistake. Defense minister IS more closed related to military as he is the political authority over the deals the military want (hardware for example). Foreign ministry is not that closely related except for the fact that army being a strong institution and perhaps the most efficient one in our country (no take it as good or bad but sadly this is the truth, also while this do show how good the army have been, more emphasis is on how bad others were) they sure are to give inputs about which states can be good strategic partners and can help with military procurement. It is the government that need to take care of all other matters, like geopolitics.

Proof that the PA calls the shots in foreign policy is the Pak chief always meeting presidents and Prime ministers when the army chiefs have nothing to do with policy which is the prerogative of an elected democratic government. What business does an army general have with heads and duly elected representatives of other nations?

Can you name me one DEMOCRATIC country that allows their chiefs and sundry generals to hob nob with heads of other nations discussing policy? Shouldn't your defence minister or defence secretary be meeting with foreign dignitaries instead of Raheel Sharif for discussing security and related issues?

It does seem without a doubt that the PA is calling the shots in Pakistan!

What kind of reasoning this is?
The army chief meeting with foreign ministers or head of state mean that he is in control? Have you never seen our OM and foreign minister meeting with these same people? you can easily look up a picture of PM meeting each one of these men you shared in pictures. Will that mean that Pakistan is a PM run country? You will see pictures of these with the president (may be not this one ) so that means that we are in a presidential system? Have you not seem the foreign minister or defense minister meeting with these people? In fact, you will find other military figures from other countries meeting politicians as well and that do not means anything.

Understand this, ARMY is a strong institute in our country and therefore is in the lime light but it is a misunderstanding that it is just army calling the shots. COAS meeting with a few people do not means that it he is running the country. You may as well think George Clooney is running USA as there are pictures of him with Barack Obama.

 

[VCheng]

Have we been able to present the world with this properly? I dont think so. There have been some serious lapses in exploiting our own potential. HOWEVER, this wont mean that we wont be able to do so in future as well.

Well then that is a mistake. Defense minister IS more closed related to military as he is the political authority over the deals the military want (hardware for example). Foreign ministry is not that closely related except for the fact that army being a strong institution and perhaps the most efficient one in our country (no take it as good or bad but sadly this is the truth, also while this do show how good the army have been, more emphasis is on how bad others were) they sure are to give inputs about which states can be good strategic partners and can help with military procurement. It is the government that need to take care of all other matters, like geopolitics.

Sometimes it is illuminating to look at things from the other side of the lens:

If Pakistan has anything to offer to the world, but it is not able to present it to the world "properly", then, as far as the world it is concerned, it is only claimed to exist, which may or may not be true.

Similarly, what you describe as the state of affairs is seen by the world as a military holding its nation to ransom by inverting the chain of command. One can try to justify it as much one likes, but that blunt truth will still shine through.

Both issues above are huge problems for Pakistan. And only Pakistan can solve them. If it can.

 

[HAIDER]

Our foreign minister under heart surgery , according to his family. A country without PM/FO for the last few weeks. Damnnn joke. Who going to deal with crucial matters like NSG etc , conference is due on June 26th ...

 

[dadeechi]

Pakistan does not even have a FM....After three years of the "tajurba kar" team took over. I'm fasting otherwise a few 4-lettered words for them..
How can you expect to get support from these countries while you did not even bother to engage them previously. The world outside Pakistan does not run on adhoc basis or at whims and wishes of individuals; it takes time, dedication and efforts through smart diplomacy. Though I wish that Pakistan gets NSG membership but not much expectations. Perhaps we are up for a surprise...who knows

As I said in another thread

While India was busy with the Jaswant-Strobe talks right after the nuclear tests, Pakistan was busy with the military coup & sanctions.

While India entered into a defence agreement with US, Pakistan was busy with WoT.

While India was closing 1-2-3 agreement, Pakistan was busy with 26/11 and it's fallout.

While India was busy getting NSG waiver, Pakistan was busy outsmarting US in Afghanistan.

While India was upgrading its relations with US as part of DTTI, Pakistan moved completely into the lap of China through CPEC.

In spite of lack of engagement of US by Pakistan, US did entertain the nuclear deal talks with Nawaz Sharif government in 2015. With Pakistan's dubious record on nuclear proliferation (Libya, North Korea & Iran), US offered the NSG deal to Pakistan provided Pakistan joins NPT, CTBT & FMCT.

Pakistan declined the offer.

At the end of the day it was purely the failure of Pakistan's establishment and foreign policy which could not close the deal with the US.

Rather than Pakistan acting as a cry baby and trying to rock India's NSG apple cart, it should introspect where it went wrong and what needs to be done to rectify and bring their policies back on track.

India's message to China was clear

1) Do not link India's NSG case with that of Pakistan

2) Gave assurance to China that India would not object to Pakistan's NSG application in future as and when it comes up for review once India is part of NSG.

Now the ball is completely in Pakistan's court to ensure that they obtain the support of remaining 47 members.

Rather than expending its political capital on preventing India's membership, Pakistan should have used it for attaining it's own membership. This desperation indicates that Pakistan has lost all the hope for it's case and hell bent on retaining the parity with India by preventing India's membership.

Very unfortunate indeed..