Speaking at a press conference in Islamabad, Nisar said the presence of a foreign military base in Pakistan, established during Pervez Musharraf’s government, was never objected to by the present government.
Commenting on the resolution of parliament’s policy over future terms of engagement with the US, Nato and Isaf, Nisar said that he and his party object to the clause regarding the presence of a foreign base in the country, along with some other clauses.
“Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani and other stakeholders also agreed with my point and said this is doable,” he added.
Nisar further said many other clauses of the resolution were very good for the country and should be implemented.
He, however, said that the problem is not with passing this resolution but with its implementation.
“We agree with the resolution wholeheartedly but we are only concerned about its implementation,” Nisar said, adding that many such resolutions have been passed in the past but they are not implemented yet.
Criticising media for presenting him as a hindrance in the way of this resolution, Nisar said he is only against the humiliation of Pakistan and not the resolution.
“We want guarantee that this resolution will be implemented,” he reiterated.
Nisar added that “people who are criticising us now for causing delay, will criticise us again when the parliament will fail to implement it.”
COMMENTS (50)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1713957765-0/BeFunky-collage-(1)1713957765-0-270x192.webp)
1713853507-0/MalalaHilary-(2)1713853507-0-270x192.webp)
Yes definitely but only those countries which leaders are conscience sellers or which leaders' conscience has died or sold.
@tcpipsau: infact french troops, at the behest of KSA liberated macca in 70's when radicals took over the place
Its not uncommon where you have an elite establishment with extremely different values from a majority whom they internally consider a threat. Pakistan meets that criteria to a T
@Jibran:
Pakistan would therefore be in good company if it allows foreign bases onn its soil!!Q.E.D.
Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda have had bases in Pakistan where they set up education and training for their 'troops'. Those bases are (were) just as foreign as the American bases. They have launched operations against Pakistan from those bases. Our armed forces have protected those bases just as they protect American bases. Just because they are not American bases, we turn a blind eye to them, perhaps treat them as "not so foreign" and have a million excuses ready to defend their presence.
Raj, where does India's bases come into play? honestly man, do you not have a hobby in the "USA"?
@Blithe:
Raymond Davis was in Kot Lakhpat jail not Larkana jail. Punjab Government had him in their possession and without their consent he could not have left. No pint beating about the bush or blaming anyone else.
@Umer: Check your facts . Raymond Davis passport is still with Punjab Government. So Punjab Government not complicit.
Raymond was released by General Pasha. He got an extention immediately after the release.
@ Afghan Karachitte When are you and your other fellow Afghans leaving Pakistan ? Its easy to sit on net and appear retarded but do you remember when millionos if you came to this country and how you have ruined it with your weapons, drungs, etc.
Yet you have courage to open mouth about Pakistan ! Sold out, no ?
@R. Roy: You mean just like Mumbai attacks, when your intelligence agencies and navy were sleeping?
That line coming from someone in a government is funny. He just lost all credibility concerning foreign insights. That's a Malik level blunder.
Most of the USA bases abroad are now plannedto be closed down. No monero, audios gringos. Back to Juranemo land of Apachees!
Rex Minor
"Would any sovereign country allow another country to have a military base on its land, questioned Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan" Yes from Gen Ayub the first military dictator to the last Gen Mush, Pakistan has gladly allowed US bases. Not only that they were full function bases to fly spy planes. Nothing is new in this regard and no surprises there. I am not saying what is good or bad for the country simply stating facts.
Now I know why Pakistan goes one step forward ,two steps sideways and three steps back ward.The former coalition partner turn opposition leader( if there is any) needs to be reminded about U2 base at Peshawar. Either U2 was a Pakistani spy network or Peshawar is not in Pakistan.What about the period between 1980. To 1988 .Well never mind they are history.After all US and Pakistan have had love and hate relationships history. Whether we like it or not US did help and assist Pakistan in many ways and one can not deny this fact.Counter argument would be they did it to serve their own interest.So does all other countries.
@blithe:
As they were in the way of handing over Raymond Davis? Somehow I think the results would be the same; PML N will outwardly make noises but in reality would be on board to please uncle sam.
Off course Pakistan will.......
@Truth: I would not be overly concearned whith enemy's rear insted pikistan should watch it's own rear by the looks it is about to get violated once again --- NO PUN :-)
@Mohammad Ali Siddiqui:
they are also not asking for hand out from every one in the world including India( $10 mill.2010 )
@Elie Khan: why do pakistanis have Base in saudi arab & africa ( although small onein sub saharan africa 750 men 8 war planes ect. )
Pakistan should keeps itself away from Afghan war. It has already turned our country into a situation which is worst than Afghanistan. Why to support Afghan war at the cost of our own country??
To attack their own country ? Ermm then its Pakistan only :d Afghanistan and Iraq case are different since they were invaded, not approved by their Govts. Here in Pak, most of the drones used to fly from Shamsi base. Drone attack rate has gone done because now, it has been closed.
Of course all the middle east is filled with american bases what is he talking about!! LOSER!! kuwait has it Saudi has it, UAE has it, Qatar has it,
Befriend US and rest of the world and prosper. Rid yourself of terror and hate and prosper. Help yourself and prosper. Giving US bases is not a problem, problem is giving them bases and then supporting those who intend to attack those bases. Pakistan needs to decide where does it stand and then be rewarded or face the consequences once and for all.
India also has its first Air Force Base in Ayni, Tajikistan where it has already deployed MI-17 helicopters and is planning to station MIG-29 fighter jets.
@Mohammad Ali Siddiqui: "I don’t consider any country as sovereign state if it has a foreign country’s base whether military, air-force or navy." Let me ask you, which is a more accurate measure of sovereignty: allowing a foreign country to operate a base on your land subject to agreed terms and conditions, or losing all control of a large portion of your territory, and sitting back and watching while foreigners from all over the world enter your country with impunity to train, plan and launch violent attacks, both within your country and against other countries?
What is the definition of a sovereign state? in modern times only ones with economic power can call them self as sovereign states! so base or no base, we will have to listen and do what our pay master ask us to do.
Also bases in nations with high self-esteem, discipline and belief in hard-work like Japan, don't matter much. We as a nation are focusing on things that do & will not matter given our social and economic decline. Till we not change our-self will can not demand respect. Freedom does not comes as a virtue, it has to be earned and preserved.
Coming back to the debate, I support drone attacks as they have helped to clean our Pak-land with foreign terrorists, something our forces and politicians are incapable off. Yes, we have suffered collateral damage, but the same is far less then what we have suffered from suicide bombers.
And when comes to NATO supplies, we should inform US that the same can only be possible provided we get nuclear deal like one given to India, as well as trade favours and write-off of our debt. The key is here to find the right price to charge US (same has to be just a bit lower then the cost of air-transport) - here we need to remember that if US wants it can and will ship all the stuff it needs in Afghanistan, with or without us.
Pakistan Zindabad
@Truth:
On second thought why not. Do you think it should go before or after a motorbike for everyone in PAK? I think it should go before as who knows if the PAK navy could secure the necessary supplies lines need to support PAK forces...
You mean other than Bulgaria, Israel, Germany, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, South Korea, Kosova, Bahrain, Cuba, Brazil, Djibouti, Greece, Guam, Spain, UAE, Afghanistan, Greenland, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Portugal, Turkey, UK, Netherlands, Oman and the rest of the +100 countries whose names I'm too lazy to type?
No.
PML N is the only party stading in front of the supplies in the parliment.
Full marks to Ch Nisar.
@Truth: You realize of course that Diego Garcia Naval and Airbase are British. This would be much like the US demanding PAK provide a US base in Iran. But it is good to note that you consider India to be an enemy. Just who is not an enemy of PAK?
@Mohammad Ali Siddiqui:
Are you being argumentative or are you just that ignorant? The US has basing rights with other nations because they share the same security concerns. The US policy is to be forward deployed. Looking at a world map you might notice the US is separate from its potential security threats why vase bodies of water. The nations it shares bases with normally are not so fortunate.
Beggars are not choosers. We need to stand on our feet first and collect taxes. Where rich are subsidized by poor there is no chance of getting out of the US demand. These politicians are not implementing tax system as it hurt them most.
Aren't they allow those who take Billions of dollars Aid?
Why Arabs are acceptable to give bases (even for hunting wildlife) and US/NATO are not? UAE had further let the Shamsi base to Americans, why that was acceptable to Pakistan Army and political parties?
I don't consider any country as sovereign state if it has a foreign country's base whether military, air-force or navy.
My question is: does US allow any foreign military, air-force or navy base on its own soil?
Yes . Japan,Germany,UK,Bahrain,Qatar etc have US bases.
Yes. If you get a considerable amount of money in both civil and military aid from that country, you certainly have to allow it's bases in your country too.
Well well well.... look at the comments ... so you people want to have foreign airbases on our soil thats why mentioning other countries... Shame on YOU POEPLE!
We want freedom from foreign Masters and should Appreciate the Solid Stance of Chaudhry Nisar and PMLN !!!
we should keep seperate our self from war on terror and we should even not at all allow operation of any of the element against NATO forces. pure neutrl approach will helpful in the longer run.......
@Jibran: Was gonna say the same
They all needed bases, we dont need foriegn soldiers on our soil..
Also I would like to add Japan to the list of Gibran. Qatar in fact has the whole US Naval fleet and so does Japan in Okinawa..
Saudi has not only allowed bases in their land but also foreign troops to be stationed in mecca and madina during the first gulf war.
All set to restore supplies
Many countries do, Turkey, Germany, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Belgium, Holland, Polland, Italy, Kuwait, KSA, Australia, Panama, Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, Bulgaria, Israel, Behrain, Cuba, Guam, Greece, UAE, Kyrgyzstan, Oman, Qatar, Pakistan, UK.
Yes the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would.