Pakistan snubs Cameron visit: Reports

Reports say British PM David Cameron's request to visit Pakistan was snubbed, Foreign Office says reports are false.


Ppi December 08, 2010

LONDON: British Prime Minister David Cameron’s attempt to mend fragile relations with Pakistan have been dashed after he was snubbed by Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, UK Daily Mail reported on Wednesday.

Pakistan's Foreign Office denied that a visit to to the country had been denied to the British Prime Minister. Foreign Office spokesperson Abdul Basit, while talking to Express 24/7 denied the claims, saying that Cameron is welcome to visit Pakistan.

Cameron wanted to visit the country to try and patch up contact with Pakistan, after he said the country “faced both ways on terror” during a visit to India. He had asked to go to Islamabad, on his way to Afghanistan. But his attempt to invite himself ended in a firm refusal, as Prime Minister Gilani said he did not want to be ‘tagged on’ to a visit to Afghanistan, according to the Daily Mail. Cameron often tries to squeeze several countries into a single foreign visit, as busy PM has to try and deal with the recession and cuts agenda at home.

His last trip to the region ended with Cameron causing great offence, first to Pakistan for casting doubt on its commitment to fighting terror, and second to Israel for criticizing their treatment of Palestinians while he was addressing Turkey.

He tried to arrange the visit a month ago. At press conference in Presidential Palace in Kabul, Cameron failed to repeat his controversial remark that Pakistan faced “both ways on terror.” He hailed Pakistan’s “progress” in clearing up terrorism camps in Swat valley.

Whitehall sources admitted that, “They said timing wasn’t great for them. They were not sure the Prime Minister would be there.”

Cameron also had to sidestep embarrassing questions over Wikileaks files, in which President Karzai had questioned effectiveness of British forces in Helmand province. British PM shrugged off comments as not relevant and referring to a time when British troops were deployed too thinly across the region.

“If you look back to 2006, 2007, 2008, it's clear now that we didn't have enough troops in Helmand to deliver the security that was necessary,” Cameron said. “Of course there are frustrations... but relationship between last premier, this prime minister and Hamid Karzai is strong.”

Cameron also raised possibility of troops being withdrawn from early next year. “We are cautiously optimistic we have right strategy. We are now a year or so into that. We have put in resources to back up that strategy which has a very clear focus, a focus on national security.”

Questioned by Afghan media about how Britain could use its influence with Islamabad to stop Islamic schools (madrassas), Cameron said that “we do have a very long term relationship with Pakistan. One of our largest embassies anywhere in the world is in Islamabad.'

President Karzai had to sidestep questions over why he had been disparaging over British troops in WikiLeaks cables. “Britain remained a steadfast supporter of Afghanistan. WikiLeaks documents are having some truths and some not so truths in them. Britain has contributed in its sacrifice of its soldiers... for which Afghan people are grateful.”

COMMENTS (37)

Anoop | 13 years ago | Reply @G.Khan, Why Indian repeatedly voted for the Gandhis? Beats me. But, they did. It might be a combination of local politics, a great regard for Nehru, a great regard for the Congress party(a party that played a role in Indian independence), a strong leader,etc. But, my point stands. Indian people voted for them. When Indira Gandhi imposed the emergency the elections after that she lost by a HUGE margin. People with "mental submission" to Indira Gandhi voted her out. They were the same people who voted her in. You expect democracy to work in straight lines, to be very logical. Sometimes you just cant predict it. Gandhi's weren't the only people who have become PMs. Manmohan Singh, Lal Bahadur Shastri, Morarji Desai, Narasimha Rao,etc, have become PMs who are not from the Gandhi Family. The only point that should matter is India is growing like never before and it is stable, even though it is situated in an ocean of instability around it. "Even in Musharraf time we had a growth rate of 7% ." --> Pakistan never touched the figure of 7%. I think I've already shown you that. http://www.indexmundi.com/pakistan/gdprealgrowth_rate.html Pakistan's average growth rate hovers around the 5% mark in his time. Considering the IMF and NATO aid you can easily see why Pakistan achieved even that 6% mark. If you factor in high population growth of 2.5% then you can see Pakistan has grown much slower than you think.
Himanshu Mehta | 13 years ago | Reply Few years ago a great indian leader had called Britain a third rate global. He didn't realize then that Britain had more clout than us, a better living standard than us. Why, we need the Britain to endorse our claim to the permanent seat at the UNSC no matter how third rate a power it might be. The British let the remarks go cause by now most world leaders know that they will get their way and the contracts if they massage the ego of the indian leadership. Cameroon may have wanted to make up with pakistan cause of being stuck in afghanistan and cause of the sizable pakistani vote bank in Britain.
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ