Reconfiguring foreign policy: After showing intent, opposition defers debate

PML-N and JUI-F lash out at govt; Raza Rabbani defends draft.

Qamar Zaman March 28, 2012


A day after it was ignored, debate on proposals for reconfiguration of foreign policy showed up in Parliament on Tuesday – but momentarily.

Stiff resistance marked Tuesday’s proceedings of the joint session of Parliament where a belligerent opposition briefly voiced its first concerns before once again deferring debate on the matter.

The government, however, attempted to assuage the opposition’s concerns, saying it will not take any unilateral decisions in this regard.

The recommendations were drafted by an all-party, bicameral parliamentary panel in the wake of worsening relations between Pakistan and the United States.

“I assure [you] that whatever resolution is passed by this house would not be the decision of mere treasury benches,” said Senator Raza Rabbani, head of Parliamentary Committee on National Security (PCNS), which prepared the recommendations.

Opposition tirade

Earlier, Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan pointed out the opposition’s objections, clause by clause.  “These recommendations are not enforceable,” Nisar said, highlighting clauses referring to drone attacks, private security contractors and foreign intelligence operatives in Pakistan, overt or covert operations, and use of airbases by a foreign country.

Nisar also questioned the implementation of Parliament’s decisions.

Pointing out a clause that called for bringing to justice those responsible for the Salala attack, which killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last November, Nisar said the US has denied taking any action in this regard.

“What would be the worth of parliament if we pass these recommendations,” he said.

Maulana Fazlur Rehman, chief of the eponymous faction of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl, also launched a tirade on the matter.

“I warn [the government], if you pass any such resolution unilaterally, we will not let you implement it,” he said.

Linking the resumption of Nato supply route to an apology from the US is the easy way out, he said, adding that the US would do whatever it takes to serve its purpose.

Responding to the oppositions’ objections, Senator Rabbani said these recommendations were not given by the government but by an all-party parliamentary panel.

“The government would not have blocked the Nato supply, [and] got Shamsi airbase vacated if it wanted to satisfy the US,” he said.

On implementation of previous parliamentary resolutions, Rabbani said he had reports of the foreign, defence and interior ministries and can share them with the house.

The opposition was not the only one that criticised the panel, though.

Senator Farhatullah Babar of the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party said that the proceedings of the PCNS were “unwisely wrapped under a cloak of secrecy.”

“By doing so, the committee deprived itself of the wisdom of the people and civil society,” he said.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 28th, 2012.


Face the Truth | 9 years ago | Reply

@MarkH: Why to be tagged as an enemy? PAK fought this war to bring justice to all the culprits and had to pay a heavy price, a lot of civilians losing their lives and far worst also to bear the US attitude especially incidents like the Salala Post attack and the recent act of US Army to poor children and their families in Afghanistan. Is any action taken against these people or was this act justified? Any apology issued by US President? Dont you think Pakis have feelings too or is it just the Americans? and do you guys even know the meaning of soverignity or soverign state after messing up so many states? cuz if you did things wouldnt have reached the point that they have today.

Cautious | 9 years ago | Reply

@Billoo Bhaya. How exactly is IK going to shoot down drones? Your civilian govt has no control over your military and your military leaders know the downside of shooting at American's.

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


Most Read