Dynamics of Pakistan-EU relations
Ansar Mahmood Bhatti
Wednesday,June 20,2007
Despite being the world’s emerging economic and political giant, Europe has never been a priority for Pakistan in terms of forging new partnerships and exploring more European markets for our products. Pakistan has to pay a heavy price for its single-track approach in the shape of restrictions on its products and now ban on PIA flights to some European countries. The Europeans would largely disagree with the contention that the ban on PIA flights was a sequel of any retaliatory act, but they had reservations on Islamabad’s decision of buying Boeing planes instead of Airbus. “It is true that the French government was very disappointed in 2003, when PIA decided to order eight Boeing-777s and not A-340, as it has been a trusted customer of the European Airbus. Now you have to know the EU restrictions effect on PIA’s fleet, except its Boeing-777s. This decision has been taken by the European Commission on the unanimous recommendations of the EU Air Safety Committee. It is a decision taken purely on technical grounds,” said Regis de Belenet, the French ambassador to Pakistan, in an interview.
President Musharraf’s meetings with the European Parliament members were part of Pakistan’s efforts towards allaying the Europeans’ apprehensions and persuading them for joint business and investment ventures. He had met the bigguns of the EU, including Commission President Jose Manuel Barraso, Foreign Policy chief Javier Solana, EU Parliament President Josep Borrell and of course the then Belgian Prime Minister. But his most important meeting was with the Union’s Foreign Affairs Committee, which is said to be composed of mostly pro-Indian MPs, strongly in favour of a serious and elaborated engagement with what they call the world’s largest and thriving democracy. Their understanding was that India had the ability of overtaking Japan as the third largest economy in the world in the near future. Chris Patten, former EU Commissioner for External Affairs, once remarked; “If there is a natural partner for Europe in South Asia, then surely it is India.”
The EU Foreign Affairs Committee is a powerful internal body whose recommendations have significant bearing. For example, this committee played a central role in concluding the third Generation Agreement with Pakistan in 2004, after which the EU committed to increase the level of bilateral cooperation, mainly in the fields of science, technology and trade-related matters. The said agreement nevertheless had to come across many turbulent times during the course of formal approval. This was because of the Foreign Affairs Committee’s strong opposition, which wanted to link approval of the improving with the upgradation of human rights and political reforms. But the 9/11 incidents changed many things and Pakistan surfaced as a frontline state in the war against terrorism. The Foreign Affairs Committee was forced to withdraw its demands and allow smooth passage of the third Generation Agreement by the EU Parliament.
Being privy to some such meetings, which took place in Brussels, and a debate on this subject in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, I can share with readers the mistrust and doubts the then foreign affairs committee had about Pakistan’s internal situation, especially after the military takeover in 1999, and its persistent opposition to the signing of the agreement.
After President Musharraf’s interaction with the committee members, things however improved, particularly with regard to EU investments in Pakistan. President Musharraf had made it clear to the committee that Pakistan was an ally and therefore should be treated as such, adding, “We need trade and not aid.” He specifically mentioned two areas where according to him the EU could extend support: one education and another women’s empowerment. He had informed members of the committee that women had 33 percent seats in parliament which, according to him, was a gigantic step towards women’s empowerment in Pakistan. Nonetheless, these two sectors still remain the most neglected areas and despite huge aid, their condition is deteriorating with each passing day. No doubt, 33 percent seats in parliament are occupied by women, but whom actually do they represent? They are in fact a continuation of the same old feudal system, proponents of which take it as their inherent privilege to rule this country.
On the contrary, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, during his meeting with Baroness Emma Nicholson, Chairperson of the European Parliament Foreign Affairs Committee, who visited Islamabad in June 2006 in connection with preparing her report on Kashmir, had said that the European Union should play a meaningful role in facilitating a peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute, adding that it was hampering the normalisation process between Pakistan and India. Shaukat Aziz also recognised that the EU was a flag-bearer of the independence of nations and human rights in the world and it should play its role in ameliorating the suffering of the Kashmiris. The Nicholson report nevertheless has given birth to new controversies with regard to relations between Pakistan and the European Union. I would dilate, in detail, on that report and its aftermath effects in the later part of this article.
Another factor playing a dominant role in straining of relations between the two sides happens to be the casual attitude of our government functionaries, right from top to bottom. A former European ambassador once shared with me an unseemly situation he and his business delegation came across when they were invited to meet Shaukat Aziz. “We reached the meeting place well on time but were made to wait for about half an hour, and then suddenly the prime minister appeared from a corner and rushed straight to his seat without even shaking hands with any of us. Then during the whole proceedings, he treated us like kindergarten kids and as if we were there to beg for something!” The ambassador said that the delegates took a highly negative impression of this whole episode and decided to have second thoughts about their investment plans.
The story does not end here. The OIC foreign ministers’ meeting held in Islamabad was a show that surprised many, particularly the Europeans the most, when the High Commissioner of the Republic of Cyprus was not even allowed to attend the conference. This is for the first time that a country, invited by the organisers, was disallowed from taking part in the conference proceedings. This happened because of Pakistan’s close relations with Turkey and Turkish Cyprus, which is recognised only by Turkey.
Islamabad and Ankara are tied in strong bonds of relationship and their mutual cooperation on all issues has been excellent, yet it does not mean at all that in this pursuit, diplomatic norms and ethics are shelved. Pakistan duly recognises the Republic of Cyprus and therefore should have allowed its High Commissioner to attend the OIC conference as a distinguished guest like others. Cyprus, as we all know, is a member of the European Union and preventing an EU member from participating in an important event is in no way a judicious step and would certainly cast an adverse impact on Pakistan-EU relations.
(To be continued)
The writer is a bilingual columnist based in Islamabad
http://www.thepost.com.pk/OpinionNew...03180&catid=11