Notes: Foreign Policy and Relations of Pakistan

[rose_pak]

Here I am starting this thread to make notes about foreign policy of Pakistan as well as her relations with different countries. the extracts would be, normally, from dawn. I will paste my notes here.

[rose_pak]

Pakistan will have to come clear to its neighbors including Afghanistan, Russia, Iran and India and delink itself from historical strategic doctrines to take advantage of its regional potential for economic development.

Ambassador (r) Tariq Fatemi has hoped President Zardari will be able to open a new chapter with Russia in his forthcoming visit to Moscow.

He said Russia needs to be assured that “we will not create trouble in Central Asia, not keep Afghanistan on the boil and also have no interest in creating problems for India.” Fatimi warned that there wouldn’t be any improvement in Pak-Russia relations if Pakistan continues to see Russia through the prism of US.

“Pakistan made a mistake by formulating its policy towards Afghanistan on the basis of ethnic divide”, former foreign secretary Riaz Muhammad Khan said adding, “the United States too committed the mistake of declaring the Taliban beyond the page and lumping them together with Al Qaeda.”

Dr Rifaat Hussain said that many Pakistanis believe that Pakistan’s traditional relations with US had not been very productive and giving us a niche in the world affairs and Central Asia is one of the reasons with which Islamabad should forge cordial relations with CA.

[rose_pak]

There is a lack of direction in the domestic, regional and global strategies that often contradict one another.

According to the western profile of Pakistan’s foreign policy, the country wants to put the Taliban in Kabul in any post-Nato arrangement.

It supports the operations of armed non-combatants in Afghanistan and India. It abets the militant discourse of jihadi parties through education and media within Pakistan. It continues to operate as a place for the training of potential terrorists abroad.

This ugly profile has cast its grim shadow on several aspects of national life.

First, it has dried up foreign investment that has brought down the rate of growth to less than two per cent in recent years.

Second, it has isolated the country. Major western airlines have withdrawn from Pakistan. The diplomatic community is under siege in Islamabad, which has rendered Pakistan a non-family station. The image of a ‘failed state’ has stuck to Pakistan despite the best efforts of diplomats, scholars and media persons.

Third, the country has suffered from religious and sectarian cleavages. It has become a battleground for rival ambitions of Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Finally, and most gruesomely, Pakistan is understood as an exporter of terrorism. Both India and Afghanistan have been critical of Pakistan on this count, with Iran occasionally incensed. China came down heavily on its Islamic insurgents who were allegedly supported by elements from Pakistan.

The current foreign policy has failed. There is a need to revamp our foreign policy objectives and the means to achieve them. The predominant current of thought in the country understands the whole issue in terms of the dichotomy between Islam and the West underscored by the spirit of the Crusades and concerns about national sovereignty, Indian designs in Afghanistan and the US-India nuclear alliance.

What is required is a change in evaluation of the country’s national interest along realistic lines. The state must shun reliance on non-state combatants in pursuit of its policy.

[rose_pak]

Pakistan and Afghanistan have set up a multi-lateral joint commission for establishing peace in Afghanistan. PM, COAS and Pasha visited Afghanistan in Apr 2011.

What is wrong with the policy?

The Afghans still believe that Pakistan is part of the problem and the distrust of the security establishment is the product of Islamabad`s flawed Afghan policies pursued for decades particularly during military-led regimes. The policy of insisting on excluding others, particularly its Afghan neighbours, from the peace process is being perceived in Afghanistan as Pakistan`s move to impose its own brand of a solution. If the past is any guide, such unilateral moves not only fail but, in most cases, backfire, inviting more trouble for the people. Pakistan, no doubt, has stakes in the Afghan conflict but it does not mean that others do not.

What strategy should be adopted?

If Pakistan wants to seriously make a positive contribution, it needs to adopt and support an all-inclusive-approach that involves regional and international stakeholders. Iran, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the European Union, Britain, the US and Nato all have stakes and established proxies inside Afghanistan. Each one has the ability to scuttle any peace process if not taken into confidence. In the current scenario, it would be naïve of Pakistan to shoulder the entire responsibility of reaching out to the Taliban. Instead, to avoid any humiliation in future, Pakistan should campaign for engaging all the stakeholders including India in the process of forming any set-up in Afghanistan. Ideally, Pakistan and Afghanistan must convince the UN to take the front seat in the reconciliation process. Here the international body needs to adopt a realistic all-inclusive-approach.

[rose_pak]

MFN Status for India – April talks
PAKISTAN has expressed its intention to extend the Most Favoured Nation status to India. At the end of a Pakistan-India meeting in Bhurban, Pakistan’s commerce secretary “assured” the Indians of the coveted tag by October this year. There appears to be no mention of an Indian wish for a transit route to Afghanistan and beyond, and Pakistan says it did not raise the issue of Indian opposition to the EU decision to provide duty-free access to Pakistani goods. This brings out the truly bilateral nature of the two-day talks. The details say Islamabad has conditioned the grant of the preferential treaty on the removal of non-tariff barriers by India.

Thus the MFN status is the milestone the current Pakistani and Indian negotiators are looking for right now, and they will claim they have earned it through assiduous work and breaking old taboos. The two countries have taken a long time to have an earnest discussion on trading items such as electricity and petroleum products. They promise to do so in the coming months. Advancing to the MFN stage may, to an extent, depend on the progress made in these areas which have a special significance for Pakistan. Pakistanis will also be keeping a close eye on how many non-tariff barriers India can remove. An official count in 2007 suggested that there were 27 such barriers, including an Indian reluctance to give visas to Pakistani businessmen. To end suspicions and for building confidence among businessmen these halters must go.

[rose_pak]

From Balance of power to Balance of terror

Nuclear weapons are the key element in the concept of deterrence. It is presumed that such deterrence will achieve a balance of terror that can provide a semblance of peace. The problem with nuclear weapons is that they can only serve the aim of national security if they deter, but never get used. As soon as nuclear weapons get used they become a means of self destruction for both protagonists, since the use by one induces a retaliatory response by the other. After all, mutually assured destruction (MAD) is the defining feature of nuclear deterrence. Yet, if deterrence based on a nuclear arsenal is to achieve the declared objective of preventing aggression, then as New Zealand-born Canadian weapons researcher Theon Te Koeti has argued: “It must reasonably be assumed that there is a possibility of it being used.” So while the possibility of nuclear war is integral to deterrence, the question of ‘peace’ hinges on reducing the probability of nuclear war.

Probability of nuclear attack in the sub continent:

There are three defining features of the India-Pakistan situation which imply a high probability of an accidental or deliberate nuclear war, thereby making deterrence in this context unstable:

(a) The flying time of nuclear missiles between India and Pakistan is less than five minutes. This induces a tendency for first use of nuclear weapons in a situation where war is considered by any one state as imminent.

(b) The unresolved Kashmir dispute and the emerging water disputes, fuel tensions between the two countries and make them susceptible to disinformation about each other’s intentions.

(c) Intra-state social and political conflicts, feed off each other and exacerbate interstate tensions. These tensions have an explosive potential due to the belief in each country, that terrorism and insurgencies within it are being supported by the security apparatus of the other country.

In the current situation, another Mumbai style attack on an Indian city could induce a conventional military response from India, which could quickly escalate to a nuclear war. If India made limited territorial gains at a number of points along the border under their ‘Cold Start’ doctrine, it could induce the use of tactical nuclear weapons by Pakistan on Indian troops within its territory. Under the Indian nuclear doctrine (as indicated by Defence Minister George Fernandes in 2002), in such an eventuality, a full scale nuclear attack on Pakistan would be launched. Apart from this, since most of Pakistan’s major cities are within less than 100 kilometres of the border with India, loss of one or more of these cities following a conventional assault could spark a nuclear response.

[rose_pak]

Pak – India Trade Relations by Dr Ishrat Hussain

World trade in 2009 amounted to $12 trillion. The size of Pakistan’s domestic market is only $180 billion.

India has a middle class of about 300 million people with rising purchasing power that matches that of South Eastern Europe while Pakistan’s middle class is approximately 30 million. A 10 percent penetration into the Indian middle class market would double the market size for Pakistani companies and businesses.

State Bank of Pakistan study in 2005 estimated that the volume of trade could rise five times from the actual one billion dollars.

there are 2,646 common items of Pakistan’s imports that India exports while At the same time 1,181 items are common between India’s imports and Pakistan’s exports – Gains for both

why is trade between the two countries so low – less than one percent of Indian exports and less than five percent of Pakistani imports. The volume of bilateral trade has not exceeded two billion dollars (the total volume of Indian and Pakistani exports is around $200 billion).

1. Political trust deficit
2. Protection of local industry
3. Weak regional economic integration forces

Suggestions to promote trade

Resumption of economic relations should be allowed without any pre-conditions and without the countries giving up their respective positions. Composite dialogue should carry on at the same time to resolve the disputes and disagreements.

• Pakistan should grant MFN treatment to India while India should reduce its tariffs on agriculture commodities, textiles and other goods that are of potential value to Pakistan.

• Both countries should reactivate SAFTA (signed 2004 – implemented in 2006) and agree on a phasing out of the sensitive list over next few years. A restrictive list would nullify all the potential gains of preferential trade access.

• Technical barriers to Trade (TBT), Sanitary and Phyto Sanitary Measures (SPS) that are in fact, acting as powerful deterrents to exchange of goods should be rationalized and simplified. These are, in fact, non-tariff barriers that hinder the flow of goods.

• Trade facilitation through expeditious border crossings, new border crossings, quick custom clearance, telecommunication, improved transport links, shipping protocols, easing visa restrictions for businessmen should be carried out immediately. Railway, air and road connections between the two countries should be increased.

• Opening of Banks in both countries

• Institutions to manage and facilitate trade integration such as setting standards, quality control, technical regulations, material testing should be strengthened and made user friendly.

• Harmonization in legal regulations for investor protection, contract and IP Rights enforcement, labour relations, would promote relocation of industries within the region as the expanded market size and mobility of goods and services would result in economies of scale}

[sqjafery]

Pakistan will cooperate with China to overcome terrorism and secessionism, cited Asif Ali Zardari, the Pakistani President. Zardari repeated Pakistan’s pledge to get rid of extremism and he promised China of his nation’s full cooperation in overcoming terrorism and secessionism, reported Associated Press of Pakistan. The Pakistani president landed in China in late August to be present at the first China-Eurasia Expo to be hosted by Urumqi, the capital of Xinjiang, in the first week of September. He alleged Pakistan denounces terrorism in all its types and appearances and will not relax on any attempt to get rid of it. Zardari also talked about his daughters were on board with him on the trip, which is a testimony of the relationships between the two nations existing since generations. He further talked about the upcoming trip of Pakistan Peoples Party chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari to China later on this week to be present at the International Political Conference and assumed it demonstrates Pakistan and China were making efforts to fortify relations and ultimately deep-rooting their international polity.