it's not like something that "beggars cannot be choosers"...in International relations one must follow the Realistic approach, we cannot block that route permanently as there are more than 40 countries operation in ISAF, we cannot confront all of them at least, i do not support that govt but because of Public opinion it is appreciable that at least we blocked that route for 4 months...

ON Friday, the city of Chicago, will host the Nato summit. When the leaders invited to the summit arrive in the city, both maritime and airspace restrictions will already be in place.

Lakeshore Drive, one of Chicago’s main thoroughfares in the city will be closed completely. The electronic Metra train that transports hundreds of thousands of busy commuters everyday will close several stations affecting millions of passengers over the course of the three-day restrictions.

Those who will be able to get on the trains will not be able to take with them backpacks or food or drink; the only bags permitted will be a single briefcase-sized bag, no larger than 15 by 15 inches.

Pakistanis would have felt sorry for the commuters of Chicago, all the other people on the opposite side of the globe just trying to get through their day lugging groceries home for dinner or getting to school or work, if their own humdrum lives had not been held hostage to Nato’s whims and wishes not for a week or a month but for years.

Now, with the unpredictability of a second-grader arranging a nursery school party, Nato has been shifting Pakistan from the ‘invited’ to the ‘uninvited’ column for the past fortnight.

Earlier, Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen indicated that Pakistan would not be invited to attend the Nato summit because of its refusal to open the Nato supply routes through the country.

Then on May 15, 2012, with Pakistan hinting at opening the routes, the golden invitation was instantly deposited at its door.As far as the commuters of Chicago are concerned, perhaps the temporary constraints of their blocked-up and traffic-jammed city can lead them to consider the impositions Nato demands of other countries.

When standing in line for crowded buses, or spending hours in traffic jams near cordoned-off roads, they could consider, for example, the condition of commuters in Karachi who have faced far worse as one political party and then another held protest after protest against opening the supply route.

They would be doing so exactly a year to the day when one such protest held by the Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaf brought traffic to a complete standstill. The temperature in Karachi that day was recorded at 45 degrees Celsius.If the extreme heat and regularity of Nato-related political tumult fails to garner any sympathy, perhaps some Chicago dwellers can consider the other consequences borne by those who have the misfortune of living in the path of Nato convoys.

What supplies a war becomes part of the war, and in the years in which the convoys have been permitted to pass through Pakistan ambushes, riots and hijackings have accompanied them.

In December last year, a gang of armed gunmen attacked one Nato convoy in Balochistan and set it ablaze killing the driver and terrifying the residents of Quetta. In another attack a year earlier in June, seven people were killed as convoys were attacked by armed militants as they made their way to the Chaman border.Those are just the direct consequences of attacks on the convoys.

In the first week of May, police officers combating militants in the violence that wracked the Lyari area of Karachi, reported that many of the weapons used against them was procured from hijacked Nato convoys.

According to news reports published in a local newspaper, police officers involved in the grisly firefights which killed over 30 people and lasted for a week, said that the rocket launchers and other arms could be traced to the arms shipments meant for Nato troops in Afghanistan.

Another report from McClatchy newspapers asserted that the P226, a 9mm semiautomatic pistol used by Nato troops in Afghanistan, was also being used by members of the terrorist group Lashkar-i-Jhangvi in gun battles against security forces in Balochistan.

In reality it is unlikely that any of these things will be considered by Americans in Chicago or anywhere else in a country happily insulated from the wars it wages in other people’s backyards.

Just as the Nato secretary-general insisted on saying that the supply route is “blocked” bossily implying the existence of some pre-existing right possessed by his organisation to pass through any country, few in the US have paused to assess the supply issue as one imposing a security cost on Pakistan.

If they did they would note that few or no Americans would permit their neighbourhood roads to be used to transport dangerous criminals or drugs or weapons from one place to another. The danger would be that escaped criminals or those wishing to procure drugs or guns would resort to violence when they became aware of the route, endangering everyone who lived or worked or went to school nearby.

According to Nato, that right it seems belongs only to the citizens of wealthy countries that make up the organisation; it is only they who can object, disallow, ban and forbid the use of their own territory when it involves inviting danger into their immediate environment. For lesser people, Pakistanis and Afghans, such reservations invite accusations of intractability, of collusion with the terrorists themselves.

It is time that the issue of the Nato supply route began to be evaluated not simply in terms of how crucial the supplies are for US forces battling the Taliban in Afghanistan, but the danger it creates for ordinary Pakistanis forced to facilitate its passage through their war-ridden backyards.

Perhaps as they sit and decide the future of the region, Nato officials can take a moment to consider that the ‘supply route’ is not a road suspended in air and one prong of their elaborate war-mongering strategies but a path through a country populated by real, living people who weep when they are hurt and bleed when they are killed.
by :Rafia zakaria
The writer is an attorney teaching political philosophy and constitutional law.

__________________
jo rukey tou koh-e-gran they hm, jo chley to jan se guzr gaey!!

NATO supply routes should be opened after completion of demands made by the Parliament. Drone attacks should be stopped as its is sheer violation of sovereignty & territorial integrity of Pakistan

when pakistan goes to IMF and then implements it's policies for the loan it gets, don't you think that it is also violation of sovereignty. and what about the groups that were operating from FATA with complete immunity, do not you think that they too were violating sovereignty. similarly the punjabi taliban in south punjab and the sectarian outfits in balochistan are also doing the same. when the state fails to implement it's writ, then it has already ceded the so called sovereignty. many surveys have been carried out in which it has been mentioned that opposition of drones becomes stronger as we move away from the areas where these drones are actually operating. it means that people of FATA actually support these drones because it eliminates the terrorist hideouts. still i think that there should be some kind of drone partnership and technology transfer, so that pakistan can own these attacks. the number of civilians killed in 2011 in drones is less than the number of people killed in Karachi. so the government/people need to open their eyes, and make a realistic assessment of the elements that really violate our sovereignty.

You are presenting things out of context

First taking loan is not a sovereignty issue. It is just to ease out fiscal pressure. And it has to be returned. You could then point out why Pakistan imports wheat in case. Now Pakistan takes load & returns it. Although to some extent conditions could be humiliating ( that is also because of pathetic economic policies) but comparing it with attack is childish.

You second point is weak writ government. Thst's Pakistan Issue not the issue of Americans. Paksitan has to decide what is best for us( Although you are right that writ must be strong in any case), but it can't give Americans any authority to violate our territorial integrity. If army of 40 countries could not control infiltration in Afghanistan, how Pakistan could be blamed for weaker writ. And people of FATA never support drone attacks, which is killing innocent women, men & children. A

And you are right that we need to set our own house in order, but we can't let other to set our house according to their wishes.

dear , regarding your second point , it is the issue of americans when there are cross border attacks from fata into afghanistan. we need to wake up to reality, OBL was living under our umbrella and all we could do was protest when the americans killed him. similarly i suggest you to read Irfan hussain's book Fatal fault lines or read his articles that will show you the number of people killed in drones and the support it has in FATA.

as regards the ecnomic policy , please understand that economic sovereignty is interlinked with the sovereignty that you are talking about. IMF & WB both are american outfits that she uses to pressurize the weak government like ours.

Then What are Americans doing there with all their technology. They should stop infiltration. I admit that there in infiltration but there is also on America-Mexico border. It is not excuse of attacks. If America has any information then it should give it to Pakistan Government, who authorized him to attack ?
Why Pakistan is an ally then?
If you have some trouble at your home with your brother, than I should attack your home ?
Pakistani forces are capable of conducting any operation. Anyway you have your own point of view. Any of your points did not authorize Americans to attack Pakistan, although your points are somewhat valid.


I understand that economic policy is interlinked with the sovereignty, but taking loan is violation of sovereignty ?

you did not get my point.taking loan is not violation , after taking loan , IMF asks you to follow those policies that suit the donor agency. take the example of WAPDA , up til 1998 , it had surplus power and money . it even gave loans to GOP , but now Wapda has been divided in to PEPCO,NTDC,GENCOS,DISCOS and this has destroyed the institution . this is my personal experience since I am employee of Pepco and my father was in WAPDA.
the point is if we keep on begging we cannot talk about sovereignty.

and in my post i also said that America should transfer the drone technology or some sort of drone partnership should be worked out. the reason pakistan leased it's base to US was because there was some tacit agreement. what we need is the government and the army should come out clean and release all the agreements with US government.

moreover you did not answer about the killings taking place in Khi, or in balochistan of Hazaras. i am saying that the kind of fervor we show in opposing drone attacks, the same should be shown in opposition of these killings.

everyone has his/her own point of view but getting into discussion allows one to re-evaluate his/her point of view.
regards

moreover you did not answer about the killings taking place in Khi, or in balochistan of Hazaras. i am saying that the kind of fervor we show in opposing drone attacks, the same should be shown in opposition of these killings.

Oh mere bhai hm operation krain ya na krain. Mnne yeh kb kaha k sb kuch thek ha but america kon hota ha attack krne wala. I condemn all these killings, It is dirty politics. But jo kuch krna ha hm ne krna ha. I have already said taht all your points are valid but that does not authorize America to attack us.

Dear there is a quotation that
A long journey starts with a short step.
, thts why me said, ths is good step takn by prsnt govt.

@ waqar abro
was such kind of bold step taken against USA in histry by any pak govt??????

__________________
"There is difference between imitating a person and counterfeiting him"