You have to stand guard over the development and maintenance of democracy, social justice and the equality of mankind in your own native soil. [Mohammed Ali Jinnah]

Monday, March 10, 2008

Mush Improved Pakistan's Image - There is no threat to Pakistan's Sovereignty :) See urself

"US yearns for Pak capitulation"

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has given them bases and logistic support as well as intelligence sharing but what the US is now demanding from Islamabad has shocked the Defence and Foreign Ministries and the initial reaction has been a rejection of what are highly intrusive demands for the US military and auxiliary personnel in Pakistan.

This scribe has learnt of the latest set of 11 demands the US has put to the Government of Pakistan through the Ministry of Defence. As one goes down the list of the demands, they become increasingly untenable.

The first demand is for granting of a status that is accorded to the technical and administrative staff of the US embassy. The second demand is that these personnel be allowed to enter and exit Pakistan on mere National Identification (for example a driving licence) that is without any visas.

Next, the US is demanding that Pakistan accept the legality of all US licences, which would include arms licences. This is followed by the demand that all these personnel be allowed to carry arms and wear uniforms as they wish, across the whole of Pakistan.

Then comes a demand that directly undermines our sovereignty – that the US criminal jurisdiction be applicable in Pakistan to US nationals. In other words, these personnel would not be subject to Pakistani law. Full Story by Shireen Mazari

We, the ppl of Pakistan who rejected mush in recent elections, demand the same from america... if they accept all these for pakistani citizens, then we have no objection... but mush is not qualified to even have a look at these demands in order to accept or reject them, since he does not have mandate now... ppl have voted against him... so US shld had put these demands infront of newly elected govt... so tht there could b a chance of a NO or reciprocity... US wants all such things done before the elected govt. takes charge
btw i found a link at pkpolitics to a case where reciprocity was demanded from US :) see this...
NAPLES (Reuters) - Ecuador's leftist President Rafael Correa said Washington must let him open a military base in Miami if the United States wants to keep using an air base on Ecuador's Pacific coast.

"If there's no problem having foreign soldiers on a country's soil, surely they'll let us have an Ecuadorean base in the United States."

Well done Rafael...

See our i.e. Pakistani response US wish list confirmed

ISLAMABAD: The Foreign Office on Saturday while commenting on The News story "US yearns for Pak capitulation" said: "Foreign governments make proposals from time to time to secure facilities and privileges for their personnel in the event of temporary assignment or transit.

"Only those proposals are considered that are in line with our domestic laws and international instruments such as the Vienna Conventions on Privileges and Immunities. Nothing is accepted that is not consistent with our national interest and impinges upon our sovereignty."

Ok i m convinced my FO... i m convinced tht we r a sovereign state... plz dont repeat this again n again... but i must say... ecuador was asked to do far less than all this and they clearly showed they want all this on equality basis... all diplomatic negotiations take place on equality basis... in our case :) there will not be any negotiations since we r a 'sovereign' state and it is a threat to our 'sovereignty' to negotiate on US orders... n as u said we'll not do anything which is not consistent with our national interest and impinges upon our sovereignty.

Blogged with Flock

1 comment:

Numan said...

Our country's constitution's very first line states

"Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Almighty Allah alone, and the authority to be exercised by the people of Pakistan within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust;"

source