Tuesday, July 6, 2021
#Pakistan - Diplomatic blundering - That discretion is the art of diplomacy must be learned by the Pakistan's Foreign Minister
Qureshi’s floundering too was apparently not accidental. His pause before bypassing the question showed deliberate ambiguity on an issue that demands a clear answer: how can a terrorist be a martyr? Yet he would not say that perhaps out of fear of a backlash from PTI ranks and his conservative constituency. His non-committal stance on a person responsible for thousands of deaths is damaging.It is not just the blunder over the bin Laden issue but also his handling of some other sensitive foreign policy issues that have raised questions about his command of the subject he speaks on. Populism should be kept out of the realm of diplomacy. The foreign minister’s public statements on foreign policy seem to be largely for domestic political consumption, but such comments often carry serious implications for our relations with other countries. Maintaining a delicate balance in matters of international relations requires nuanced responses that are often missing from his populist rhetoric. His recent response to Afghan officials was also uncalled for, however provocative their statements may have been. There was no need for it after the foreign ministry’s appropriate reaction to the Afghan side’s invective.Such trading of barbs only serves the purpose of those elements that seek to vitiate the atmosphere between the two countries. One has to be more careful in the face of the fast-changing situation in Afghanistan that should soon see the complete withdrawal of foreign forces from its territory. There may be some vested interests trying to spoil moves to get a political settlement in Afghanistan but any misstep could pull us deeper into the quagmire. Undoubtedly, Pakistan has played a significant role in getting the Afghan Taliban to the negotiating table that led to the Doha peace agreement, clearing the way for the withdrawal of American forces. But the situation is extremely volatile with the intensification of the fighting in Afghanistan and no signs of the cessation of hostilities. The looming civil war in Afghanistan will have direct and serious security implications for Pakistan. Surely, we can still play a role in any peace process in Afghanistan, but it is not in our interest to be seen to be aligned with any one side in the conflict. Despite frequent clarifications, there is still some doubt over our claims of neutrality. This is largely so because some of the statements emanating from Islamabad are exaggerating our role. Such statements are giving the impression that we can get the Taliban to negotiate. They are causing resentment. The foreign minister’s warning that Pakistan would not take responsibility if blamed for the deteriorating Afghan peace was unnecessary. It’s not for someone in that position to react to every statement that comes out of Kabul. Whatever role we can play should be discreet. That discretion is the art of diplomacy must be learned. It is even more important given our geopolitical and geostrategic situation. Peace in Afghanistan is vital for Pakistan as well as the region. Surely it’s a very complex situation for Islamabad with its increasingly tense relations with the Afghan government. Another tendency is to depict Pakistan at the centre of international politics, giving one an exaggerated sense of our influence. Intriguingly, at one point in time, the foreign minister even took credit for the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Supporting Palestinian rights is one thing but otherwise we don’t have a role to play in the Middle East conflict. We have offered to mediate between Saudi Arabia and Iran. In fact, for a country that confronts enormous domestic and external challenges the best policy is to maintain a low profile in international conflicts that do not directly affect us. With the economy in a perpetual state of crisis and serious internal security problems we need to look inward rather than seeking to stretch our footprint outside. A major problem plaguing our external policy is the absence of clear direction. There is no coherence among the various stakeholders on key policies. The disarray was evident in the so-called backchannel contact with India. While the establishment appeared euphoric over the progress, the civilian government didn’t seem to have any clue about the development. Although there is now silence on the issue, there is still no clarity on the India and Kashmir policy beyond rhetoric. Similar confusion was witnessed over counterterrorism cooperation with the US as foreign forces started withdrawing. True there is now a bit of clarity after the prime minister’s unequivocal statement that there was no question of providing any base to the American forces for any counterterrorism operation in Afghanistan. But some confusion still persists on how to redefine our relations with the US. What we need is to focus more seriously on policy and the art of diplomacy rather than populist rhetoric for local consumption. Foreign policy is too serious a matter to be left to an individual’s political ambitions. https://www.dawn.com/news/1630981/diplomatic-blundering
#Pakistan - Words matter in foreign policy
FOREIGN policy is serious business and rightly described as a country’s first line of defence. Policy formulation and policy articulation both require careful thought and judgement. How policy is publicly articulated can make it more or less effective and impact on relations with other countries. In diplomacy it is essential to know when not to publicly say something and when to speak. Words have consequences, intended or unintended. Words on foreign policy can affect — for good or ill — Pakistan’s diplomatic relations, how the world sees us and international opinion. As no line separates what is spoken for domestic consumption and what is heard abroad it is important to carefully weigh words and be judicious in making foreign policy assertions.
These considerations seem to have been ignored in foreign policy statements and interviews by the government’s top leaders, causing unnecessary confusion and slip-ups, which are unhelpful for the country. For a start, too many PTI ministers, whose portfolios are unrelated to foreign affairs, voice public views on international issues often at variance with what their colleagues are saying. Consider the recent FATF meeting. At least three ministers in addition to the foreign minister commented on its outcome. One minister even said Pakistan’s retention on the ‘grey list’ was due to its nuclear status! This isn’t the only issue on which differing voices have been heard. At a perilous moment in Afghanistan whose fate involves serious implications for Pakistan some ministers have been airing views that don’t necessarily accord with official policy.
Consistency in official pronouncements is essential so that clarity in policy is conveyed which leaves no room for doubt about Pakistan’s interests and goals and position on specific issues. But this aim is compromised when those holding other portfolios mount the airwaves with little knowledge and only to seek publicity.
Even those responsible for articulating foreign policy should consider if speaking too often — a presser or TV appearance every day — is prudent or productive. Making daily statements minimises their significance. It also heightens the risk of making mistakes and gaffes that result in avoidable embarrassment. This is evident from the frequency with which remarks by some ministers have had to be clarified or disavowed. Wise political leaders strike a balance between raising their profile and engaging in overexposure. This also applies to those with foreign policy responsibilities. Some explanations are best left to spokespersons.
Whining is not a strategy and enunciation of foreign policy should not be subservient to populist politics.
Another aspect to enunciation of foreign policy by the government has to do with its populist politics and the seemingly irresistible compulsion to play to the public gallery. This phenomenon is also evidenced in other countries where populism holds sway. Of course, it is important to explain policy to the public and build national consensus on foreign policy goals and initiatives. But that is quite different from making bombastic or provocative pronouncements aimed only at the local audience, which have direct implications for Pakistan’s ties with other countries.
Again, playing to the gallery is neither new nor exclusive to Pakistani leaders. But like elsewhere, it creates avoidable problems and complications. A populist approach to foreign policy that involves excessive recourse to statements designed to appeal to people’s emotions at home can end up with the country being. perceived abroad as unpredictable and non-serious in its international dealings. Casting aspersions or attributing malign motives to erstwhile friendly countries hardly helps to advance the country’s goals. What is said to a local audience resonates abroad and is consequential.
Another tendency of some ministers is to publicly criticise, even castigate, an otherwise friendly country or multilateral body when they are not supportive of Pakistan’s position. At times an assessment reached in in-house discussions — that should stay in-house — is publicly voiced. An example is public criticism of the OIC not long ago. The question is whether a public attack, rather than privately conveying misgivings and mounting pressure, will urge an organisation or country to change course? Or will a public rebuke further reinforce their position?
This also happened with a state with whom Pakistan has a crucial relationship and resulted in a setback that took a year to rectify. The most recent case in point concerns a multilateral body, FATF. For senior ministers to publicly denounce it for being politically motivated — a view that may be well-founded — is not the way to elicit a positive future outcome from that body. Predictably it prompted a European official (speaking anonymously) to caution Islamabad against making such statements which “were not only counterproductive but also harmful for Pakistan’s interests”. This is not to say that disagreement with statements or reports should not be voiced but it must be done in a purposeful and measured way.
The tone of foreign policy statements sends important signals abroad. Whining is not a strategy. Whining about a decision or lack of international response on an issue of importance to Pakistan will not change the minds of others. But it will expose the country’s frustrations and vulnerabilities to its adversaries. Moreover, a constantly complaining tone is self-denigrating and tiresome for others. Whining only advertises weakness and does nothing to enhance Pakistan’s reputation. Even worse are statements that give an impression of playing victim — a helpless target of ‘international conspiracies’ or unfair policies of others. Again, such sentiments even if justified, are best raised in private because playing victim shows a lack of self-confidence.
A penchant to keep invoking the past and lament how the country was (mis)treated in a relationship has also been evidenced. This is fine for internal assessments about the historical context of a bilateral relationship but it seems pointless to go on and on about it in public speeches. It signals an inability to get past the past and equally the lack of meaningful thinking about the future. Narratives predicated on public lamentations are neither helpful in rebuilding a relationship nor do they mobilise public support for any reset.
Public enunciation of foreign policy in a coherent, confident and dignified way is an essential part of statecraft. It should not be made subservient to populist politics or scoring political points at home at the cost of jeopardising Pakistan’s important relationships with other countries or indeed with multilateral organisations.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1633270/words-matter-in-foreign-policy
Cash-strapped Pakistan inks agreement with Saudi Arabia-based bank to borrow USD 4.5 billion
A debt-ridden Pakistan has signed an agreement with Saudi Arabia-based Islamic Development Bank (IDB) to borrow USD 4.5 billion to alleviate oil and gas shortages that are crippling the economy and people's livelihoods through power cuts and fuel disruptions.
The loan, issued by IDB, will be used to pay for crude oil, refined petroleum products, liquefied natural gas (LNG), and industrial chemical urea over the next three years, Asia Times reported.
The agreement was reached with the International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation (ITFC), the trading arm of the Jeddah-based IDB.
The opposition parties blame the crisis on lethargy and mismanagement by the Prime Minister Imran Khan-led PTI government. They have pointed to delays in buying furnace oil and say a vessel crucial to the distribution of LNG is inexplicably out of action in drydock when it is most needed.
The energy shortfall has hit power generation hard in the country amid reduced water flows into the Mangla and Tarbela hydroelectric dams on the Jhelum and Indus rivers.
Citing the reports, Asia Times reported that dam water levels are now so low they can hardly turn the turbines at full capacity. The situation worsened on Friday when the hydropower shortfall exceeded 4,000 megawatts. Pakistan generates about 7,320 megawatts from its reservoirs.
As the power situation deteriorated, the government last week cut water distribution to provinces by 10 per cent, with more cuts planned if the situation does not improve. Low water supplies have reportedly hit the production of rice, sugarcane, cotton crops as well as orchards in Sindh and Punjab provinces.
The government has also suspended gas supplies to non-export industrial units and compressed natural gas (CNG) stations to meet domestic demand for gas.
Farrukh Saleem, an Islamabad-based Pakistani political scientist, economist and financial analyst, told Asia Times that mismanagement, lack of planning and non-adherence to supply chain mechanisms are behind the crisis.
Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader and former finance minister Miftah Ismail said the Imran Khan government was directly responsible for the energy crisis. He added that the government continued to delay the purchase of furnace oil and then went for it in haste at an exorbitant price when the crisis became apparent.
Pakistan's energy woes have been compounded by a deal with Saudi Arabia that has turned sour. The Saudis agreed in 2018 to help Pakistan stave off a current account crisis with $3 billion in currency support for a year, reported Asia Times.
It further reported that this was supplemented in 2019 with a deal that said the Saudis would supply oil for three years for which Pakistan would make deferred payments. However, the Saudis ended the arrangement after one year for reasons which were not made public.
https://in.news.yahoo.com/cash-strapped-pakistan-inks-agreement-205941329.html
چیئرمین پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی بلاول بھٹو زرداری کا چین کی کمیونسٹ پارٹی کی 100ویں سالگرہ کے موقع پر دنیا بھر کی سیاسی پارٹیوںکے سربراہان کے اجلاس سے خطاب
چیئرمین پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی بلاول بھٹو زرداری نے چین کی کمیونسٹ پارٹی کی 100ویں سالگرہ کے موقع پر دنیا بھر کی سیاسی پارٹیوںکے سربراہان کے اجلاس سے خطاب کیا۔ سینیٹر شیری رحمن اور پی پی پی کے سیکریٹری اطلاعات فیصل کریم کنڈی بھی ان کے ہمراہ تھے۔ چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو نے کہا کہ پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی کے بانی چیئرمین شہید ذوالفقار علی بھٹو اور چیئرمین موﺅزے تنگ نے پاک چین دوستی کی بنیاد رکھی تھی
اور سی پیک کی ابتدا صدر آصف علی زرداری کی قیادت میں پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی نے رکھی تھی۔
چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو زرداری نے چینی قوم کو اس موقع پر مبارکباد پیش کی۔ انہوں نے کمیونسٹ پارٹ آف چائنہ کی جانب سے اس ورچوئیل تقریب کا انعقاد کرنے پر سی پی سی کو سراہا۔ چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو نے کہا کہ آج سی پی سی دنیا کی سب سے بڑی پارٹی بن چکی ہے اور دنیا کے سب سے زیادہ آبادی والے ملک کی قیادت کر رہی ہے۔ آپ کی قیادت اور پالیسیوں کے تسلسل نے چین نے غربت ختم کرنے کے لئے کامیابی حاصل کی ہے اور اس وقت دنیا میں بڑی معیشتوں میں سے ایک ہے۔ کورونا کی وباءسے دنیا بھر کی معاشی ترقی سست ہوگئی تھی اور صحت کا نظام درہم برہم ہوگیا تھا لیکن اس کے باوجود چین نے بے مثال معاشی ترقی کی اور ساری دنیا کو ایک سبق دیا۔ انہیں یہ جان کر نہایت خوشی ہوئی ہے کہ 2012ءکے بعد سے لے کر اب تک چین نے 10کروڑ آباد ی کو غربت سے نجات دلائی۔ چین کی کمیونسٹ پارٹی کی عوام دوست پالیسیوں کی وجہ سے یہ ممکن ہو سکا۔ چین کی ترقی سے یہ ثابت ہوگیا ہے کہ اصل معاشی ترقی اس وقت ہوتی ہے جب ملک کے غریب ترین عوام کو فائدہ پہنچے۔
آج چین کے ون بیلٹ ون روڈ منصوبے کی وجہ سے میں یہ کہتا ہوں کہ پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی اس عظیم خواب کو پورا کرنے کے لئے مخلص ہے۔ سی پیک کی بنیاد پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی کی حکومت اور چین کی کمیونسٹ پارٹی نے ڈالی۔ صدر زرداری کی اور چین کی قیادت کے تحت سی پیک کا قیام ہوا اور گوادر پورٹ کی بنیاد رکھی گئی۔ اس سے دونوں ممالک کے درمیان پہلے سے زیادہ گہرا رشتہ قائم ہوا۔ پاکستان اور چین کی دوستی کی بنیاد قائد عوام شہید ذوالفقار علی بھٹو اور چیئرمین ماﺅ نے رکھی اور اس کے بعد شہید محترمہ بینظیر بھٹو نے پاکستان اور چین کو دوستی کو مزید مضبوط کیا جس سے دونوں ممالک کے عوام نزدیک تر ہوگئے۔
چین نے صدر زی کی قیادت میں بیرونی سرمایہ کاری، وباءکے دوران انسانی تعاون ، موسمیاتی تبدیلی میں ذمہ داری اور عالمی ترقی میں بھرپور کردار ادا کیا۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ سی پیک ہم سب کے لئے پارٹی کی سطح سے اوپر اٹھ کر اہم منصوبہ ہے۔ سی پیک معاشی استحکام کا ایک ذریعہ ہے جو پاکستان کو 21ویں صدی میں کامیاب کر سکتا ہے۔ سی پیک، کورونا کی وباءکے لئے ویکسین کی فراہمی کے لئے میں اپنے ہم وطنوں کی طرف سے کمیونسٹ پارٹی آف چائنہ کا شکریہ ادا کرتا ہوں کہ اس نے اس مشکل وقت میں پاکستان کا ساتھ دیا جب ہم کورونا کی وباءکی سخت ترین لہر کا مقابلہ کر رہے تھے۔ یہ اس بات کی عکاسی کرتا ہے کہ چین نے ہر مشکل وقت میں پاکستان کا ساتھ دیا ہے۔ انہوں نے اس سارے تعاون کے لئے کمیونسٹ پارٹی چائنہ کی مرکزی قیادت اور چین کی حکومت کا شکریہ اداکرتے ہوئے کہ پاکستان کے عوام اور پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی چین کے اس تعاون پر شکرگزار ہے۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ مستقبل امن اور تعاون پر منحصر ہے۔ آج چین بجائے عالمی تضادات کے عالمی تعاون کی قیادت کر رہا ہے اور یہی وہ مستقبل ہے جس سے یہ نئی نسل مستقل امن حاصل کر سکتی ہے اور تضادات سے باہر نکل سکتی ہے۔
https://www.ppp.org.pk/pr/25230/