—————————————————————————————————————————–
PEACE BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN IS MORE BENEFICIAL TO INDIA
By: Mohammed Ali, Canberra, Australia
mohammedali506@hotmail.com
Recent pressure of world’s leading nations on India to resume high level talks with Pakistan should be appreciated by all peace loving people around the world. Pakistan has welcomed the proposal and if all goes well the talks should resume between the two countries at the foreign secretaries level in the near future. These talks are expected to encompass issues that include the disputed region of Kashmir, and terrorism.
The process of peace negotiations between the two neighbors was launched in 2004, however, the talks were suspended after the 2008 Mumbai attacks. The fresh proposal of resumption of talks has come ahead of a visit to Pakistan by India’s home minister, Palaniappan Chidambaram, who is scheduled to attend a two-day regional security meeting in Pakistan late in February. Mr Chidambaram will be the first high-level Indian official to visit Pakistan since the Mumbai attacks.
While peace between India and Pakistan is of mutual benefit to both countries, it is essentially more fruitful for India in terms of its export prospects, its plans to increase its tourism, its desire to harness terroristic activities and its dream of playing a leading role in the regional politics.
Export activities between India and Pakistan have a long history but due to an equally long history of constrained relationship between the two countries this activity has mostly continued through indirect routes involving a third country, usually a Middle Eastern nation. Whether indirectly or as a result of direct export between the two countries, the balance of this activity has always been in favour of India. India has enjoyed a huge trade surplus with sales to Pakistan at around $1.9 billion against imports of a mere $300 million in the recent past.
It is worth noting that prior to initiation of mutual talks in 2004 the trade between the two countries was at the paltry level of few hundred million dollars. As soon as the talks began the export phenomenon enormously increased and touched the heights of 2.2 billion dollars in 2009. If terroristic activities would not hinder, the export between the two countries is estimated to increase to minimum 6 billion dollars in 2010. The lion share of the resultant benefit will again go to India.
A peace talk sponsored by India would give more confidence and assurance to Indian businessmen. An official trade agreement between the two countries will pave way to open direct export channels, which will be more efficient and less time and resource intensive.
Another issue that if resolved would be of greater benefit to India than Pakistan is the age old issue of Kashmir. India Pakistan relations have historically been marred due to this dispute, which has dearly cost both countries economically with more losses on Indian side. Imagine the continuous deployment of forces on the borders and the hundreds and millions of dollars it requires each year on the part of the Indian government, imagine the volume of policing required within the disputed territory to deny the right of self determination and its financial implications on the state and federal budget, imagine the cost to Indian economy in relation to the resultant destruction and destabilization, and imagine the heavy psychological and psychiatric issues that arise due to these tensions within the Kashmiri population blowing out already stretched health budget. All of these heavy expanses could be minimized by India by accepting the right of self determination in Kashmir and therefore resolving a long standing issue with Pakistan. These and similar issues were recently discussed in a seminar on Kashmir held by the Kashmir Solidarity Council Canberra.
The Kashmir issue has also its bearing on India’s long desire to be accepted as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. An unwritten pre-requirement of gaining this status is a practical demonstration of peace with neighbors. With more than 93,000 lives lost in the Kashmir dispute and a history of wars with neighbors, it becomes hard to convince friends and neighbors to support a case for the membership of a prestigious institution like Security Council.
The issue also casts its shadow on the assertion by India of being the world’s largest democracy. The claim looks dwarf when a continuous violation of the United Nations resolution of 1948 is seen in play in the Kashmir region. This then leads to human rights issues, which negatively impact on country’s future prospect of becoming a regional leader or world power.
Both India and Pakistan have issues of poverty, public health and environment to address. While these issues have become more perpetual and complex in Pakistan due to the refugees’ problem, India could by way of resolving Kashmir issue as per the aspirations of Kashmiris, divert more of its resources to address these basic issues. Mahatma Gandhi is quoted to have said that poverty is but the worst form of violence. A 2005 World Bank report claimed that 42% of Indian population falls below the international poverty line of $1.25 a day. Further, India has the highest number of malnourished people, at 230 million. The number of malnourished children (43% of India’s children under 5 are underweight (BMI<18.5), is the highest in the world as of 2008.
This is not to say that Pakistan does not have these problems but given that India outnumbers Pakistan in terms of its population size, the issue is many folds greater in India than in Pakistan. A solution of Kashmir issue will certainly be a step forward by India to help address these problems.
One should acknowledge that India’s stance on the Kashmir issue has some what softened over the years. There was a period when India was not even ready to accept and endorse Kashmir as an issue in mutual talks with Pakistan. Now the situation is different. The issue is certainly on the agenda in the talks, however, it has been linked by India with terrorism and religious extremism. This approach unfortunately does not serve the cause.
Pakistan has been consistently maintaining that terrorism is a global issue and it is vital that the peace talks between the two countries are delinked with this issue. Pakistan maintains that terrorism (and religious extremism) is a problem of both countries. This notion was last week partly accepted by India when it was accepted that the Bombay issue had some assistance from within India as well.
Pakistan has been echoing its concerns over involvement by India in Baluchistan. This was recently expressed in an interview by the current Ambassador of Pakistan in Brussels, Mr Jalil Abbas Jilani. Pakistan, reportedly, also has its concerns over India’s role in Afghanistan.
On the contrary, in a recent meeting with the senior Pakistani journalist, poet and peace ambassador Mahmood Sham, the BJP president Mr Nitin Gadkari said that Pakistan should concentrate its energies on combating problems of poverty and infrastructure development, rather than harbouring and fostering terrorists on its soil. These terror elements are creating problems for India, as well as for Pakistan, Mr Gadkari further said. What all this reflects is a huge mutual distrust between the two countries and quoting Jilani again, “this kind of blame game does not lead any where”.
In as much as it is in the interest of Pakistan to want peace with India it is in the interest of India as well. Take the example of tourism. Open any international TV channel these days and you would see the advertisement describing India as ‘Incredible India’. Although India might be successful in attracting innumerable foreign tourists every year through these kinds of advertisements, one can not neglect that if India resolves issues with Pakistan it will benefit itself with thousands of more Pakistani visitors. And the balance of tourist’s trade again will be in favour of India.
Even today the number of families in Pakistan who have their relatives in India is far greater than Indian families with relatives in Pakistan. Such Pakistani families will be a potential boost to Indian tourism if the peace process is successful. One can not also neglect cricket and traditional hockey rivalries between the two countries that could offer further boost to economies in both countries if the matches are held again. Moreover, Pakistani Diaspora living in the USA and Britain will also be able to visit India more often, contributing further to its economy. But all this depends on easing out current situation by holding successful talks and then easing out visa process for Pakistani born or nationals. The ratio of such family or sports related visas would easily be 5:1 in favour of India.
And then there are cultural ties and similarities. Both countries have more or less common social and family values. This is one reason why Pakistani TV serials have been extremely popular in India. On the contrary, Bollywood has its great impact on the Pakistani functions related with marriages. The literary linkages between the two countries are immense and so are opportunities in Pakistan for Indian writers and poets. India Pakistan poetry festivals (Mushairas) are just one example of the common cultural and literary values. I remember when I founded Urdu Literary Society in Canberra in 2000, I was encouraged by so many friends originally belonging to India who live in Canberra. Over a period of ten years, the society has staged Mushaira in Canberra hosting Ahmad Fraz, Manzar Bhopali, Qateel Shifai, Khwamakhwah, Popular Meerathi, Amjad Islam Amjad, Pirzada Qasim and many other renowned poets, writers and scholars. We are a generation that has grown reading Faiz ahmed Faiz, Qurratulain Haider, Krishan Chandar, Ahmed Nadeem Qasmi and Rajindar Singh Bedi. This is a common heritage not to be destroyed by politics. Any facilitation of talks by India will give way to more cultural exchanges between the two countries fostering closer literary relations.
It may be wrong to say that peace could be obtained by attempts of one country only. Essentially it has to be a strong will of both countries. Pakistan has always expressed its will to talk to India but it has always insisted to include real issues like Kashmir and water distribution on the agenda.
India has in the past put conditions for talks that have been unreal. A more real approach in this regard reflecting greater respect and trust in its neighbor, and mutual exploration of common interests and goals will lead a long way for both countries to a stable and prosperous future, more in favour of India than Pakistan.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
Kashmir Solidarity Day observed in Canberra
Report: Mohammed Ali, Canberra, Australia
We support you in your plight; we express our solidarity with your struggle. These were the sentiments echoed at a seminar held by the Kashmir Solidarity Council in Canberra on Friday, 5 February 2010. The speakers who echoed these sentiments included Dr Zakir Rahmani, Dr Ejaz Qureshi, Mr Atiq ul Hassan, Mr Kashif Iqbal Bouns, Mr Javed Butt and Convenor of the Kashmir Solidarity Council Canberra, Mr Iqbal Khan. Mr Mohammed Ali, Executive Member of the Council, conducted the event.
Mr Iqbal Khan, a Canberran of Kashmir origin, presented a historical view of the issue while Mr Javed Butt, Executive Member of the Council, shared with the attendants history of the Kashmir Solidarity Council and its aims and objectives.
Speaking on the occasion, Dr Ejaz Qureshi, an Australian economist of Kashmir origin, highlighted the economic cost of the conflict and indicated that the issue has caused massive under development in all sectors of Kashmir including tourism, agriculture, horticulture and handicraft industries. He further said that education and health sectors were worst hit, with innumerable Psychological problems conveniently neglected.
Dr Zakir Rahmani presented a strategic view of the issue and suggested that Canberra should organise an international forum on the issue. He suggested that the newly formed Pakistan Australia Forum in Canberra should take lead in this regard.
Mr Atiq ul.Hassan, a Sydney journalist, writer and author of ‘Australia for Pakistan’, drew attention of the attendants to the double standards of the United Nations and Western powers. He questioned that if East Timor issue can be resolved why Kashmir issue can not be resolved?
Mr Iqbal Bouns, a young voice from Canberra, shared with the audience that the issue had so far taken more than 93,000 lives. He reiterated that the best solution of the problem was that ‘Pakistan and Indian governments sit with Kashmiris and come out with a solution acceptable to the Kashmiri citizens’.
In the lead up to the seminar, Mr Mohammed Ali and Mr Iqbal Khan communicated with couple of Australian Senators and lobbied them to support the Kashmir cause.
The seminar was widely publicised in the local media, which provided an opportunity to increase awareness of the issue to local Canberrans.
The Kashmir Solidarity Council Canberra has been organising protest rallies, awareness events and seminars in Canberra for the last nine years. The organisation reiterates its commitment that it will keep on supporting the cause of Kashmiris and will keep on increasing awareness of the issue around Canberra and wider Australia. The organisation equally wishes it does not have to organise any protest rally or seminar next year and the issue gets resolved during the current year.
BOAT PEOPLE DESERVE OUR HELP
By: Mohammed Ali ( Canberra, Australia )
mohammedali506@hotmail.com
The age old debate of Boat People ignited once again across Australia on 18 October 2009 when an Australian customs ship rescued 78 Sri Lankan asylum seekers of Tamil origin from their stricken vessel found in Indonesian waters. The incidence occurred not long after Australia turned away an earlier boat carrying another 260 Sri Lankan refugees, of Tamil origin again, in international waters. Yet these two incidences were not the only ones to draw attention of all Australians and rest of the world to the issue of boat people, which is a tiny part of the bigger issue of asylum seekers. The last ten days of October witnessed more boats turned away and at least another 83 asylum seekers were disallowed to enter Australian territory to exercise their right to seek a refugee status.
The question is why are we afraid of boat people? Why we don’t like them to come into Australia for seeking permanent settlement? Why is it that as soon as we hear the news of a boat coming to Australia , we start nurturing unknown fears in our mind? Are we a nation that lacks compassion and empathy? Prior to seeking answers to these questions let us first see who boat people are and whether the blames levelled against them are justified.
It is not uncommon to see that people are often forced to flee their homes and countries due to dire poverty, adverse political situation, threatening ethnic problems or appalling economic conditions. Usually such people aim for developed countries like Australia and America . In doing so, some of these people, due to extreme desperation or lack of enough resources, opt to take risks and use the cheaper option of using small, sub standard boats operated by people smugglers. The term boat people was coined for such desperate human beings in the late70s. In the recent years many people have opted to flee from Afghanistan and Iraq due to obvious reason of war. Sudan and Sri Lanka are relatively late entries to the list, owing to internal turmoils in these countries.
Boat people are hardly received in any country with open arms. They are often labelled as illegal, queue jumpers, cashed up, not real refugees and, at times, cruel. They are dreaded to take away local jobs and are considered a threat to the security of the host country. More often than not, the issue is made a political football in the destination country. Tampa is a good example to quote for Australia . In August 2001, during John Howard’s era, this incidence caught every ones attention. A Norwegian ship, Tampa , carrying 438 asylum seekers rescued up in international waters, was refused entry in Australian waters. This triggered a political controversy, and a diplomatic dispute between Australia and Norway . This also triggered the introduction of the so-called “The Pacific Solution“, whereby the asylum seekers were taken to Nauru where their refugee status was considered, rather than in Australia .
The political climate at the time and the mainstream media’s ever increasing attempt to make stories more sensational made common Australian neglect the fact that the asylum seekers were unfortunate people forced to leave their homes under compulsion. Instead, the environment led them to believe that the people in Tampa were “not good people”.
Again the question is “Was Tampa justified”? Should we turn our eyes away from a group of people who rightly deserve our help? Let us analyse this issue first with a global perspective and then with an Australian perspective.
According to Amnesty International 1 in 115 people on earth are refugees and a new refugee is created every 21 seconds. At the end of 2007 there were 11.4 million refugees in the world, who were living outside their homeland. Regretfully, less than 1 % of these refugees could be resettled in the other countries as per a report from the UNHCR. This is partly due to an application process that is fraught with difficulty and partly due to host country’s reluctance owing to internal resistance. The following year i.e. 2008, the UNHCR noted a 12% increase in asylum claims world wide. This reflected a worsening situation, further aggravated by the continuing wars and overall global political situation. Unfortunately, despite an increase in the asylum claims, the processing of refugees applications remained an extremely slow process.
The process of applying for the refugee status requires that the application is submitted only from outside the country of origin. This causes serious problems. For example 80 % Afghans wishing to apply for the refugee status elsewhere in the world have to go to Pakistan or Iran for that purpose. Iran does not encourage this activity and has repatriated them in the past. Australian High Commission in Islam Abad is also closed to refugee status. Due to these reasons many Afghans resort to flying to Indonesia to apply for asylum, where some of them end up in the evil hands of people smugglers. They may also be held up for years in Indonesia . Some of them have reportedly lost their lifetime savings in the distant and elusive hope of a better life, and have been forced by circumstances to go back to their home countries.
Statistics shows that developing countries accept more refugees than developed countries. Pakistan has hosted millions of Afghan refugees for decades. A 2001 statistics showed that Tanzania had a ratio of refugees to their own citizens as 1:76, Britain was at 1: 530 and Australia , very poor, only 1: 1583. Developed countries are often ready to contribute money to settle refugees elsewhere in the world rather than opening their own doors. The developing countries, which are usually thickly populated, are reluctant to accept further pressure on their population. As a result refugee number keeps building up.
As of 31 March 2009, 1057 asylum seekers were present in Indonesia . Of these 417 had their refugee applications approved but were awaiting resettlement in any country. The remaining 616 were waiting to hear about the result of their applications.
In Australia , the federal government determines the number of refugees to be taken in each year. Between 1999 and 2008, 11200 people came to Australia through protection visas. 85% of them were issued temporary residency. Only 24 % (2659) of these people entered the country via boats.
Of 2148 children that arrived without valid visas in Australia between 1999 and 2003, 92% were awarded refugee status and granted temporary visas. In contrast only 25% of 3125 children that arrived as refugees by valid visas were judged to be real refugees. These figures clearly show that people coming via boats are not fraud.
There are 6000 resettlement places available for refugees under the Australian Department of Immigration’s Humanitarian Program this year, with an extra 500 allocated to Iraqi refugees. However, to this date, to the best of knowledge, no refugee has arrived from Indonesia for settlement although 46 asylum seekers are reportedly waiting to see whether Australia would accept their applications. But it was not like this in the past. Between 2005 and 2008, Australia accepted 184 refugees which are now permanently part of its society.
It is understood that the asylum seekers issue is complex and confronting. Global inequalities in health, wealth and security are realities of our time and have further complicated the issue. However, sending asylum seekers, particularly boat people, back to their countries where they may face life threatening situation is also not a good solution. Perhaps it is time to share our fortunes with the less fortunate ones. We should open our arms for them; those who had no choice except to take risk of their lives and come all the way to knock our doors.
Supporting boat people must NOT be taken to imply that we are supporting illegal humanitarian trade. We should keep the two issues separate. We should keep denouncing the evil trade from our roof tops. Prime Minister Rudd rightly denounced all those involved in the heinous crime in April this year.
As a nation, we are fortunate that our country ranks first in the Asia Pacific region for labour, agriculture and industrial productivity. The country has recorded 17 consecutive years of economic growth since 1992, averaging an increase of 3.3% each year. This makes Australia stand in line with those developed countries that have a sustained growth rate. Australian business sector has also been doing well. It was because of this sector that we were able to defy all odds of recent global economic meltdown and were able to get back on the road to recovery sooner than many other countries.
Australia is also acknowledged in the world for its high standard of living. A 2006 OECD Economic Survey noted that living standards in Australia surpass those of all groups of eight countries in the OECD except for the USA . One wonders why then we think that an intake of small number of asylum seekers coming via boats (after they have been duly screened for security and other requirements) would cost us our life style. Surely, this is a myth like many others.
Australia ’s population rate has not significantly increased in the previous years. At the same time we have an ageing problem threatening work place issues. We need more people from outside world to maintain our productivity graph upwards.
Australia takes an average of 170,000 new migrants every year. So far, as reported, the number of boat people that have ever landed in Australia has not gone above 25,000 mark. When you compare this figure with the annual figure of 170,000, you would realise that it is highly insignificant and extremely low.
It is also proven that people coming via boat are not bad character people and neither are they fraud. They are real sufferers needing HELP. If these people are assisted then, thinking positively, they will in return assist us in our nation building.
How can refugees contribute to our society? They can contribute as cherry pickers, as mining labourers, as labourers in building industry etc. In the long run they can be useful in areas like agriculture, dock related jobs, and land scaping. Among them who are educated can provide us with relief in specialised areas e.g. medical practice in rural areas and engineering.
Can they be a security threat: No not at all. Many of them have fled their countries due to fear of life. It is hard to believe that they will indulge themselves in any illegal activity in the host country.
Will they be a burden on the tax payer? Initially yes, but that can be minimised. On average 104 dollars per person per day is spent if they are kept in detention centres. Alternatively, if they are allowed in the main land, and kept on parole or issued with temp visas/ bridging visas and allowed working, they will require only few dollars per day per person. The two latter options are cost efficient and have been successfully tried in other countries.
We, Australians send millions of dollars world wide in charity each year. Why not help rebuild lives of these poor people who have some how been able to come all the way to knock our doors. Having known Australia and Australian, I am confident that it is not a difficult task.
Prime Minister Rudd’s government should be praised for ending the Pacific Solution. This government now has a golden chance to come forward and take leadership in settling refugees in Australia , including boat people, at an increased rate. By doing so not only we would boost our international image but we would also further solidify our image as a compassionate and caring nation.
———————————————————————————————————–
Mohammed Ali is a Canberra based writer. He is also founder and President of Forum Australia .
Where is the Writ of Zardari & Kiyani?
Shakil Ahmad – Australia
The time is running out fast for any recovery. The Americans are very clever to meet their objectives. They not only hired the serving leadership but also hiring fast the retired officers of Army and bureaucracy and networking at root level in the civil and military establishment for an “under cover” defacto government. They have a pool of puppy and puppet journalists, politicians, scholars, civil & military officials and NGOs to reform the public opinion in favour of their agenda, through the sponsored media. To deviate the public attention from the anti-state activities of Americans, the engineered debates are raised in the media like that of Musharraf trial, Meera, Eid Moon, MQM, sugar, etc, etc.
But make no mistake in realizing the fact, that the American security agencies operating on the soil of Pakistan, in the name of Blackwater, Dyncorp or Xe, etc. are part of the same US private army. They are conducting operations in collaboration with private security agencies run by our retired army officers with the protection and patronage of their local strategic contacts. Following the pattern of their operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and some parts of Asia, Africa and Europe, they are tactically involved in bomb blasts, killing religious leaders to trigger sectarian riots, murder of political opponents, supply of arms to the ethnic groups to trigger civil unrest, and many other destabilizing tactics to promote their agenda in Pakistan. Our leadership should mind it that the Pakistanis, who are now joining the bloody network of Blackwater for the sake of dollars, will not hesitate even to throw them out of their fortresses, when offered more dollars. It’s nothing more than breeding a force of Mir Jafars and Mir Sadiqs pending their imminent downfall. And one has to reap what he sows in today. As if the leadership is a model of betrayal and treason, then who can stop this chain of criminals within the nation.
Allah gave Pakistan all the mental and mental resources, which places Pakistan in the top 10 countries in that regard but our rulers bargained it to rank also in the most humiliated bottom 10 nations. And to the sole benefit of our rulers, under the humiliating terms of Kerry Loggar Bill, US is bent to use their network of locals in Pakistan to promote anti-state agenda through their financed media. Who will suffer, the democrats, bureaucrats or the generals? Not at all. They will be the beneficiary of the campaign as per their history of English slavery. Only the nation will suffer from the miseries and destruction. But the traitors must remember that whenever they conspired against their own people, their masters never treated them more than a toilet paper, as used and flushed into the toilet, and surely they deserved it. They should also learn a lesson from history that the nations make and break but it’s the leaders only who are cursed and humiliated for ever. Still we have time to rescue the nation. If we care for our people, they will care for us otherwise the nation will suffer but would neither forget nor forgive us for our acts in self interest only. So obey only whatever is in the national interest and do whatever is for the benefit of our people. Surely all will benefit from this cycle of sacrifice.
By Shakil Ahmad
President
UWS-ERP Union Australia
—————————————————————————————
Pakistan – Australian Growing Relationship
BY: Mohammed Ali, Canberra
Diplomatic relations between Pakistan and Australia were established in 1948, with reciprocal establishment of missions in both countries. These relations enjoyed a significant boost in 2001 when Australia recognised Pakistan’s key role in the global fight against terrorism. Further strengthening of the mutual ties commenced in 2005 when the former president of Pakistan General Pervez Musharraf visited Australia, a visit which was reciprocated in the same year by the then Australian Prime Minister, Mr John Howard.
Mutual visits at other higher levels have also been a norm between the two nations. In February 2009, the Honourable Stephen Smith MP, Minister for Foreign Affairs, visited Pakistan. In his visit, Mr Smith met with President Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani, as well as a number of senior ministers in the Pakistani government, including Foreign Minister Mr Shah Mehmood Qureshi. Former Attorney- General Phillip Ruddock visited Pakistan in 2007. Earlier, in 1998, Pakistan’s then senate chairman, Mr Wasim Sajjad paid a visit to Australia. Pakistan’s current president, Mr Asif Zardari has also reportedly visited Australia when he was a minister in an earlier government. Mr Tim Fisher, Former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, can also be included in this list.
The relationship between Pakistan and Australia is multidimensional. It includes educational and economic assistance, and trade and commerce ties. Australia has recently announced doubling of its assistance programme for the next two years i.e. from A$ 60 million to 120 million. Australia exported A$490 million worth commodities to Pakistan in 2007-08. These included coal, lead, vegetable products and fertilizers. In return, Pakistan exported textiles, clothing and rice with a total value at $154 million in the same year. Commercial links between Australia and Pakistan include BHP Billiton’s investment in Pakistan’s Zamzama gas field, valued at US$100 million. Zamzama is considered Pakistan’s fourth-largest gas field and is situated approximately 300 kilometres north of Karachi.
On the education side, the Australian scholarship programme offered to the Pakistani student since 2006 to study in various Australian universities has further brought two countries close. While 500 students from Pakistan will benefit from this scholarship programme, there are more than 5000 Pakistani students studying in Australian Universities. It is a matter of pride for Pakistan that all Pakistani students are rated amongst the best students. The assessment level of Pakistani students opting for admissions in Australian universities has also been upgraded because of the outstanding performance of Pakistani students.
The foundation of Pakistan-Australian Defence relations was laid even before the establishment of Pakistan in 1947. Many Australians do remember Field Marshal Blamey (1884-1951) but only few know that the honourable Field Marshal was a 1912 graduate of the Command and Staff College, Quetta (an important city of Pakistan), which was then part of the British Raj. Over the years, these foundations have been strengthened by many defence based information exchanges and cooperation between the two countries. An example was in 1988 when Pakistan purchased some 44 Mirage aircrafts from Australia, which are still operative. Pakistan has also been part of the joint naval exercises of Royal Australian Navy as one of the participating countries. An example was in 2008 when two Naval Ships of Pakistan Navy participated in RAN Exercise KAKADU-2008, carried out in Darwin.
Various defence training programs / experience sharing initiatives have always existed between the defence forces of the two countries. These include; attendance of different long duration courses on reciprocal basis, short duration training programmes, seminars, symposiums and conferences, attracting officers from both sides. It is highly likely that Australia would send more of its defence force officers in the near future for training purpose to Pakistan.
Australian Defence Force did not forget Pakistan at the time of the deadly earthquake in Kashmir in October 2005. Australia had sent a 142 members medical group which offered its humanitarian and medical support to the victims in the affected areas. This group did an excellent job and won hearts of thousands of sufferers. The then Prime Minister Mr John Howard also visited this group during its stay in Pakistan and shared his ‘wonderful’ cricketing skills with the group members.
Australia
It would not be out of place to review role of Australia in Afghanistan war at this stage. Australia is not a NATO member yet it is a significant contributor to bring peace in Afghanistan. Recently, the Australian government has increased its contribution from 1100 to 1550 Australian troops, mainly in Uruzgan Province. Australian contingent in the province is doing wonderful in building societal and social infrastructure. One of the main priorities is building schools and hospitals for local population, some thing regarded as “life line” for the war-torn nation. Another important function that Australian soldiers are doing in Afghanistan is mentoring of Afghan National Army. Together with Dutch troops, Australian defence force personnel are providing security to the local population. Pakistan government is also assisting Australia to carry out its role in Afghanistan in terms of logistics support and transit facilities to Australian Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Uruzgan province.
During his recent visit, General Tariq Majid’s talks with the former Australian Minister for Defence were very successful. In these talks, the Defence Minister shared the information that the Australian Defence Force is working with the Pakistan Military on a number of counter insurgency training initiatives both in Australia and Pakistan. Thanking Australian government, General Tariq responded by saying that Pakistan appreciates the role played by Australia as part of the coalition forces in Afghanistan. He further emphasised that Pakistan and Australia have ‘common interests and shared objectives’ in promoting peace and stability in the region.
Today, Pakistani Diaspora in Australia, a significant 20,000 in number, is basking in the warmth of these relations. But the journey is not yet finished. We have to continue working together for a future in which Pakistan is completely free of all the issues it is currently facing. Pakistan may be a small country but it is a vital country. It is vital for its strategic importance. It is vital for its mineral resources and it is vital for its beautiful, maiden landscape. It can not be neglected. It is this realisation that Australia participates in the Friends of Democratic Pakistan group which “seeks to help Pakistan address its security, development, energy and institution building challenges. Other members of the group are Pakistan, the United Kingdom, United States, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Turkey, the European Commission, the European Union and the United Nations”.
Let us hope that this mutual understanding increases and journey of assistance continues in the years to come.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————
K ZAMAN MEDIA 
Leave a comment