Pakistan's foreign ministry in hot waters after envoy abstains from voting on Syria

Pakistan’s envoy at the UN Human Rights Council abstained from voting on a resolution against killings of civilians and human rights violations in Syria. (UN/file)
Updated 12 March 2018
Follow

Pakistan's foreign ministry in hot waters after envoy abstains from voting on Syria

ISLAMABAD: All of Pakistan’s parliamentary parties have demanded the government to hold the country’s envoy at the Office of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) for abstaining to vote on a resolution against killings of civilians and human rights violations in Syria.
“Pakistan has committed a blunder by not supporting the resolution and it must be investigated as to why our envoy at the UN Human Rights Council abstained from voting,” Sen. Taj Haider of Pakistan Peoples Party told Arab News.
He said the government should explain its position on the gaffe in Parliament as it is a matter of grave concern for the people. “By abstaining from vote, we indirectly sent a message to the international community that Pakistan stands with the oppressor in Syria instead of the innocent people,” he said.
On March 5, a resolution was moved in the UNHHRC on the deteriorating situation of human rights in Eastern Ghouta and it was adopted by a vote of 29 in favor and four against. Fourteen countries including Pakistan abstained from the voting.
Speaking on floor of the National Assembly on Friday, Minister for Foreign Affairs Khawaja Muhammad Asif said: “It is a matter of shame as our envoy did not cast a vote against atrocities on Syrian people.”
He was responding to questions raised by Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman, a coalition partner of the government, who informed the House that Pakistan abstained from voting on the resolution.
Talking to Arab News, JUI-F Member National Assembly Naeema Kishwar said her party has demanded the government to investigate the matter and present a detailed report of it in the Parliament.
“We want the Parliament to hold the envoy accountable for the blunder,” she said, “it is a matter of shame for us that we have not voted in favor of the resolution that condemned violence against Syrian people.”
Kishwar said Pakistani liberals criticized the government when it deployed troops in Saudi Arabia, but they are silent on atrocities being committed against innocents in Syria. “Our government needs to come up with a clear stance that Pakistanis condemn violence against Syrians,” she said, “we also want the Parliament to pass a consensus resolution condemning atrocities against innocent Syrians.”
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Member National Assembly Dr. Shireen Mazari told Arab News that Pakistan’s role at the UNHRC in the matter of Syrian resolutions reflects the poor foreign policy of the government.
“Syria has become a battlefield where different Muslim countries have different positions, but we should be very much clear in our stance that we condemn violence against innocent people in all its forms,” she said.
Talking to Arab News, Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan MNA Ali Raza Abidi also demanded the government investigate the matter thoroughly and brief the Parliament about it. “It should be investigated if the diplomat stayed back because of any pressure or arrangement,” he said.
Dr. Mohammad Faisal, spokesman for Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told Arab News that Pakistan supports a peaceful and political solution to end the crisis to ensure security and stability in the region, including respect for the territorial integrity of Syria.
“We are concerned at the humanitarian situation and urge all sides to enable provision of humanitarian and medical assistance to the innocent men, women and children and to take urgent measures for their safety and security,” he said.
Faisal refused to comment if the ministry will investigate against Pakistani diplomat at the OHCHR for abstaining from the voting.
However, the foreign minister assured the National Assembly on Friday: “I’ll let the House know on Monday as to why Pakistan did not vote on the resolution.”


‘Not Winston Churchill’: Trump steps up criticism of UK’s Starmer

Updated 10 sec ago
Follow

‘Not Winston Churchill’: Trump steps up criticism of UK’s Starmer

  • Trump criticized Starmer’s decision to cede sovereignty of the Chagos Islands, home to the Diego Garcia air base, ‌saying that they have ‘been very, very uncooperative with with that stupid island’
  • Donald Trump: ‘France has been great. They’ve all been great. The UK has been much different from others’
LONDON/WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump intensified his criticism of Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Tuesday, ​saying his lack of immediate support for US strikes on Iran showed “this is not Winston Churchill we’re dealing with.” Trump has lashed out at Starmer three times this week after he said neither the British military, or its air bases, were involved in the initial US and Israeli strikes on Tehran that killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Starmer told parliament that the government had learnt from its mistakes in backing the US in the 2003 Iraq war, and said any military action must have a “viable, thought-through plan.” He also said he did not believe in “regime change from the skies.” But ‌Starmer has since ‌allowed the US to use UK bases to launch what he ​called ‌limited ⁠and defensive ​strikes ⁠to weaken Tehran’s capabilities, after Iran hit US allies in the region with drones and missiles. On Monday, a British base in Cyprus was hit by a drone that Cypriot officials said was likely launched by Iran-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah, prompting London to send a destroyer and more helicopters with counter-drone technology to the region.
Trump told reporters during a meeting in the Oval Office with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz that he was very disappointed with Britain.
“This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with,” he said, comparing Starmer with Britain’s revered ⁠wartime leader.
Trump also criticized Starmer’s decision to cede sovereignty of the Chagos ‌Archipelago, home to the US-UK air base of Diego Garcia, ‌saying they have “been very, very uncooperative with that stupid island.”

Starmer has ‌been criticized from all sides at home for his decision, with opponents on the left calling ‌for him to condemn the military action while on the right, opposition leaders Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage attacked Starmer for failing to back Britain’s key security and intelligence ally.
Britain has long prided itself on its relationship with the US, aided by British leaders such as Churchill, Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair cultivating strong relationships with their counterparts, ‌Franklin D. Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.
Starmer, a center-left former lawyer, surprised his critics when he too struck up a solid relationship ⁠with Trump, but that has ⁠been tested in the last year as the US leader became more combative on a number of fronts. Trump earlier told the Sun newspaper he never thought he would see Britain become a reluctant partner, instead heaping praise on France and Germany.
“This was the most solid relationship of all,” he said. “And now we have very strong relationships with other countries in Europe.”
“France has been great. They’ve all been great. The UK has been much different from others.”
Britain, France and Germany released a joint statement in response to Iranian attacks on Saturday, saying they were in close contact with the US, Israel and partners in the region, and were calling for a resumption of negotiations.
Starmer has defended his response, telling parliament on Monday he had to judge what was in Britain’s national interest. “That is what ​I have done, and I stand by ​it,” he said.
Polling published by YouGov on Tuesday showed people in Britain were opposed to the US strikes on Iran by 49 percent to 28 percent.