Why Pakistanis dont want MFN to India

  

Dumping means dropping goods below cost so that the industry of the local industry can be destroyed. Then the foreign entity can have a monopoly for decades to come.

There is tremendous pressure on Pakistan to open up its markets to Bharat so that it can begin dumping its shoddy goods on the Pakistani market. Pakistani industries already hurt by load-shedding and other external factors. Many analysts believe that many of the TTP attacks on Pakistan are Bharati inspired.

Islamabad has opened up the Pakistani market to Bharti films. However Bharat does not import Pakistani movies or TV dramas. A similar situation will occur if MFN status is given to Bharat. The increase is trade would in fact be a burden on the Pakistanis, as the $10 billion would be to Bharat's advantage. This has been resisted for the past sixty years. There is no reason to allow commercial encroachment by Bharat. The Bhrati IT industry is worth $50 billion but it does not use Pakistan talent either in Pakistan or overseas.

Bharati companies will begin dumping shoddy Bharati goods on the Paksitani consumer. Large Bharati companies will target Pakistani companies and industries that are vulnerable--thus destroying them. Japan started with steel and them moved up the pacman chain and took over a large section of the US market.

Pakistan cannot allow this Bharati terror to encroach into Pakistan.

New Delhi, Nov 24: Even as ties between India and Pakistan remain frosty, India Wednesday told a visiting 12-member Pakistani trade delegation that Islamabad should grant New Delhi Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status and called for a five-fold increase in bilateral trade.

Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao said India hoped that the Pakistan government would implement the recommendations of the Panel of Economists appointed by the Pakistan Planning Commission and urged Islamabad to accord MFN status to India.

Rao also asked Pakistan to shift from a positive list of imports to a negative list regime to achieve a five-fold increase in bilateral trade from $2 billion to $10 billion.

Rao was inaugurating a FICCI conference on 'India-Pakistan Economic Relations: Prospects & Challenges'.

Rao assured business leaders of India's commitment to facilitating greater economic cooperation and integration between India and Pakistan and the South Asia region.

Rao said that to improve infrastructure and streamline and harmonise customs procedures at the land borders, India was setting up a modern integrated check post at the India-Pakistan border at Attari for trade facilitation. This is expected to be ready by April 2011.

She pressed for the opening up of more rail and road routes and expanding the existing capacities on operational routes. 'As things stand, Pakistan allows only the import of about 110 items from India through the land route, while it allows the export of only one item, cement, to India by the road route.'

Pakistan should permit all permissible items for trade via the Attari-Wagah route, she added.

The Pakistani delegation, led by Sultan Ahmed Chawla, president, Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI), interacted with top Indian businessmen and pressed for escalating bilateral trade between the two countries.

Chawla called for removal of non-trade barriers by India and facilitation of movement of people across borders. 'We would request that instead of raising issues related to NTBs (non-tariff barriers) in a generalized manner, it would be more useful if specific instances can be brought to our notice, which are found to be specifically discriminatory for Pakistani exports to India,' said Rao.

'There is no discrimination against Pakistani exports because the same standards are being applied for imports from any other country,' she pointed out.

Rao stressed that India and Pakistan have complementarities in their economies which can create a 'win-win' situation for all sides. Listing out areas of mutually beneficial cooperation, Rao said: 'We only have to seize them by rising above our political differences for the welfare of our two people.'

The Pakistani delegation called on Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma Tuesday. The delegation informed Sharma of the 'existing lacunae in the two-way trade and suggested some measures for improvement', said a statement from the Pakistan high commission Wednesday.

'The minister assured the delegation of removing the impediments in the smooth running of trade activity between the two countries and expressed the hope that the bilateral trade will substantially increase in the years to come,' said the high commission.

The delegation felt that the trade between India and Pakistan could be balanced if the tariff and non-tariff barriers are removed by the Indian side.

They also met Pakistan's High Commissioner Shahid Malik Tuesday.

This is the first visit by a Pakistani business delegation since the July 15 talks between the foreign ministers of the two countries broke down over a host of issues, including terrorism and Kashmir. Trade diplomacy: India presses Pakistan for MFN status. 2010-11-24 20:40:00. Masters in Diplomacy. Earn a Masters in Diplomacy Online at Norwich University. www.Norwich.Edu/Diplomacy. (IANS)

It is not in Pakistan's strategic interests to allow Bharati imports. It is not in Pakistan's industrial or commercial interests to allow shoddy Bharati imports.

Related articles

• Clinton's Pakistanphobic rhetoric creates Anti-Americanism in Pakistan (thedawn.com.pk)


• The destruction of Caste in Pakistan (pakpunch.com)


• Sarmila Bose destroys Indian propoganda about 1971 (viewstimes.com)


• Why many want Musharraf back (rupeenews.com)


• Azad Kashmir and Pakistan (azadkashmirtimes.com)


• Unbiased scrutiny of 1971 absolves Paksitan Army or mass rape charges (newpakistantimes.com)


• Italy's ENI to build Iran-Pakistan pipeline (rupeenews.com)


• Italians to build Iran-Pakistan pipline (azadkashmirtimes.com)


• Indian unable to keep Kashmir, Hyderabad, 71 agression off UN dispute list (pakpunch.com)


• Indian role in Afghanistan: US must limit it. David Pollock (pakistanindependent.com)


• Most India Pakistan disputes still on UN list (azadkashmirtimes.com)


• Our Sister Asia Bibi must be protected (rupeenews.com)


• Hyderabad and Kashmir still on UN dispute list (timesofsrinagar.com)


• APTTA trade remains a Bad deal for Pakistan (pakistanindependent.com)


• UN: Pakistan keeps disputes with India alive (pakistanakhbar.com)


• Revise or Revoke bad APTTA (pakistanledger.com)


• Kashmir, Hyderabad, 1971 agression is alive on UN agenda (rupeenews.com)


• APTTA remains a Bad deal for Pakistan (pakistanakhbar.com)


• Kashmir and Hyderabad still on UN dispute list (kashmirpunch.com)


• List of UN diputes includes Hyderabad, Kashmir, 1971 agression (pakistanledger.com)


• Bharati Civil War on Kashmir (pakistanindependent.com)


• UN dispute list: Kashmir, Hyderabad, 1971 agression (pakistanindependent.com)


• Kashmir creates friction between secular and extremist Indians (rupeenews.com)


• So Obama can boost US economy with $12 billion in sales? (pakistanledger.com)


• Bundu's Biryani bedeviled by bungled Bharati Bureaucracy (rupeenews.com)


• Pakistan's national nightmare over: Obama leaves Delhi (rupeenews.com)


• The 'cornerstone' that America likes today (rupeenews.com)


• Obama's $12 billion sales trip to India (militarystrat.wordpress.com)

Oklahoma racism faces wrath of US Constituton

The Bill of Rights of the US Constitution allows freedom of religion, even in OK. Bigotry against minorities is rampant in Oklahoma Wikipedia

Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly passed an amendment to their state constitution prohibiting state courts from considering international or Islamic law, also known as Sharia, when deciding cases.

But on Monday, U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange issued a temporary restraining preventing the state's election board from certifying the results of the vote.

According to the Associated Press, the measure's sponsor, Rep. Rex Duncan, said the amendment was not an attack on Muslims but an effort to prevent activist judges from relying on international law or Islamic law in deciding cases.

But Muneer Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma and filer of the lawsuit before Miles-LaGrange, said the measure transforms the state constitution into "an enduring condemnation" of Islam.

About 20,000 to 30,000 Muslims live in the state, according to the AP.

Is Oklahoma out of line with such an amendment or is the federal judge erring by delaying, for now, its implementation? And, briefly, why?

MOHAMED ELIBIARY, President & CEO, Freedom and Justice Foundation

Reports now show that a dozen states are looking at similar legislation to Oklahoma's Rep. Duncan. Some will view that as proof that the anti-Sharia movement is mainstream, or why would 70% of voters support it? I will concede that it is mainstream, especially in conservative states; but I would respectfully diagnose it as a crisis among Christian Americans and not a Muslim problem. The number of Muslims in Oklahoma or around the country is not driving this, because in the 230-year plus history of documented Muslim settlement in America not a single Muslim, much less a group, has ever advocated for changing the Constitution.

Putting this development in historical context would show us that we had 11 states during the civil rights movement that passed legislation banning the NAACP as subversive. More than a century ago we had the zenith of an anti-Catholicism movement called the 'know nothings" that similarly passed ordinances targeting non-Protestantism. These movements of the past were all rolled back with time and with the upholding of the 1st Amendment's establishment clause that there is no class-ism amongst religions in America.

The federal judge was correct to pause this ballot measure, otherwise our system would suffer from the tyranny of the masses. I expect the federal court system to eventually rule it unconstitutional. Judging from the Anti-Defamation League's recent press release here in Dallas, other religious minorities who've practiced their own religious laws under the supervision of our civil court system's arbitration and mediation framework have rightly begun to speak out condemning the xenophobia behind this measure.

KATIE SHERROD, Independent writer/producer, Fort Worth

Yes, Oklahoma is out of line. It doesn't matter whether 30,000 or three Muslims live in Oklahoma. This law not only is based in sheer unadulterated fear-mongering, but it also blatantly violates our constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion, in that it singles out only sharia law, not all religious codes. And if it is extended to all religious codes to make it meet the constitutional test, would it outlaw reference to the Ten Commandments?

The unintended consequences of outlawing any reference to international law haven't begun to be explored. What would this law do to contracts Oklahoma-based oil companies have with those based in other countries? Or to any international corporation that might consider moving its headquarters to Oklahoma? One legal scholar suggested it might also outlaw references to English common law, upon which much of our own legal code is based.

The xenophobia apparent in all this would be frightening if it weren't so clear that this is all rank political posturing by Republican conservatives who want to impose their own narrow fundamentalist world view on the rest of us. The irony is that their actions are in line with those of religious fundamentalists around the world, including the Islamic fundamentalists they claim to fear the most.

Thank God for prudent judges. But of course, such judges also are targets of the right-wing Republicans, who define an "activist" judge as one who disagrees with them.

JOE CLIFFORD, Pastor, Head of Staff, First Presbyterian Church of Dallas

Demagoguery is defined as "the practice of a leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace." Oklahoma Rep. Rex Duncan's proposed measure is a great example of this practice. When it was proposed, Sen. Anthony Sykes, a co-author, dubbed it the "Save Our State," amendment saying, "Sharia law coming to the U.S. is a scary concept." Given Muslims represent about a half of one percent of Oklahoma's population, the chances of Sharia deciding court cases in Oklahoma are slim to none, and Slim just left town. As Joseph Thai, a professor at the University of Oklahoma College of law said, "It's an answer in search of a problem." Tragically it makes a segment of the population the problem, demonizing Muslims in order to mobilize votes. The district judge is doing her job by protecting a vulnerable minority from the tyranny of the majority. Leaders should cast vision that inspires, not manufacture threats to manipulate the masses.

JAMES DENISON, Theologian-in-Residence, Baptist General Convention of Texas, President, Center for Informed Faith

"Sharia" means "path" in Arabic. Sharia, or Islamic law, guides every aspect of Muslim life.

Britain now allows Sharia tribunals governing marriage, divorce and inheritance. This is similar to Anglican and Jewish mediation in that country; criminal law remains under the existing legal system. Sharia-compliant banking is growing 15% a year in Europe as well. Since riba (charging or paying of interest) is banned under Islamic law, banks such as Citigroup, HSBC and Deutsche Bank are developing Islamic sectors. Sharia-compliant investments are also growing, avoiding transactions related to weapons, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, pornography and pork.

I understand the Muslim desire to live under Islamic law. America, however, is governed by a secular constitution in which the word "God" nowhere appears. Unlike the U.K., we have no precedent for suspending our governance in favor of alternative religious authorities. To do so would violate the First Amendment's instruction that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

It seems understandable, then, that Oklahoma's voters would pass a referendum which "forbids courts from considering or using international law ... or Sharia Law." However, constitutional experts see problems with the wording of the new measure. They state that it could harm businesses which engage in international commerce and singles out one religion for exclusion.

Whatever comes of the legal battles to be waged in Oklahoma, it is clear to me that "a free church in a free state" is the American ideal. The Founders wanted a country where people of all faiths and those of none could follow their religious beliefs without government entanglement. Jesus taught the same: "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's" (Matthew 22:21).

MIKE GHOUSE, President, Foundation for Pluralism, Dallas

The Oklahoma referendum on Sharia is simply gratuitous and one of the best examples of politicians duping the public.

Getting the public to be riled up against something that ain't there is the ploy the politicians have been using. Many a times they succeed and the responsibility falls on our shoulders to wake the public up to such abuses.

The reason the Oklahoma law is gratuitous is because Muslims in America value the laws of our nation. They strongly feel that the American laws serve the very justice they seek, and they do not seek or ask for sharia law in America. Even if a few ask for it, statistically they are insignificant.

WILLIAM LAWRENCE, Dean, Professor of American Church History, Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University

To the extent that Shaira is understood as religious law for adherents to Islam, the Oklahoma amendment appears strangely irrelevant on the one hand and oddly threatening on the other. It is clear that religious law does not triumph over civil or criminal law, let alone the Constitution, in the United States. Some practitioner of a religion that mandates obedience to Leviticus, for example, could insist on the religious right to practice slavery, but no such thing would be permissible under the U.S. Constitution or laws. A quasi-Mormon sect operated its own cult, but eventually had to surrender to the reality that its endorsements of polygamy and marriages of male adults to female adolescents were unlawful. The Oklahoma amendment is irrelevant because religious law (in this case, sharia) cannot supplant civil or criminal law.

However, to suggest that a court could not consider Islamic law is actually a threatening proposition for all religions. Roman Catholic Canon Law clearly specifies that only men can be ordained priests. But, if a court in the United States were presented with a sexual discrimination complaint from someone who wanted to be ordained to the priesthood but was barred from it by her gender, the court would have to "consider" the Canon Law of the church--since membership in the Roman Catholic Church is strictly voluntary and anyone who becomes a Catholic knows (or should know) that ordination is reserved for men.

The same gender "discrimination" likewise is practiced in most Baptist congregations, so a court must "consider" Baptist polity when dealing with a complaint about gender discrimination in the hiring of a pastor. Some Americans, apparently including a significant majority of voters in Oklahoma recently, allow their prejudices against Muslims and their ignorance of Islam to take precedence over their knowledge of American justice and freedom.

The judge is correct. The majority of the voters in Oklahoma were wrong. In a democracy, a majority may win an election and still be wrong!

GEORGE MASON, Senior Pastor, Wilshire Baptist Church, Dallas

Aside from the Constitutional question of whether the vote was legal, or even the matter of whether it is culturally wise to make laws preemptively to protect against the influence of international or sharia law in Oklahoma courts, a larger religious question must be posed: When in the history of the world has a religious aim been permanently advanced by the use of secular law? Religion by its nature requires that people be persuaded of its truth. Any time legal measures are employed to secure its privilege, the coercion inherent in such an approach undermines the persuasion of people's hearts and minds. A battle may be won, but the war will be lost because it is being fought on the wrong field.

It doesn't take much insight to see that fear of the loss of Christian social hegemony is being used by politicians to advance their own ends. Any time religion is used for personal or political advantage, it both denigrates that religion and diminishes the richness of our diverse public life.

LARRY BETHUNE, Senior Pastor, University Baptist Church, Austin

I am no expert in jurisprudence, which I will leave to the lawyers. But the Oklahoma amendment has the feel of fear-based political grandstanding designed to score points with constituents rather than respond to a genuine danger. Has Oklahoma had a single incident of a judge basing decisions on Sharia? Is the U.S. constitutional separation of religion and state insufficient to cover that contingency?

I have to agree with Mr. Awad that the amendment transforms the state constitution into an "enduring condemnation of Islam," the background of which is religious (predominantly Christian) bigotry. Like Christianity, Islam is an ancient and diverse faith tradition. It is as unjust to judge all Muslims on the beliefs and actions of extremist Muslims as it would be to judge all Christians on the beliefs and actions of the KKK.

When will we learn that protecting the religious freedom of minority faiths protects our own religious freedom? The continuing anti-Islamic rhetoric betrays the spirit of American democracy, endangers the lives of Americans abroad (especially our military), oppresses peace-loving American Muslims, and feeds the lie of terrorists seeking to frame our war on terrorism as a cosmic war between Christianity and Islam. Shall we base our laws on fear and ignorance or intelligence and truth?

TEXAS FAITH: Was Oklahoma out of line with Sharia amendment? 3:15 PM Tue, Nov 16, 2010 |Sam Hodges/Reporter

Related articles

• US: Sharia Law commands 'conformance to law of the land' (rupeenews.com)


• US: Sharia Law commands 'conformance to law of the land' (musalmantimes.com)


• Sharia Law commands 'obedience of law of the land' (ajma.org)


• Judge blocks OK's Racist Anti-Islam amendment (musalmantimes.com)


• Okla Duncan's inane law not OK: Bigotry will affect business (musalmantimes.com)


• Oklahoma's absurd Anti-Shariah Law may have profound implications (rupeenews.com)

Mujib's fascism returns to Bangladesh

Image via Wikipedia

Police and protesters have fought pitched battles across cities in Bangladesh as a nationwide strike called by the main opposition party brought the country to a standstill. Dozens were injured as police fired rubber bullets and used batons on Sunday to disperse activists of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), who were protesting against the eviction of their leader and two-time prime minister, Begum Khaleda Zia, from her home. Businesses and schools across the country were closed as a result of the shutdown. The strike halted almost all transportation in Dhaka, a city of about 12 million people, just as the majority-Muslim country begins to celebrate the Eid al-Adha holiday.

A former commerce minister was among a dozen injured in Chittagong, the country's main port city, while a police inspector was hit by a small bomb in northern Mymensingh city, local police told the AFP news agency. A police van was burnt by a petrol bomb in Dhaka, where security was tight with at least 10,000 heavily armed policemen and 2,000 members of an elite Rapid Action Battalion out in force, police spokesman Walid Hossain said. Hossain said police swung into action at several sites in the capital, using rubber bullets, tear gas and batons after opposition activists became violent. Eviction BNP supporters have accused the government of harassing Zia following her eviction from the residence she has occupied at army headquarters for around 30 years. Zia's residence in the sprawling compound was leased to her by the government in 1982, after her husband and ex-president, General Ziaur Rahman, was killed in an abortive coup. They had lived in the house for several years.

The current government of Sheikh Hasina Wajed, the prime minister, who leads the centre-left, secular Awami League party, cancelled Zia's lease last year. They intend to build multi-storey buildings for families of army officers killed in a mutiny in a paramilitary unit headquarters in Dhaka. Several thousand protesters skirmished with police close to Zia's residence in the garrison area on Friday as the deadline for the expiration of her lease approached. As Zia was driven from the compound, witnesses and security officials said up to 4,000 protesters armed with sticks and stones set fire to vehicles and attacked officers near the headquarters.

"They broke the front door, cut the grilles and then broke open my bedroom door. They dragged me out and pushed me into a car," Zia said during a live television broadcast, wiping tears from her eyes. "I was forced out with only one clothing. I was humiliated. They evicted me from my house breaking all rules and regulations. They also hit my family members," she said. Zia and her centre-right BNP ran the Bangladeshi government from 1991 to 1996 and again from 2001 to 2006. She was the first female prime minister in Bangladesh's history. After Zia's most recent term expired in 2006, an army-backed caretaker government took countrol under emergency law, which was ended in 2008 with Hasina's election. Hasina had been elected once previously, in 1996.

Related articles

• Suicide bomb in Bangladesh kills three as opposition leader Begum Khaleda Zia evicted from her house (telegraph.co.uk)


• Khaleda Zia evicted from home (topinews.com)