Minnpost- usa

By Sharon Schmickle | Friday, May 29, 2009

Some Pakistanis buried their dead before they fled to save their own lives. Many abandoned wheat fields, shops and restaurants. Most now live packed in sweltering towns and makeshift camps where water, health care and patience are in critically short supply.

The exodus from embattled northwest Pakistan is the largest that UN officials have seen since the Rwandan genocide in 1994. Some 2 million people have run for their lives in the past three weeks as the U.S.-backed Pakistan army pounded Taliban strongholds with fighter jets, helicopter gunships and ground troops.

There are many reasons to worry about these displaced Pakistanis, beginning with the basic concern of one human being for another. The Minneapolis-based American Refugee Committee is among many aid groups mobilizing to stop this crisis from morphing into mass disaster.

Another worry — what Marvi Memon calls the “minds and hearts” factor — looms as American forces gear up across the border in Afghanistan to rout al Qaeda leaders and their Taliban sympathizers from mountain hideouts.

Memon is a member of Pakistan’s National Assembly. She was one of five Pakistani Parliament members visiting Minneapolis last weekend as part of a tour sponsored by the U.S. State Department. The Minnesota International Center helped organize the Twin Cities stay.

Walking along the Nicollet Mall, Memon explained why she had been eager to discuss the complexities of the crisis with American journalists.

“We need to dialog better with people,” she said. “Mostly what you see in Pakistan is emotional scenes and very anti-American slogans. It’s very popular to be anti-American back home.”

If anti-American sentiment was popular before Washington pushed Pakistan’s government into attacking the Taliban, imagine what could come as misery mounts among the masses of civilians displaced by the fighting.

There is real danger that local sympathy will turn not only against America but also against the shaky, nuclear-armed government in Islamabad.

“If we don’t get this right, we are going to lose the minds and hearts just like this,” Memon said, snapping her fingers. “It is very, very critical to get this right. . . . We appreciate the fact that the United States is giving aid, but it’s not just a question of getting the money in. It’s a timing issue. The timing has to be immediate.”

With the government overwhelmed by the human tide surging from the war zone, displaced Pakistanis are turning to Islamic charities with close ties to militant insurgents, the Washington Post reported.

“Refugee camps in Pakistan have been prime recruiting grounds for militant groups ever since the Soviet invasion forced millions of Afghans to cross into Pakistan in the 1980s,” the Post said. “Now, concern is growing that this latest wave of displacement will create a fresh crop of Pakistanis with grievances against the government and loyalty to groups that seek to undermine the state through violent insurgency.”

Farhatullah Babar, a spokesman for President Asif Ali Zardari, told the Post: “”If people are not looked after well, they tend to become extremists. It hasn’t happened yet, but we’re very conscious of it.”

Response from Minnesota
The American Refugee Committee already had a large staff on the ground in Pakistan when the crisis erupted. ARC teams have worked for eight years to provide health services and other aid for refugees from Afghanistan.

ARC quickly diverted some doctors and engineers to help the displaced Pakistanis. It also brought in Northfield native Gary Dahl who directs ARC’s operations in Thailand where he has years of experience helping refugees from Myanmar.

Among other projects in Pakistan, the ARC team is setting up a water system near the northwestern city of Mardan, a primary destination for civilians fleeing the Swat Valley region. The city is studded with refugee camps consisting of endless rows of tan canvas tents that bake under 110-degree skies, the Post said.

“Schools are packed to capacity with families sleeping on concrete classroom floors, with each classroom housing 40 or more people,” it said. “Virtually every spare bedroom in the city is being used to host displaced civilians, who may have to wait months or longer to return home.”

Imagine that all of Minnesota’s 5 million residents suddenly were pushed into Minneapolis and St. Paul, filling every building and camping in parking lots and parks, said Monte Achenbach, ARC’s Vice President for International Programs.  

Of course, conditions are far worse in Pakistan because many of the host families already were short on food and other basic needs. Now they have no idea when their unexpected “guests” can go home.

On the plus side, this crisis differs from others around the world in that so many Pakistanis have opened their homes and shared their food, Achenbach said.

Overwhelmed
Still the host cities are overwhelmed. Water and sewer systems are utterly inadequate to handle the huge influx of people. And there is nowhere near enough medicine.

“If agencies and governments don’t respond in a hurry, there are going to be serious health problems,” said Scott Charlesworth, who directs ARC’s field operations.

Charlesworth was back in Minneapolis this week after working for a month in Pakistan, and he was briefing Michael Barringer-Mills who is set to fly over there.

“Any time you have large collection of displaced people without adequate water, you have a high risk for respiratory problems, measles and other diseases,” Barringer-Mills said. “Cholera is the No. 1 fear, but there are lots of others.”

Pakistan’s government has drawn international criticism because it called for civilians to flee the conflict zone without preparing adequately for their needs.

“We wanted them out because we didn’t want them to be used as human shields,” Memon explained. “The Talibans are trying to encourage these people to go back to their homes. We don’t want to send them back until we have cleared up those areas.”

How long that might take, she couldn’t say.

“It wouldn’t be rational to put a time limit on it because we don’t know how long the military operation is going to last,” she said. “Your objective is to go out and zap extremists wherever they are even if it takes one month, two months, three months.

ARC is gearing up to serve the needs for at least six to nine months, Achenbach said. 

“The scale is so overwhelming, that it will take some time just to get everyone back into their homes,” he said. “There are whole communities that have been emptied out, and you wonder how they get pieced back together and how robust the system of authority will prove to be.”

ARC staffers declined to talk about sensitive U.S-Pakistani politics.

Almost all of ARC’s field workers are Pakistani. And American staffers have to “lie low,” Charlesworth said.

“Some people wouldn’t have a problem, but many would, especially if we were viewed as having any connection with the United States government,” he said. “So we really have to go under the radar screen in many ways.”

Common enemy but deeply divided
While the governments in Islamabad and Washington share the powerful bond of a common enemy, they are deeply divided on issue after issue. In that regard, my conversation with Memon was unsettling even while I agreed wholeheartedly with her call for dialog.

Memon worked on media relations for former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf. Now her party, the Pakistan Muslim League, is in the opposition. So she often sounds a critical voice in Islamabad.

When it comes to the United States, though, her views reflect those you often hear in Pakistan. So I will share them. They do, indeed, illustrate an urgent need for dialog at the very least.

President Obama’s emerging strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan (dubbed AfPak) is flawed in several respects, Memon said.

For starters, Obama views the two countries as terrorism’s stronghold. Thus he proposes a unified policy for them.

But, it offends Memon to hear Obama talk about Pakistan and Afghanistan in the same breath.

“It whips up the sentiment that Pakistan and Afghanistan are on the same levels,” she said. “Pakistan is a nuclear state. Pakistan is battling Talibans. Pakistan does not want to be put in the same category as Afghanistan.”

Memon also took offense at many related assertions from Washington:

• That Osama bin Laden is hiding in Pakistan. “If he is in Pakistan we would like to have his GPS coordinates. Kindly give them to us. We will go after him.”

• That Pakistan’s government is unstable. “Pakistan is a stable country. We are a nuclear state. . . . We have many issues with our government, but that does not mean that we as a country are unstable or that we require any assistance from outside to make us stable. We will defend our sovereignty at all costs. And, for that, we as a nation are united.”

• That Pakistan’s nuclear weapons could fall into the wrong hands. “Nobody talks about the nukes in India, but the West has an obsession with our nukes. And the West needs to get rid of its fears about Pakistan’s nukes because the Pakistani armed forces are fully capable of securing our nuclear assets and as a parliamentarian I have full faith that they will do so.”

One common criticism in the West is that Pakistan has been so obsessed over perceived threats from India that it has ignored the deadly buildup by the Taliban and other militant forces. I asked Memon to respond.

She was ready: “Yes we are obsessed with India, but we are rationally obsessed. India has actually sent infiltrators and agents into Pakistan to destabilize areas. …. So yes, India is an issue, and it will continue to be until you resolve the Kashmir conflict.”

If there is any hope for Obama’s strategy, it must be an AfPakIn approach, she insisted.

“India has to be included,” she said. “Without including India, you don’t solve the region’s issues because India is part of the problem. . . . India does not wish to discuss the core issue, which is Kashmir. There are certain issues in the Muslim world — like Palestine and like Kashmir — which, if they are not resolved, will continue to create instability.”

On another touchy issue, Memon adamantly rejected an effort by the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs last week to attach conditions to $400 million in military aid for Pakistan. One condition would have required “direct access to Pakistani nationals” associated with nuclear weapons material supply networks, Reuters reported. It was a clear bid to question the founder of Pakistan’s nuclear program, A.Q. Khan. He disputes allegations that he ran an international black market in atomic technology, and Pakistan has shielded him from outside investigators.  

“That is a complete no go,” Memon said. “No way! No parliamentarian would allow Dr. A. Q. to be given to anyone for interrogation.”

Why not?

“Because this is nobody else’s business.”

She also rejected the U.S. deployment of killer drones to strike militant targets in Pakistan’s border region near Afghanistan.

“Please give us the drones, and we will man them ourselves,” Memon said. “We don’t wish to have you involved in droning our lands because you are not respecting our sovereignty.”

Even when it comes to fighting the common enemy, Memon expressed Pakistan’s independent spirit.

“We need to zap out the extremists from wherever they are,” she said. “But we need to do it, no one else.”

Still, the country needs U.S. dollars. And the masses of displaced Pakistanis make the need ever more compelling. Washington is preparing to send $110 million for their cause as well as more military aid.

“We need aid right now and it’s not a good position to be in,” Memon said. “But we don’t wish to have aid without dignity because we are a nuclear state. And a lot of issues within Pakistan have been created by the West’s involvement in the Afghanistan situation since the 1970s and ’80s. So the West has a responsibility for what’s happening in Pakistan now.”

Sharon Schmickle writes about national and foreign affairs and science. She can be reached at sschmickle [at] minnpost [dot] com.

 

DT- Pak

Daily Times 23rd May Marvi Meets US Committee Head PML MNA Marvi Memon has met US House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman in Washington and urged the US authorities to remove all intrusive conditions form the final legislation on the aid package for Pakistan. A press release said that Memon, who is now in the US, said had met Berman before discussion on the proposed package started in the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee. Following the meeting, the committee endorse a bipartisan measure to authorize a combined packaged of $7.5 billion economic and more than $2 billion security assistance for Pakistan over the next five years. She said she urged the chairman Berman to remove all intrusive clauses from the package.

 

Newsweek

I was told that the five female members from the Pakistani Parliament visiting Washington this week were interested in women and politics in America, and so I was unprepared for their real agenda, which was to tell the media how disappointed they are that President Obama has adopted his predecessor’s policies when it comes to Pakistan. They shouldn’t have been surprised. Obama said during the campaign that he would fight the Afghanistan war harder. The escalation impacts the Pakistani side of the border, which serves as a sanctuary for Al Qaeda, and is likely where Osama bin  may someday be found.

With Taliban fighters controlling Pakistan’s Swat Valley and moving into the town of Buner, just 60 miles from Islamabad, the Obama administration pressed Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari to take action. A military offensive launched while Zardari was in Washington earlier this month has driven more than a million people from their homes, and these visiting parliamentarians wanted me to know that a lot of Pakistanis blame America, that these military operations were done at the behest of the U.S., that this is America’s war. That perception is so widespread that the Zardari government is running TV and print ads reminding the Pakistani public of the cost of extremism, from the assassination of Benazir Bhutto to last year’s truck-bomb explosion at the Marriott in Islamabad. 
 
“It’s our war against the extremes,” says Marvi Memon, the most outspoken of the visiting delegation and a member of the Pakistan Muslim League. But she wants to know why the U.S. isn’t doing more to aid the displaced persons. Why isn’t there a number to call on television the way there was for the victims of Katrina? This week, the State Department had put in place a system for people to text $5 for Pakistani relief efforts. That morning, as Memon and the others in the delegation urged more assistance, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stood in the White House briefing room announcing a $110 million aid package.

Listening to Memon and the others was like having a fire hose turned on as the grievances kept coming. All five are Muslims, two were sheathed in traditional dress, but they are not Taliban sympathizers or fundamentalists, and they believe that’s how Americans see them. They are insulted by the Obama policy of AF-PAC that lumps them in with Afghanistan, a backward nation with a much smaller population, and they seethe at what they see as a double standard that leaves India out of the mix. They want an AF-PAC-IN policy that confronts the longstanding conflict with India over Kashmir. They’re so sensitive about their standing as a nation that they see slights where they’re not intended, complaining that a photo of the Afghani and Pakistani presidents with Hillary Clinton in the middle represented a lapse in protocol because she is not a head of state. A picture with Obama was taken the next day.

What I found particularly eye-opening-and I suppose I shouldn’t have been surprised-is their fierce dedication to their country’s nuclear program. On the day of their visit, The New York Times ran a front-page story about Pakistan adding to its nuclear arsenal, perhaps with U.S. money meant to battle insurgents, while Obama and other top officials tried to reassure Americans about backup plans to secure the weapons, if necessary. Memon, her dark eyes flashing, said the nuclear program is “extremely dear to any Pakistani, not just the armed forces. It is the ultimate deterrent against India, and we will not allow this vital weapon to slip out of our hands. If Pakistan decides to build up its arsenal for our security, we don’t appreciate being told not to. We’re a proud nation and independent. You can’t give dictation to another country.”

In a written statement she had prepared for me, she said Americans should substantiate their claims about the whereabouts of bin Laden “with GPS locations,” or else stop making such far-reaching assertions that Pakistan is harboring him. President Obama believes very strongly that we should look to the future rather than the past, but in Pakistan, the legacy of mistrust and miscalculation can’t be set aside-anymore than it can here at home.

 

times of india

: Bowing to Islamabad’s sensitivities and the Obama administration’s lobbying, a US Congressional panel on Wednesday dropped an explicit demand for access to nuclear smuggler A Q Khan and preventing terrorist attacks against India as conditions in a legislation that triples US aid to Pakistan to $ 1.5 billion annually. ( Watch ) In marking up the Pakistan Enduring Assistance and Cooperation Enhancement Act (HR 1886 or Peace Act), the House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC), under pressure from the Obama administration, took cognizance of Pakistan’s complaint that it felt “humiliated” by language implicating the country in nuclear proliferation and cross-border terrorism, particularly mention of its low-grade war on India. In a token gesture, the committee reworked the language to say Pakistan will have to be providing “access to Pakistani nationals” connected to proliferation networks, “ceasing support, including by any elements within the Pakistan military or its intelligence agency, to extremist and terrorist groups” and “preventing cross border attacks into neighboring countries” as conditions for US security assistance. It was the best the administration could extract from the Committee after Pakistani lawmakers remonstrated loudly about benchmarks they said were degrading. “We need aid, but aid with dignity,” Marvi Memon, a visiting Pakistani legislator close to former dictator Pervez Musharraf, said in a C-Span interview. “There are some no-go areas that are totally not acceptable.” She identified the legislative demand for access to A Q Khan as one such area. But US law-makers remained unimpressed by what some Congressional sources said were Pakistan’s tantrums. “For far too long, Pakistan has taken US assistance with one hand, while undoing US efforts to bring stability to Afghanistan with the other. For far too long, Pakistan has been receiving US aid to fight terrorism, while keeping its army aimed at India. This legislation lays down an important principle — that Pakistani actions will have consequences,”Ed Royce, a Republican member from California said. Making no secret that the bill would still hold Pakistan accountable on specific benchmarks, Royce said in a statement that “Congress is sending an important signal – that we must see progress on A Q Khan, ISI,and terrorists targeting US troops and neighboring India.” The House committee bill now goes before the full House even as similar legislation, which is much lighter on benchmarks, makes its way through the US Senate. The two bills will then be discussed at a ‘conference’ — where the administration is expected to side with the less punitive Senate legislation — to arrive at one single bill which will be voted and sent to the President. Former Presidential candidate John Kerry is leading the effort to dilute the benchmarks in the bill, arguing that make it too tough or rigid will not allow Washington to achieve its goals. But the House leadership is insistent that Pakistan has to be called to account and there should be no free lunches, as promised by President Obama. “Contrary to what some have said, these are not ‘rigid’ or ‘inflexible’ condition,.” said Howard Berman, the Democratic chairman of the HFAC. “To ensure that the President has sufficient flexibility, we provide a waiver if he is unable to make the determinations (on non-proliferation and cutting terrorism links).” “I think this is an excellent bill that will strengthen the critical US-Pakistan relationship and support US national security objectives in South Asia,” he added. Whether the Senate and the administration agrees remains to be seen.

 

news

Concerned over the recently signed memorandum of understanding (MoU) on Pak-Afghan transit trade, a cross-party parliamentary group is in the offing to block India benefiting from this facility. Consultations among legislators belonging to both sides of the aisle in the National Assembly are currently underway to form the panel and formally announce its making shortly, sources revealed to ‘The News’ here. “There is a growing concern among lawmakers of the ruling coalition and opposition parties over the Pak-Afghan MoU, which has been greatly hailed by the US, as it aims at promoting regional trade and not bilateral trade,” these sources quoted some of the legislators, actively engaged in the formation of the group. Sources pointed out that Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q) legislator Marvi Memon was taking the lead in efforts to form the group as early as possible. When contacted, Marvi, who had filed an adjournment motion with the National Assembly Secretariat, seeking debate on the matter in the House, confirmed that she already had won support of MNAs from several parties, particularly from the PML-N and the PPP on the initiative. However, she declined to disclose identity of the lawmakers, saying it would be premature to reveal their names. She claimed that the move had gained support from almost all the parliamentary parties. “I had filed a motion for an in-House debate on the issue, but it was not entertained. Afterwards, I raised the issue on a point of order. On Thursday, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Malik Ammad briefly spoke on the issue, but I am not satisfied with his explanation,” she contended. She was of the view that the MoU was going to ultimately facilitate Indian trade, harming Pakistan’s security and economic interests and added the government should have not shied away from a debate in the assembly in this connection, if this was not so. Meanwhile, the combined opposition has moved the Senate for an in-House debate on the Pak-Afghan MoU on transit trade. Expressing concern over what the political parties called a dubious initiative, they called on the government to take the Parliament into confidence on the memorandum of understanding signed with Afghanistan recently in the US. Leader of Opposition in the Upper House of Parliament Wasim Sajjad submitted an adjournment motion with the Senate Secretariat on Friday. He also filed a question regarding the matter. Talking to ‘The News’ here, the opposition leader said he had raised two points through a question: had the government taken into account Pakistan’s security and economic interests vis-a-vis the transit trade under an MoU. A noted economic expert Senator Prof Khurshid Ahmad has also submitted an adjournment motion with the Senate, seeking a full debate on the issue. “The Foreign Office is misleading the nation on the matter. It is correct there is no mention of India in the MoU, but its focus will be to facilitate trade among neighbours in the region,” he maintained. Khurshid is vice-chairman of independent group of senators. He pointed out that if the issue was of Pak-Afghan transit trade, it was already going on since early 1960s, but its signing in the presence of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her describing it a historic happening was enough to conclude that it would serve regional trade interests, particularly India. The veteran legislator noted that had it been the issue of bilateral trade, she would have referred to it, but she talked of regional trade and not bilateral trade.

 

nation

Will the Parliament debate and review the commitments and statements made by Mr Zardari in USA during his recent visit? Will he recall what Mr Barack Obama told him in the brief one-on-one meeting? Will the members of Cabinet be apprised of the discussion that took place between the two and whether the question of drone attacks was addressed? Was Mr Zardari authorised to endorse the Memorandum of Understanding on transit trade between Pakistan and Afghanistan and “beyond?” Why was the US secretary of state so very keen about this MOU – so very concerned that she literally presided over the meeting attended by the two presidents? Why did she call it a “historic event” and “an important milestone?” Why were the two presidents practically downgraded to the level of a foreign minister, Hillary herself being one? Something bilateral was turned into a trilateral affair with a formal signing ceremony arranged at a place thousands of miles away from Kabul and Islamabad. Good that the matter is being taken up in the National Assembly. Marvi Memon is raising the issue by moving an adjournment motion. Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, leader of the opposition told the reporters on Wednesday: “We will launch an agitation against the agreement, besides opposing it in the Parliament.” Although the MOU does not mention India, the general feeling is that New Delhi will be a major beneficiary of it. India has wanted a transit facility to Afghanistan since 1947. Pakistan for good reasons has been resisting the grant of this concession. If India succeeds in securing this facility the consequences for Pakistan’s trade, industry and strategic interests could be most harmful. It is well known that largescale goods going into Afghanistan via Pakistan have considerably damaged our economy because of resultant smuggling of the stuff back into our territory. It is important that the MOU is thoroughly analysed and its contents fully examined in the light of the consequential implications. It shouldn’t be treated rhetorically in the Parliament for merely scoring points and criticising the government. Quite a lot is at stake. India is obviously working behind the scenes and Washington is more than willing to oblige New Delhi to strengthen its role in the region. The added reason why it must be addressed seriously and vigorously is the requirement thrust on the Government of Pakistan that the two governments must “undertake to conclude and sign a complete Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement as early as possible and no later than December 31, 2009.” A coordination committee is also on the cards to “resolve all issues relating to cross-border commerce and inland transit.”

 

press

14th May News Item for Web
 
The News
May 14, 2009
Petroleum products heavily taxed, admits government
The government on Wednesday conceded in the National Assembly that the petroleum products were heavily taxed but said the revenue thus generated also went to private oil companies. Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Dr Babar Awan sought the opposition’s help in introducing a legislation to reshape the Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority (OGRA) to make it pro-people.Raising the issue on points of order, the opposition members asked the government to reduce the oil prices before the apex court ordered it to do so, following a report of a judicial commission. Ms Marvi Memon (PML-Q) asked the government whether it had any plan to reduce the prices of petroleum products since the apex court had directed the government to bring down the prices. Leader of the Opposition Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan said, “If the government does not correct things, then others will do it.” He said there was an urgent need to rationalise the prices of petroleum products and he would convey the sentiments of the members of the house on the issue to the prime minister. (TN)
 
 
The News
13th May
 
Marvi Memon (PML-Q) blamed India and its intelligence agency RAW for destabilising Pakistan and said New Delhi does not deserve any favour in transit trade with Afghanistan. During the debate, legislators from both sides of the aisle supported the military operation in Swat and said the army should be encouraged to wipe out the militants. Marvi Memon asked the government to rid the country of militants and terrorists who are challenging the writ of the State. She said the PML-Q fully supports the government in its campaign to eliminate the extremists who have become a challenge for the society. She came hard on the government over the reports of cut in the country’s nuclear budget, saying, her party will not allow the government to reduce our nuclear capabilities
 
The Nation
13th May
 
Marvi Memon of PML-Q also supported the military operation in Swat and said, “You can’t have the cake and eat it too. We supported Nizam-e-Adl for peace but after it the writ of the government was challenged. We would support the government and strengthen it for military operation against the militants.”  She said that the government should explain how the Taliban violated peace agreement in Swat. She was of the view that RAW was busy in destabilizing the country, and said, “Our Armed Forces are fully equipped to give a befitting response to the enemies of the country.” About displaced persons, she said that the government should formulate a strategy in this regard and establish IDPs’ cell under the Prime Minister including representation of all the provinces in it. She also opposed the Transit Trade Agreement and the reduction of nuclear capability and research work. (N)

 

may 12

Dawn-

Pakistan Muslim League-Q member Marvi Memon, a usual critic of the present PPP-led ruling coalition, seemed a changed person on Tuesday when she said it was time to support the government and the military in the fight against extremism and re-establish the writ of the state in the troubled region.

She said the militants would not be able to stand up if they realised the whole nation was one against them, and called for a ‘simultaneous blitz’ against extremist cells in whatever province they might be.

Daily Times-

The PML-Q’s Marvi Memon said it was time to decide if “we are against the extremists or not”.

ARY website/ APP

 - Pakistan Muslim League (Quaid-e-Azam) MNA Marvi Memon said the party accepted the Nizam-e Adl but unfortunately the militants reciprocated it with violence. She said the militants have no other option but to accept the writ of the government and have no excuse to attack military convoys, educational institutes and security forces check posts. Marvi suggested setting up of a cell under the Prime Minister to support IDPs in which the political parties should be given representation.

- foreign press-

“Wherever there are extremist sleeper cells, it needs to be a blitz action simultaneously to take them out,” said Marvi Memon, an opposition lawmaker. “It’s us versus the extremists and the entire country needs to galvanize support for the armed forces, for the government.”

 

press

ISLAMABAD: The signing of a memorandum of understanding on transit trade between Pakistan and Afghanistan is likely to generate a heated debate in the next session of the National Assembly, which begins on Monday.

Marvi Memon, a PML-Q leader, has submitted an adjournment motion seeking a discussion on an issue of ‘urgent public importance’.

Under Rule 110 of the Rules of the Procedure and Conduct of Business in the National Assembly, an adjournment motion is submitted to discuss matters of public importance.

Talking to Dawn, Ms Memon said on the one hand the government claimed that parliament was supreme, but on the other it was taking decisions on important issues without taking parliament into confidence. She said the MoU would ultimately allow India to use Wagah-Khyber route for trade with Afghanistan.

‘The issue of transit trade between Afghanistan and India through Pakistan is not a trivial matter and the government should have first taken parliament into confidence before signing any MoU.’

‘Attempts were made by the Indian lobby in US for such a facility in the past, but all previous governments resisted the move considering its far-reaching repercussions,’ the PML-Q leader said.

She said the present government did not resist the pressure exerted by the Indian lobby through the US administration. ‘We want an open discussion whether the MoU is in Pakistan’s interest or otherwise,’ she said.

 

press

Nawa-i-Waqat

May 9, 2009

 

We will fail all conspiracies to sell Pakistan for the sake of power: Marvi Memon

Transit Trade Agreement was India’s plot Zardari became tool

PML MNA and renowned analyst Marvi Memon has strongly criticized the recent memorandum of understanding signed between Pakistan and Afghanistan on Transit Trade Agreement and said that India thrived in its conspiracy against Pakistan and that our rulers sold our previous govts 43 year old definite stance on this issue in just one night for the sake of power. She said Zardari instead of holding India accountable for terrorists activates in Balochistan and FATA gave India transit facility through Wagah border. Our president has become tool for Indian conspiracies she said.

 

 

The News

May 8^th, 2009

15,000 bottles of blood required daily for transfusion’

 

About 15,000 bottles of blood are required monthly in Karachi alone to cater the blood requirement of Thalassaemia but existing blood banks cannot arrange for the supply of demanded quantum of blood, said Kashif Iqbal Thalassaemia Care Centre (KITCC), Chairman Muhammad Iqbal while talking to The News on Thursday.

Criticising the government, he said that Marvi Memon had once argued in the National Assembly that pre-marriage couple testing for Thalassemia should be made compulsory as is the tradition in other countries but Federal Health Minister Ijaz Jakharani opposed it.

 

 

Daily Times

May 8^th, 2009

PML-Q to support govt’s logical decision

 

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q)’s Marvi Memon called Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani’s speech very logical. The PML-Q member said her party would support the government’s decision of eliminating the Taliban from the country. She said the best way to support the government at this critical time was assisting it to take care of the internally displaced persons.

 

 

Jinnah

5^th May

PML leaders Ameer Muqam, Riayaz Pirzada and Marvi Memon said Pakistan was doing well in last govt.