In March, the United States co-hosted the second virtual Democracy Summit with more than 120 countries represented. Pakistan declined an invitation to attend, saying instead that it would pursue one-on-one dialogue with the US and other nations that participated in the summit.
Pakistan’s decision reportedly stemmed in part from the US move to include Taiwan in the meeting while keeping China out. Beijing views Taiwan as a part of China. Both Pakistan and the US uphold the one-China policy and don’t recognise Taiwan as an independent nation.
While Islamabad chose not to attend the US-led Democracy Summit, its representatives attended the International Forum on Democracy: Shared Human Values in Beijing and the Boao Forum for Asia on the Chinese island of Hainan just a week earlier.
Its attendance record marks a break from a careful diplomatic balance that Pakistan has long tried to maintain in its relations between the US and China.
In the past, Pakistani leaders have frequently offered to mediate between Washington and Beijing as they did in 1971, when leaders of the US and China moved away from decades of deep mistrust to forge a relationship. The credibility that allowed Pakistan to help the two powers communicate came from its artful diplomacy over several decades.
In 1954, when Pakistan joined the US-led security alliance, the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), it ensured that the agreement did not explicitly mention Chinese communism. Prior to participating in the first SEATO conference, the Pakistani ambassador met with Chinese officials in Beijing to assure them of Islamabad’s commitment to maintaining “happy and harmonious” ties.
At the African-Asian conference in Bandung in 1955, Pakistani Prime Minister Muhammad Ali Bogra reiterated Pakistan’s position to his Chinese counterpart, Zhou Enlai, that its alliance with the US was not anti-China but rather aimed against India. Beijing recognised Pakistan’s stance and directed criticism at the United States, choosing not to oppose Pakistan’s membership in the US-led security alliances.
Then, as Sino-Pakistani military ties grew stronger after China’s border war with India in 1962 and its support of Pakistan during the latter’s war with India in 1965, Pakistan ensured that its alliance with China did not threaten American interests in the Asia-Pacific region.
Pakistan refrained from backing China’s demand that the US withdraw its forces from Vietnam and other parts of the region. At the same time, it has consistently supported the one-China policy, refusing to recognise Taiwan as an independent nation.
This pragmatic, flexible and somewhat independent approach allowed the country to act as a bridge between Washington and Beijing in 1971. But by refusing to attend multilateral political dialogues in Washington while showing up in China for similar discussions, Islamabad is carrying out a pivot that could restrict its ability to navigate the US-China strategic rivalry.
At the democracy forum in Beijing, Mushahid Hussain Sayed, chairman of Pakistan’s Senate Committee on Defence, praised China’s “democratic” system for reducing poverty and criticised the “so-called” US Democracy Summit for weaponising democracy and human rights.
Meanwhile, former National Security Adviser Moeed Yusuf spoke at the Boao Forum, calling for the US and China to collaborate on addressing global challenges like climate change and debt distress without engaging in power politics. Given Pakistan’s significant debt to China (about 30 percent of its overall $100bn external debt) and the lack of agreement between China and the Paris Club of major lending nations on a mechanism to reform the global lending structure, Yusuf’s message made sense.
Pakistan could have carried this discussion forward by sending its representatives to the US Democracy Summit and calling for mechanisms to provide solutions to climate- and debt-vulnerable countries. Islamabad needs to register concerns at both powers’ forums, urging them to cooperate on debt restructuring for countries facing debt distress and on financing climate-adaptive infrastructure in countries like Pakistan.
If Pakistan disagreed with any of the paragraphs in the US summit’s declaration, it could have expressed its reservations. Twelve of the 74 countries that endorsed the declaration – including India, Israel, the Philippines, Mexico and Poland – expressed reservations or disassociated themselves from some of the paragraphs.
For instance, India expressed opposition to three paragraphs related to the rule of law, the International Criminal Court and internet restrictions. Pakistan had the opportunity to similarly disassociate itself from paragraphs it considered contrary to its national interests or not reflective of its views. On top of that, Islamabad could have taken a more constructive approach by presenting its perspective and proposing ways to facilitate democratic debates and improve global approaches on issues that matter to it.
Nighat Dad, a Pakistani digital rights activist, seized the opportunity to share the stage with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and forcefully advocated for the advancement of democracy and internet freedom in the digital age. She underscored the importance of considering the experiences of marginalised communities, such as female journalists and activists, in global debates on the democratic governance of the internet. Dad emphasised the need to acknowledge the solutions proposed by local communities in the Global South.
Pakistan’s government could have ensured that its voice was heard on platforms organised by both of the world’s two big powers. It should have presented itself as an independent actor that can speak for itself without having to be apologetic or subservient to any power centre.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
Quebec legislature member Youri Chassin has announced he’s leaving the Coalition Avenir Québec government to sit as an Independent.
He announced the decision shortly after writing an open letter criticizing Premier François Legault’s government for abandoning its principles of smaller government.
In the letter published in Le Journal de Montréal and Le Journal de Québec, Chassin accused the party of falling back on what he called the old formula of throwing money at problems instead of looking to do things differently.
Chassin says public services are more fragile than ever, despite rising spending that pushed the province to a record $11-billion deficit projected in the last budget.
He is the second CAQ member to leave the party in a little more than one week, after economy and energy minister Pierre Fitzgibbon announced Sept. 4 he would leave because he lost motivation to do his job.
Chassin says he has no intention of joining another party and will instead sit as an Independent until the end of his term.
He has represented the Saint-Jérôme riding since the CAQ rose to power in 2018, but has not served in cabinet.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 12, 2024.
MONTREAL – NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says he will not be taking advice from Pierre Poilievre after the Conservative leader challenged him to bring down government.
“I say directly to Pierre Poilievre: I’m not going to listen to you,” said Singh on Wednesday, accusing Poilievre of wanting to take away dental-care coverage from Canadians, among other things.
“I’m not going to listen to your advice. You want to destroy people’s lives, I want to build up a brighter future.”
Earlier in the day, Poilievre challenged Singh to commit to voting non-confidence in the government, saying his party will force a vote in the House of Commons “at the earliest possibly opportunity.”
“I’m asking Jagmeet Singh and the NDP to commit unequivocally before Monday’s byelections: will they vote non-confidence to bring down the costly coalition and trigger a carbon tax election, or will Jagmeet Singh sell out Canadians again?” Poilievre said.
“It’s put up or shut up time for the NDP.”
While Singh rejected the idea he would ever listen to Poilievre, he did not say how the NDP would vote on a non-confidence motion.
“I’ve said on any vote, we’re going to look at the vote and we’ll make our decision. I’m not going to say our decision ahead of time,” he said.
Singh’s top adviser said on Tuesday the NDP leader is not particularly eager to trigger an election, even as the Conservatives challenge him to do just that.
Anne McGrath, Singh’s principal secretary, says there will be more volatility in Parliament and the odds of an early election have risen.
“I don’t think he is anxious to launch one, or chomping at the bit to have one, but it can happen,” she said in an interview.
New Democrat MPs are in a second day of meetings in Montreal as they nail down a plan for how to navigate the minority Parliament this fall.
The caucus retreat comes one week after Singh announced the party has left the supply-and-confidence agreement with the governing Liberals.
It’s also taking place in the very city where New Democrats are hoping to pick up a seat on Monday, when voters go to the polls in Montreal’s LaSalle—Émard—Verdun. A second byelection is being held that day in the Winnipeg riding of Elmwood—Transcona, where the NDP is hoping to hold onto a seat the Conservatives are also vying for.
While New Democrats are seeking to distance themselves from the Liberals, they don’t appear ready to trigger a general election.
Singh signalled on Tuesday that he will have more to say Wednesday about the party’s strategy for the upcoming sitting.
He is hoping to convince Canadians that his party can defeat the federal Conservatives, who have been riding high in the polls over the last year.
Singh has attacked Poilievre as someone who would bring back Harper-style cuts to programs that Canadians rely on, including the national dental-care program that was part of the supply-and-confidence agreement.
The Canadian Press has asked Poilievre’s office whether the Conservative leader intends to keep the program in place, if he forms government after the next election.
With the return of Parliament just days away, the NDP is also keeping in mind how other parties will look to capitalize on the new makeup of the House of Commons.
The Bloc Québécois has already indicated that it’s written up a list of demands for the Liberals in exchange for support on votes.
The next federal election must take place by October 2025 at the latest.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante is defending her decision to turn off comments on her social media accounts — with an announcement on social media.
She posted screenshots to X this morning of vulgar names she’s been called on the platform, and says comments on her posts for months have been dominated by insults, to the point that she decided to block them.
Montreal’s Opposition leader and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association have criticized Plante for limiting freedom of expression by restricting comments on her X and Instagram accounts.
They say elected officials who use social media should be willing to hear from constituents on those platforms.
However, Plante says some people may believe there is a fundamental right to call someone offensive names and to normalize violence online, but she disagrees.
Her statement on X is closed to comments.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
