ISLAMABAD: The government verified on Wednesday that its allegation about a foreign conspiracy against the high minister was grounded on a political string entered from one of the country’s operations abroad.
At a rally in Islamabad on Sunday, Prime Minister Imran Khan claimed that the opposition’s no-confidence stir against him was a result of a “ foreign conspiracy” because his external policy and finances were being conducted from abroad to oust him from power.
Though he didn’t originally give specific details about the threatening letter, he latterly opened up a bit because of critics distrusting his claim. The government originally offered to partake the letter with the principal justice of Pakistan, but latterly the high minister also briefed his press members about the contents of the letter.
In view of the legal bar on telling classified documents, a group of intelligencers was also handed twinkles of the press meeting at their commerce with the high minister.
State Department says no US government agency or functionary transferred a letter to Pakistan
No foreign government was named in that meeting, but the media persons were informed that a Pakistani envoy was told by an elderly functionary of the host country that they had issues with Prime Minister Khan’s foreign policy, especially his visit to Russia and the station on the ongoing Ukrainian war.
The Pakistani envoy was further conveyed that the unborn line of relations between the two countries was contingent upon the fate of the no-confidence stir that the opposition parties were also planning to bring against the high minister. The envoy was advised of serious counteraccusations if Prime Minister Khan survived the no-trust vote.
The string was reportedly transferred on March 7, a day before the opposition submitted the no-confidence stir and requested a National Assembly session for advancing on it.
Meanwhile, it has independently surfaced that the string was transferred by Pakistan’s also minister to the United States Asad Majeed on the base of his meeting with Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Donald Lu.
Ambassador Majeed has now moved to Brussels for taking up his new assignment and has been replaced by Ambassador Masood Khan.
Antithetical claims have surfaced from Islamabad and Washington about the meeting between Ambassador Majeed and Lu after PM Khan’s claim.
An elderly Pakistani functionary told Dawn the language used in the meeting by the American side was surprisingly harsh.
Meanwhile, Americans deny in private conversations that any specific communication was delivered to the Pakistani envoy.
It’s a well-known fact that the administration of US President Joe Biden was uneasy with Mr. Khan’s trip to Moscow which coincided with the launch of Russia’s irruption of Ukraine.
US State Department had intimately raised those enterprises and both sides admit that there had also been communication between them ahead of Mr. Khan’s Moscow trip in which an attempt was made to inhibit him from bearing the visit.
Latterly on March 1, Islamabad- grounded Western diplomats had also issued a statement, prompting the Pakistani government to condemn the Russian attack on Ukraine and support a resolution in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) calling on Moscow to stop the war.
Pakistan went on to hesitate in the UNGA vote and demanded that the conflict be resolved through dialogue and tactfulness.
The other issue the Americans reportedly had was with Mr. Khan’s foreign policy.
A couple of Pakistan’s former envoys to the United States told Dawn American officers generally didn’t brandish pitfalls during sanctioned meetings though their tone would vary from situation to situation.
Besides, countries routinely keep expressing displeasure or concern over others’ conduct in bilateral engagements.
They said that indeed if pitfalls were made in extreme situations, that was done in a subtle manner and, more importantly, presumptive deniability is maintained. “ They will clearly not do so in the presence of note-takers,” one of them fooled.
The two former ministers further observed that under PM Khan, the fundamentals of foreign policy hadn’t changed except that he was more oral. Thus, it was delicate to understand why they would have an issue with his policy now, they maintained, adding that Islamabad hadn’t hovered US interests moreover.
Interestingly, there were no signs of a rupture or new pressures in ties until Mr. Khan went public with the trouble.
Islamabad hosted Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights Uzra Zeya for the OIC Council of Foreign Ministers meeting held last week.
After a meeting with Ms. Zeya, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi twittered “ Bilaterally, Pakistan has a longstanding relationship with the US and we believe a regular and structured dialogue process ( was important) to promoting our bilateral and participated indigenous objects. We look forward to commemorating the Pak-US 75th anniversary of the establishment of political ties this time.”
Indeed Ambassador Majeed thanked Mr. Lu on Twitter for participation in a delegacy event on March 16.
US diplomats in Islamabad weren’t demarche indeed after the exposure.
A Western diplomat thinks that it has happed because someone had to be scapegoated for the current political extremity and there could have been no more option than the United States.
ANWAR IQBAL ADDS Meanwhile, the US State Department said on Wednesday that no US government agency or functionary had transferred a letter to Pakistan on the current political situation in the country.
Responding to questions from Dawn about the contended letter and US involvement in the no-confidence stir against the PTI government, a State Department prophet said “ There’s no verity to these allegations.”
According to some political sources in Washington, the letter could be a political string from Washington, drafted by an elderly Pakistani diplomat. “ The contents of the letter, supposedly, are grounded on informal conversations between Pakistani and other officers,” one political source said.
“ The contents, if correct, show a set of friendly officers from colorful countries indulging in some loud-thinking and delving. Nothing more,” the source added.
The sources said that similar exchanges frequently happed in capital metropolises around the world and diplomats frequently participated in the contents of similar exchanges with authorities in their home countries.
“ The purpose behind similar lines is to keep your government informed. It’s no sign of a conspiracy against a government or a personality,” another political source said.
