Russia will not sell arms to Pakistan

jalismirza

Voter (50+ posts)


Wa kia bat ha janab.....



انہوں نے یہ بات پاکستان سے متعلق پوچھے گئے ايک سوال کے جواب میں کہی۔ روگوزن ان دنو*ں بھارت کے دورے پر ہیں۔ وہ پير کے روز بھارتی وزیر خارجہ ایس ایم کرشنا کے ہمراہ بین الحکومتی کمیشن کے اجلاس کی صدارت کریں گے، جس میں روس اور بھارت کے مابین تجارت، معیشت، سائنس، ٹیکنالوجی اور ثقافتی تعاون سے متعلق امور زیر بحث آئیں گے۔


روسی نائب وزیر اعظم نے گزشتہ روز نئی دہلی میں صحافیوں کے سوالات کے جواب دیے۔ جب ان سے پوچھا گیا کہ کیا روس پاکستان کو اسلحہ فراہم کرے گا تو انہوں نے کہا، ’’ آپ کو یہ سمجھنا چاہیے کہ ہم آپ کے دشمنوں سے ڈیل نہیں کرتے، ہم انہیں کوئی ہتھیار فراہم نہیں کرتے۔‘‘ ان کے بقول روس نے بھارت کو اسلحے کی فراہمی پر کوئی قدغن نہیں لگائی اور روس اور بھارت کے تعلقات میں کوئی تنازعہ نہیں ہے۔ ’’ ہم نے بھارت کے لیے اس کی سرحدوں پر کبھی مسائل پیدا نہیں کیے، یہ بھارت کا دوست ہونے کے ناطے ایک ایڈوانٹج ہے۔‘‘


روسی نائب وزیر اعظم کے بقول ان کا ملک بھارت میں مسافر بردار طیاروں اور جنگی ٹینکوں کی تیاری پر بھی آمادہ ہے۔ دونوں ملکوں کے اشتراک سے بننے والے BrahMos سپر سونک کروز میزائل کی کامیابی کی جانب اشارہ کرتے ہوئے روسی عہدیدار نے کہا کہ ان کا ملک بھارت کو دفاعی پیداوار کے حوالے سے نمایاں ملک بنانے کے لیے پر عزم ہے۔ اسی اثناء میں انہوں نے طیارہ بردار جنگی بحری جہاز ایڈمرل گورشکوف کی بھارت حوالگی میں حائل تکنیکی مسائل کا بھی ذکر کیا۔ روگوزن کے بقول بھارت اپنی بحریہ کے لیے اس جہاز کے حصول پر فخر محسوس کرے گا۔ ان تکنیکی مسائل کی جانب اشارہ کرتے ہوئے انہوں نے کہا، ’’ ہم جانتے ہیں کہ اس معاملے میں نظام الاوقات بہت اہم ہے، معیار اولین ترجیح ہے، مسائل دراصل ان پرزوں کی وجہ سے پیدا شدہ ہیں جو تیسرے ملک سے حاصل کیے گئے ہیں۔‘‘


علاقائی صورتحال پر تبصرہ کرتے ہوئے روسی وزیر نے کہا کہ افغانستان سے غیر ملکی فوج کے انخلاء کے بعد وہاں خطے میں دہشت گردی کی نئی لہر پیدا ہوسکتی ہے۔ ’’ ہزاروں دہشت گرد اور بنیاد پرست افغانستان اور اطراف کے خطے میں پناہ لینے کی کوشش کریں گے، اس سے وسطی ایشیا کے خطےکو نئے چیلنج درپیش ہوسکتے ہیں، یہ صورتحال روس اور بھارت کے لیے بڑا مسئلہ ہے۔‘‘ انہوں نے کہا کہ صورتحال پر قابو پانے کے لیے سیاسی اور سکیورٹی مانیٹیرنگ کرنا ہوگی اور دہشت گردی کی اس لہر سے اپنے شہریوں کو محفوظ رکھنے کی مشترکہ کوششیں کرنا ہوں گی۔
واضح رہے کہ روسی صدر ولادی میر پوٹن اگلے ماہ بھارت کا دورہ کر رہے ہیں، جس دوران باہمی تجارت کو 20 ارب ڈالر سالانہ تک بڑھانے سمیت دو طرفہ دلچسپی کے مختلف امور پر بات ہوگی۔

Russia will not sell arms to Pakistan
Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin on Sunday ruled out any arms sales to Pakistan and stressed that unlike other countries, Russia never created problems for India, reported Indian media. “We are always cooperating with India to ensure safety of the region. We never created trouble for India in the region as compared to other countries,” he told reporters in New Delhi. Rogozin was responding to a question on whether Russia was planning to expand military relations with Pakistan. “That’s our political advantage as a friend of India,” he said. Ahead of Russian President Valdimir Putin’s visit to India next month, Rogozin said “We don’t do military business with your enemies. We don’t transfer any arms to them,” he told journalists after arriving here to co-chair the India-Russia Inter-governmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific, Technological and Cultural Cooperation (IRIGC-TEC) with External Affairs Minister SM Krishna. Rogozin was clearing the air on several high-level engagements with Pakistan in recent times, which has led to talk about a reset in Russia-Pakistan ties. While Mr Putin cancelled his Islamabad visit last month, his Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov held consultations with the Pakistani leadership. Around the same time, Pakistan Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani visited Moscow. Russian Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, who was here a few days ago to hold talks with his Indian counterpart, AK Antony, on putting defence trade into a higher trajectory, besides sealing some pending deals, also became part of the story when he cancelled his visit when Gen Kayani was in Moscow. Indian officials hotly denied that Mr Serdyukov had postponed his India visit to be at hand to meet Mr Kayani in Moscow but they gave no reason for the Russian Defence Minister putting back his engagements in India by a week. Mr Rogozin, in-charge of Russia’s recently announced defence research organisation, will be taking up issues unresolved since his July visit — chiefly nuclear liability and investment by telecom company Sistema — besides touching on future areas of cooperation in the defence sector that were discussed by Mr Serdyukov. Mr. Rogozin indicated that tough negotiations lay ahead on the next two reactors at Kudankulam. Russia does not want the civil nuclear liability law to apply to the proposed units 3 and 4. India has not applied the law to units 1 and 2 (being challenged in the Supreme Court) because they were constructed under an agreement that predated the 2010 civil liability law. But it is against exempting units 3 and 4 because this will be seen as discriminating against companies from the US and France. While warning that the reactors would become more expensive if they were brought under the liability law, Rogozin also addressed safety issues about units 1 and 2. Post-Fukushima, protests delayed their operationalisation. and even Sri Lanka was concerned enough to begin talks with India on a civil nuclear agreement whose important components will be nuclear safety and response to nuclear accidents.
 
Advertisement
Last edited by a moderator:

sabir1

Senator (1k+ posts)
acha hai. nahi diay.werna inhoon nay aasman sar per utha laina tha keh waha bhau wah.hum ne kamal kar dia jese russia nay muft main dena ho sab
 

jalismirza

Voter (50+ posts)
I don't know what's Russia intention behind this but it will be great suffering for Pakistan,because it were only contact by which we can blackmail america :-(

and in a recent visit of high powered Russian delegation which signed a number of Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) with Pakistan on energy, railway and steel sectors, the premier said that Pakistan Steel Mills, a symbol of the friendship of Pakistan and Russia in the 20th century, will now serve as a bridge to further intensify relations between the two countries in the 21st century.
 

sabir1

Senator (1k+ posts)
by the way , what are Pakistani engineers doing in armed forces? they get free education in fact paid education with free medical and residence still they are not able to produce a single nut and bolt in pakistan
 

rtabasum2

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
We don't need arms fom anyone. we are self suffiicent and exporting from our ever green nursey of suicide bombers to Afghanistan as well
 

tariisb

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)


اچھی خبر ہے ، ہماری معیشت ایک اور بوجھ سے بچ جاۓ گی ، امریکہ بھی انکار کر دے تو ، وہ دن ہماری ترقی کا نکتہ آغاز ہوگا


اگر دنیا میں ، بھارت ، اسرائیل ، پاکستان ، اور سعودیہ ، نہ ہوں تو ، دنیا کی اسلحہ ساز فیکٹریاں ، دیوالیہ ہوجائیں ، کیسے کیسوں کا روزگار ، ان "جنونیوں" کی وجہ سے لگا ہوا ہے

 

ASQR1

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
it could be a political byan, let us wait and see instead of jumping to conclusion.
 
Last edited:

aqibarain

Senator (1k+ posts)
itnay T*tay uthanay ka koi faida ni hua hamari government ko... time bhi zaya aur hath bhi ganday huay... :)
 

aftab818

MPA (400+ posts)
its about money, russia will sell whatever we want but we are beggars and always look for ncentives and borrowing, so india is high class prostitute and pakistan is ghatia AIDS zadda prostitue.
 

zhohaq

Minister (2k+ posts)
Indian foreign policy is a thousand times better then Pakistan.

This is how they treat relations with US,
like a nation with self respect and worth..
[HR][/HR]
[h=1]India appears ambivalent about role as U.S. strategy pivots toward Asia[/h][h=3]By Simon Denyer and Rama Lakshmi, Published: October 13[/h]NEW DELHI — If the soaring rhetoric of their burgeoning partnership is to be believed, India is the linchpin of Washington’s strategic pivot toward Asia.
But it has become apparent that New Delhi is ambivalent about playing a leading role in Washington’s new “rebalancing” act. So much so that some U.S. analysts are questioning whether India will ever be a dependable strategic partner for the United States, and whether New Delhi will ever match its global ambitions with a leadership role on the world stage.
“The U.S.-India strategic partnership came with great hype about India’s potential contribution to U.S. interests,” Colin Geraghty of the American Security Project in Washington said in a report this month, adding that a “sense of disappointment” has set in.
In Washington, analysts and business leaders have expressed disappointment in the past two years over the pace of reform in India, the lack of progress in civil nuclear cooperation and India’s continuing engagement with Iran. While the longer-term logic of the relationship remains firmly intact, there is a growing sense that India will never be a truly trusted ally.
The U.S. strategic rebalance reflects the Obama administration’s belief that the center of gravity of American foreign and economic policy has shifted toward Asia and that maintaining peace in the Asia-Pacific has become increasingly important as a result of China’s rapid rise.
In one of the few concrete measures announced so far, the U.S. Navy will gradually move more of its ships to the region, deploying 60 percent of its fleet there by 2020.
“India clearly plays an important role in our rebalance,” Deputy Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter said in an e-mail interview, looking to it as an “anchor of regional stability . . . and a partner on issues in the Indian Ocean and beyond.”
Privately, some senior Indian officials say they would welcome a stronger American presence in the region — New Delhi shares a strong strategic interest in hedging against China’s rise and in maintaining open sea lanes and free commerce throughout the region.
Publicly, though, the reaction has been distinctly lukewarm, with Adm. Nirmal Kumar Verma, then Indian naval chief, delivering what Indian media called a “snub” in August, when he said deployment in the Pacific and South China Sea was “not on the cards.”
“We want strategic autonomy,” retired Indian diplomat T.P. Sreenivasan said in Washington last month, according to a Foreign Policy blog post. “We don’t want to be identified with U.S. policy in Asia, even if we secretly like it.”
Caution regarding China
India’s reluctance to tie itself to the U.S. mast is partly a legacy of its Cold War antipathy toward Washington and distrust stemming from the imposition of American sanctions after India’s nuclear tests in 1974 and 1998.
India has also watched nervously in recent years as President Obama first courted China and then as he seemed to move toward a policy of containment.
The strategic rebalance has inflamed nationalist sentiment in China, and there is a sense in New Delhi that a little distance from the occasionally clumsy Americans is a generally sound foreign policy approach — especially when India shares a long, disputed border with the Chinese.
“India is a little wary about both the U.S. and China,” said retired Commodore C. Uday Bhaskar, a senior fellow at the Society for Policy Studies in New Delhi. “India would not want to be in a position where it is forced to defer to China, or make China belligerent by joining a formal military alliance with the U.S.”
U.S. officials acknowledge that the two democracies will not agree on every issue but emphasize their respect for India’s “strategic autonomy” and shared interests.
Nevertheless, with Marines deploying to Australia, the positioning of coastal combat ships in Singapore, and the Philippines reopening old bases to U.S. forces, “questions may arise in the U.S. security establishment and Asia about what India’s enduring contributions will be to this endeavour,” S. Amer Latif, a visiting fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, wrote in a report this year.
Growing frustration
Washington is not demanding any specific commitments from the Indians as part of the rebalance, but officials and defense manufacturers have expressed frustration over India’s refusal to sign two key defense agreements usually demanded of U.S. allies — enabling seamless communications between the two militaries’ weapons systems and guaranteeing mutual “logistical support.”
Defense trade between the two nations is booming, and India conducts more joint military *exercises with the United States than with any other country, but experts say military ties still lack a strategic and political underpinning.
India’s tentative “Look East” policy, which is supposed to foster closer ties with East and Southeast Asia, has also disappointed some U.S. officials and strategic experts who would like to see New Delhi forging closer trade and security links with America’s Asian allies.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton gave a New Delhi a nudge last year, urging it “not just to look east, but to engage east and act east, as well.”
“Is India willing to come out and say ‘we don’t like it’ if China misbehaves?” asked Paul Kapur, a professor of national security affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif. “India may not want to go on record saying that.”
Indeed, Clinton herself calls India a “strategic bet,” rather than a sure-fire certainty.
“You can see frustration in Washington because people are not entirely clear what India wants,” said Harsh V. Pant, a lecturer in the Department of Defense Studies in King’s College London, who says strategic autonomy effectively means India wants friendly relations with everybody. “That means you are not ready to make choices.”
“If India doesn’t want to take the risk, does it make sense for Washington to invest more in other partners, to invest in other Southeast Asian nations which are more willing to play ball?” he asked.
At a seminar last week, Indian National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon spoke of the “remarkable transformation” that had taken place in U.S.-India relations over the past decade, buttressed by a shared vision and a shared set of values.
And Richard Fontaine, president of the Center for a New American Security, said it would be wrong to give up on India.
“It’s easy to get caught up in the short-term frustrations . . . but the strategic logic that brings these two countries together is sound,” he said. “People are increasingly viewing India with more of a sense of realism than romanticism.”

The Washington Post Company
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...4b05d0-0e18-11e2-bb5e-492c0d30bff6_story.html
 

crazycolors

MPA (400+ posts)
Well its a good news to me which shows Pakistan is making its relationship with Russia for other purposes like trade, business, Afghan stability and investment in industrial sector....... i think its a news to cheer that in the end this relationship will not start with weapon deal because we bough enough weapons from America and our poor people suffered a lot ..... i think except weapons we have too much to do together ...... if our army is joining russian camp for weapons only then better we should stay away .....
 

drkjke

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
as for pakistani secular generals.if they had read quran ever, than they would have known that no one is friend of muslims other than other true muslim.kufar can never be muslim,s friends, be they china,america or russia or india.
kufar are friends of each other,they are ummatul wahid .this is all mentioned in quran but the people here are under satan,s control,who does not let them seek guidance from quran
 

Ali raza babar

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
as for pakistani secular generals.if they had read quran ever, than they would have known that [HI]no one is friend of muslims[/HI] other than other true muslim.kufar can never be muslim,s friends, be they china,america or russia or india.
kufar are friends of each other,they are ummatul wahid .this is all mentioned in quran but the people here are under satan,s control,who does not let them seek guidance from quran
And you claim you have read the Quran . Go and Read Surah Maida Ayat 82 and Come after that and comment . There is no such thing that you are claiming that nobody is a friend of a muslim . Allah Says otherwise .
 

Ali raza babar

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
by the way , what are Pakistani engineers doing in armed forces? they get free education in fact paid education with free medical and residence still[HI] they are not able to produce a single nut and bolt in pakistan
[/HI]
In Which world do you Live in mate ? Do you even know How much of arms we produce ourselves ?

Have you ever been to Wah Arms Factory ? No ?
Have ever Heard of Corner Shot Gun ? Only two countries had it as per my latest information . Israel and Pakistan and Pakistani Engineers made it themselves . Why do you people copy other remarks and say it without even researching on it ?
 
Sponsored Link

Latest Blogs Featured Discussion اردوخبریں