|You are in: Talking Point|
Monday, 4 November, 2002, 10:29 GMT
Should Pakistan be readmitted to the Commonwealth?
Pakistan remains suspended from Commonwealth meetings following talks between the organisation's foreign ministers in London on Friday.
The country was suspended after a military coup in 1999, but recently held elections to restore civilian rule.
Commonwealth Secretary General Don McKinnon said the ban would remain until the role of democratic institutions in the country became clearer.
Many feel that there are still questions over whether President Musharraf is really committed to handing over power.
But Pakistan's high commissioner in London said the country had been governed well over the last three years.
What do you think? Should Pakistan be readmitted to the Commonwealth?
This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.
Dr Behjat H. Syed, Karachi, Pakistan
First of all, we need to ask ourselves what the Commonwealth is all about. What's the purpose, the achievements, the significance and the benefits of it? Besides, realistically speaking, the ways things are shaping up for Britain, it's more likely to end up being a "colony" of either the USA or the EU. What then? Are the leaders of Commonwealth states still going to get together every year, as representatives of former colonies of a present-day colony?
Compared to what we have seen over the last few years of 'democratic' governments, President Musharraf's government has done well for the country and its people. His government has brought back some level of normality from the highly corrupt governments of Sharif and Benazir. As far as rejoining the Commonwealth, does it really matter?
Stephen Cavouti, Canada
Pakistan is a sovereign country, it does not need the support of the Commonwealth. The sun did set on the British Empire several decades ago.
Since Pakistan has shown a willingness to return democracy to its land, I believe it should be readmitted fully or perhaps on a trial basis.
However, why should Pakistan want to be in the Commonwealth? It has no real power and is unlikely to acquire any in the future. Southern Ireland and the USA are examples of former British territories that survive well without the Commonwealth and have little desire to enter it.
Jvalant Sampat, Princeton, New Jersey, USA
The Commonwealth is nothing but a joke and a waste of time and expenses. This body in the past 50 years has brought nothing fruitful to Pakistan. Who needs it? Pakistan is much better off without it.
As long as Pakistan continues to sponsor terrorism it should not be allowed to join the Commonwealth.
Hashir Rasul, Canada
What does Commonwealth stand for except for some ceremonial novelties? Have they got any agenda or future goals? What have they achieved for member countries in last 50 years? The Commonwealth should realize that they have to radically overhaul themselves to achieve anything positive for the people of the world today. The way things stand today Pakistan should be more than happy to stay out of the Commonwealth to avoid another administrative nuisance.
No, as long as Musharraf holds power in any form, Pakistan should not be readmitted.
Yes, Pakistan should definitely be readmitted to the Commonwealth now. It is totally unfair to deny the common man in the street the privileges of being in the Commonwealth for the mistakes of its leaders in the past.
Dr.Rajinder Sehgal, Canada
What did Pakistan get when it was in the Commonwealth? If our economy is getting better and people are happy, than who needs to be in the Commonwealth?
Of course Pakistan should be readmitted to the Commonwealth. Pakistan has done its share helping to bring a modicum of normality to the lives of the Afghanis.
By keeping Pakistan out of the Commonwealth, only political agendas are being satisfied. In reality, it is unlikely to have a real effect on Pakistan's economy whether or not they are a part of the Commonwealth!
Pakistan should be readmitted to the Commonwealth. It would definitely send a message to Pakistan about the dividends that they can reap by becoming democratic.
I believe that Pakistan should be re-instated to the Commonwealth, as it is apparent that most of the people of Pakistan are content with the improvements that the current administration have made. If they are happy with President Musharraf then who are we to argue?
It's only fair, South Africa was readmitted.
The Commonwealth should wait and see
if Pakistan keeps it
word and restores
I should say yes, as the decision to expel Pakistan was not just in the first place as it didn't hurt the government but the people of Pakistan. More importantly the Commonwealth should not follow the USA's policies like the Blair govt is doing, which is based purely on their own interests. The Commonwealth should show some character and should have its own policy independent of influential powers of the world
Baig M.Z., Singapore
Commonwealth countries should realise the importance of a true democracy in Pakistan, in view of current crises of terrorism around the world. Holding elections does not mean everything is normal. Long term vision and policy needs to be formulated to ensure the peace and stability in the region.
Pakistan should be readmitted as Commonwealth member.
01 Nov 02 | South Asia
25 Oct 02 | South Asia
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
Top Talking Point stories now:
Links to more Talking Point stories are at the foot of the page.
|E-mail this story to a friend|
Links to more Talking Point stories
To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> | To BBC World Service>>
© MMIII | News Sources | Privacy