A statement issued by the Presidency in regards to the telephonic conversation between President Alvi and Palestinian President Mahmood Abbas a few days ago said that the former had suggested a ‘one-state’ solution for resolving the Palestine dispute. The exact words in the statement issued were “If two states solution was not acceptable to Israel then one state solution was the only way where Jews, Muslims and [a] good percentage of Christians could live to exercise equal political rights,” The statement invoked sharp reaction and almost all media channels started discussing this deviation from the well-entrenched stance by Pakistan on the issue. In the wake of this criticism the President retracted from the statement hours after issuing it.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, when approached by the media, said that Pakistan had an unwavering commitment to a fair and enduring resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, founded on the two-state solution, leading to the establishment of a sovereign and viable Palestinian state with Al Quds Al Sharif as its capital, along borders that existed prior to 1967 as enshrined in several resolutions adopted by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). It is worth mentioning that caretaker Prime Minister Anwarul Haq Kakar had also stressed the same position in his meeting with the Palestinian President in Riyadh where he had gone to attend to participate in the OIC summit convened to discuss the Gaza situation.
The issue also resonated in the Senate session on Tuesday. Senator Raza Rabbani, dilating on the issue, launched scathing criticism on the President and demanded his resignation for committing this diplomatic faux pas. Caretaker foreign minister Jalil Abbas Gilani responding to the criticism by senate members stated that the President did not seek any input from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs before calling his Palestinian counterpart. President Alvi is holding this august position for the last five years and should have known that in case of interaction with any head of the foreign government or a dignitary it is invariably desirable to consult the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to ascertain the nature of relations and the stated position on the issue that has to be discussed or broached. It is indeed mind-boggling that the President demonstrated such ignorance of the diplomatic norms and protocols.
The thing is that retracting from the earlier statement by the President is of no substance. Since he suggested this solution to the Palestinian President during the conversation he must surely have been flabbergasted by this unexpected discourse by the President of a country which has always been on the forefront to plead the Palestinian cause and staunchly supported the two-state solution, also agreed by the global community and the Islamic world.
No matter how much flak is heaped on him for the disrespect of the constitution and the diplomatic faux pas that he has now committed in regards to statement on the Gaza situation he is not going to budge and is likely to enjoy sitting on the hill till the time he is shown the door. He will be leaving an unenviable legacy for sure. History will also not forgive him for bringing a bad name to the office of the President
I think Senator Raza Rabbani was justified in demanding the resignation of the President. What he did was not a mistake but a diplomatic blunder. Any self-respecting man would have not only apologized for this blunder but have also resigned. Unfortunately President Alvi is not that kind of material. He actually never acquired unbiased credentials as President of the state but invariably has acted as an activist of the PTI. He breached the constitution by accepting advice of Imran Khan for the dissolution of the National Assembly and announcement of new elections after the Deputy Speaker dismissed the no-confidence motion. An honourable man would have said adieu to Presidency when the Supreme Court taking suo motu notice declared the entire process unconstitutional. Bur he preferred to stay on without caring for his personal respect and dignity.
He made a reference to the SC for seeking its opinion on Article 63A at the instance of Imran Khan, and the opinion rendered by the SC judges known as the like-minded group fomented and precipitated the political crisis in the country, more so in Punjab. It was an outcome of sinister motives to favour PTI against its political opponents. He refused to administer the oath of office as PM to Shehbaz Sharif, shirking from his constitutional obligation.
During the crisis in Punjab he twice dashed to Zaman Park in Lahore to meet Imran Khan for consultations and seek his instructions, instead of the latter coming to the Presidency to meet him as demanded by presidential protocol. What could be a greater proof of him being an activist of PTI sitting in Presidency considering all the foregoing realities?
My considered view is that as soon as the PTI government fell as a result of the no-confidence motion and PDM government was installed, he should have resigned and gone home. But such is the lure of perks and prestige attached to the office of the President that any man with lesser degree of self-respect would never wish to forego them.
No matter how much flak is heaped on him for the disrespect of the constitution and the diplomatic faux pas that he has now committed in regards to statement on the Gaza situation he is not going to budge and is likely to enjoy sitting on the hill till the time he is shown the door. He will be leaving an unenviable legacy for sure. History will also not forgive him for bringing a bad name to the office of the President.
