No, thank you

No, thank you

According to the Defence Department press secretary George Little, Pakistan has refused to be part of a joint investigation into the November 26 Nato attack on Pakistani check post in Mohmand. The decision is one of the several that Pakistan has taken in its protest against the attack that killed 24 army personnel.

It has been reported that in his November 29 briefing to the media, Director General Military Operations Major General Ashfaq Nadeem had already ruled out the possibility of a joint probe, saying that earlier joint investigations carried out after similar attacks were unable to produce any results.

Meanwhile, the parliament is expected to hold a joint session to discuss the attack and the senate has passed a unanimous resolution opposing the attacks.

Will the senate’s resolution and the parliament’s impending joint session be able to form a concrete strategy against such attacks? And if formed, will such a strategy be followed in the future?

Has Pakistan made the right move by refusing to be part of the joint investigation being carried out by Nato? Is the snub going to hurt Pakistan or benefit it? invites its readers to give their views and suggestions.



Comments Guide: encourages its readers to share their views on our forums. We try to accommodate all users' comments but this is not always possible due to space and other constraints. Please our read our comments guidelines below for more information:

1. Please be aware that the views of our bloggers and commenters do not necessarily reflect's policies.

2. Though comments appear to have been published immediately after posting, they are actually forwarded to a moderation queue before publication.

3. Dawn reserves the right to remove or edit comments that are posted on this blog.

4. Language that is offensive to any race, religion, ethnicity, gender or nationality is not permitted.

5. Avoid posting comments in ALL CAPS. Commenters are also encouraged to avoid text contractions like 'u r.'

6. Do not cross-post comments across multiple blog entries.

7. Any comments posted to a blog entry should be relevant to the topic or discussion.

8. Do not spam the comment section.

223 Responses to “No, thank you”

  1. Shazia says:

    United States should provide monetary aid to Pakistan to relocate all Afghan refugees back to their homeland. This only can be done as a slow process, once the NATO forces vacate the Afghan territory.
    Those Afghans who now hold Dual citizenship are likened to the Mexicans in America who are now settled in the United States and refuse to go back…..
    Hence, the Afghan chapter in Pakistan can never be completely closed. It is futile, on part of the US to partake such an effort…it will be a monetary loss as time passes.

  2. ghosia says:

    yes army took a good decision.

  3. Victoria Faith says:

    I want to express humble respect to all people of Pakistan and those offended around the world. I feel sorrow and appreciation for all who feel love and pain. Peace be with us all.

  4. Sheikh Muhammad says:

    After the failure of Bone Confrence the importance it can be asessed very well that this decision of Army is also very right. With out Pakistan no one can bring peace in the teritory. Very well Pak Army.

    • sarmad says:

      I thought the decision to boycott Bonn conference was taken by elected Government of Pakistan. Was not knowing that Foreign policy is being run by ISI

  5. Syed Ali says:

    I fully support Pak army decision. The nation should trust them and stand behind them. There is no other institution so well organised and patriotic as Army & ISI. The enemy knows them and thats why they are bent upon on damaging them.

  6. Syed Waqas says:

    A very courageous decision by Pak Army. Its a real time to say goodbye to NATO/ASAF/US.

  7. Yes, this was the right thing to do under the prevailing circumstances.

  8. yasir mehmood says:

    What ever decision taken by our Army officials is right . and we should back them morally.
    We have seen the real face of america and there allies several times before.

  9. Zeeshan Waris says:

    on-ground realities shows that NATO has crossed the “red-lines” by miles……you never do such things to your allies….friendly fire is a phenomenon that does not apply here because we had been pleading with NATO to stop the gun-fire but they continued for well over two hours……the only respite in these tragic events was to Mr.Obama to issue a public apology but he didn’t… this whole scenario left us with nothing but to boycott BONN Conference and deny any involvement in joint investigations….may i offer condolence to the families of martyred soldiers……..

  10. Islam Habib Khan says:

    I notice a lot of our Indian friends have been making comments on the subject. This is a good and healthy sign and shows the freedom of speech although some comments show bias and the underlying hatred.
    I was wondering why the Indian Government did not invite Pakistan to join in the investigation after the Mumbai incident when Pakistan was not even directly involved?

    • Shekhar says:

      Dear Mr.Habib,

      you are right that there should be a healthy exchange of ideas between Indians and Pakistanies. However, to say that Pakistan was not directly involved in the Mumbai carnage is questionable.

      • Islam Habib Khan says:

        Thank you. You just proved my point that if the comments are laced with bias they cannot achieve anything. So far it has not been proved nor is there any evidence that the Government of Pakistan was directly involved in the Mumbai incident.
        The question we were discussing was why did the Indian Government did not invite Pakistan for a joint investigation especially if the attackers were Pakistanis.
        Most of the comments coming from our neighbors on the subject are criticizing Pakistan’s decision not to participate in the investigations with NATO who has admitted attacking the two posts.
        I think it is a wise decision and we will evaluate NATO’s investigation report when it comes independntly and without any compromise.

  11. Ali says:

    In reality, as perceived from the history, the investigations, enquiries, commissions etc. are the tools of procrastination in nature and serve the purpose of diluting the measures to be taken and also reduces the fervor of the other party to take justified stances. Infact the time is consumed to negotiate and avoid the outcomes in applying any of such tool and which prevents the responsive measures which are justified to be taken into account. this is not first instance where the Americans are making investigation, as history is evident of the fact. The Pakistanis are confident on their decisions and there are reasons for a prudent person to believe that what actually happened.

  12. Amjid Qureshi says:

    This saga no doubt creates an issue for Pakistan and US definitely works for her interest, however, remember that Pakistan Army always creates conditions which would favor them and allows them to overthrow the civilian government. Undoubtedly this is a good decision, but we may give army a chance to take over the administration. I wonder what is the link between the ambassador Haqqani scandle and this event.

  13. T.R. says:

    Whatever be the calculations and compulsions of the Pakistani government and army, this brinkmanship is dangerously counterproductive! With America’s election campaign intensifying and the GOP candidates opposing Obama’s ‘withdrawal’ and calling for action against Pakistan, don’t expect even symbolic, cosmetic concessions by the Obama Administration! Nor can you expect China to go to war for Pakistan’s sake! Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal may checkmate India or even China, but not the US or the Russia!

  14. sajjad says:

    It was intentional attack,so what investigation and what part they want pakistan to play but it would be nice,if pakistani investigator is also present in a team,so they wont have to protest at the end on unfair or unacceptible results.

  15. Yawar Shah says:

    Pakistan must be part of any NATO / ISAF investigation team as 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed. The attack was on two Pakistani border posts, which were clearly marked on the maps shared by Pakistan, ISAF and NATO. So the investigation must determine who ordered the attack, even if an error was made, why did it go on for several hours? What do the communication tapes between the helicopters and their base say and what do their gun camera film reveal? Let the facts come out so corrective measures can be taken to avoid such deplorable incidents and compensation given to those killed. Justice must not be delayed or denied.

  16. Maulvi Imran Ahmed says:

    If Pakistan is to turn the talks to its advantage then it must participate fully or not at all.

  17. omarz says:

    It is important to comprehend that the sum of all nations at Bonn can not
    Equal to the strategic importance of Pakistan in the region

  18. Pakistan’sgame is up.The deep divide between military & civilian administration seems difficult to bridge.PEOPLE Of Pakistan deserve better administration.–given the vice like grip of army,I doubt.

  19. A.Bajwa says:

    Some investigation would be required to set the record straight.

  20. shaikh riaz says:

    Beyond any doubt, it is a plausible decision to protest against the selfish decisions of america. we disparately need to defend our sovereignty against the vested interests of united states. i appreciate general pasha and chief of army staff general kayani for upholding the flag of pakistan against monopoly of united states.

    • Mustafa says:

      Well said Shaikh. Also let Pakistan pay back to USA every penny received as gift, aid and charity and encourage all Pakistanis to leave America and come back home for the sake of honour, pride and dignity.

      • Sohaib says:

        Aid , charity and gift received are for mutual benefit or at least for uplift humanity as a whole.No one gives Aid to anyone to later degrade him/her in front of the whole world.This is true at an individual as well as national level.Pakistanis living in America work for mutual benefit for own/national and American interest well.Do you think American Government give visas to Pakistanis only to provide them food shelter and a better living standard all for nothing in return ……….?

        • Mustafa says:

          It is hypocracy to work for mutual benefits with someone you hate and do not trust. Call a spade a spade.

  21. salar khan says:

    yes,now pakistan should keep standing on their decision and not to follow US policies again.

  22. AAJ says:

    Simply put, Pakistan and the US have differing claims as to whether the attack was deliberate or not. I would like to ask, if the attack was deliberate, what is the possible reason for it? The US wants to make sure that Pakistan cuts off the US’ supplies to Afghanistan?
    Pakistani Army is not taking part because if the investigation finds that they gave the all clear for the attack, as the US alleges, then the fault for the death of Pakistani soldiers is due to the Pakistani Army itself. The Army cannot allow that to be proven beyond any doubt, as it would be a grave blow to the Army’s image.
    So, the truth will never be acknowledged by Pakistan… same old story.

  23. naveed says:

    This US drama should be stopped now and Pakistan should open its eyes. It must not be tolerated more. The respond should be tit for tat.

  24. Shazia says:

    Justice delayed is justice denied….in our case apology delayed means they dont care. Allies are respected, not pushed around. We have been paying very heavily for the fake, inflated title of being a US ally. Time to realize this fact.
    Abuse of power has been seen repeatedly in history….time can only repaint the picture intrue colors and expose what actually happened.

    • Karthik says:

      Offcourse US apologized. How come you do not know that? Rejecting investigation is the biggest disrespect shown to the soldiers who died. The deserve better.

  25. osmond says:

    Pakistan’s position on Afghanistan is irreconcilable with the broader view held by the rest of the world. Pakistan wants an Afghanistan which is completely subordinate to it so as to give it strategic depth vis a vis India. So their attendance or absence at the Bonn conference will not significantly affect the outcome.

    • farah says:

      America sitting thousands of miles away wants strategic depth thats ok but Pakistan which is next door neighbour is not expected to enjoy this privilage.India wants to have upper hand in Afghanistan but does not tolerate Pakistan to have anything in there.SO Mr Osmond u r too naive, or portraying simple innocense, or too biased to acknowledge the fact, whatever ur reasons re we have every right to be involved in Afghanistan like it or not ACCEPT IT.

    • waqas says:

      i think every nation has the right to safeguard its national interest. considering the fact that our allies dont even want to apologise for the loss of our troops, we should not have sacrificed thousands of our people and soldiers in this so called war on terror. on Facebook on Facebook