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. Noor says:

    Can any one including all those criticizing Pakistan for it’s reaction imagine or describe what would have been america’s reaction if it’s forces were subjected to the dual attack? I am sure if this was the case, America would have got a resolution passed from security council against Pakistan and god knows what not would be expected of us to prove it an accident. Please do not malign an affected party for it’s legitimate right to protest. Be prepared to face more tough choices and decisions in future, welcome to independent decision making finally!

  2. Thulani says:

    No doubt, it’s unfortunate that many soldiers died in the Nato attack. Right now, I guess Pakistan is getting too emotional over the issue. Set aside the emotions for the sake of some many good things, and talk talk to work all issues out. Both countries need to build the trust for the sake of already a troubled region.

    • Asad says:

      If you had a brother or sister or any blood killed in a nato strike, I would like to know how emotional you would be. We are getting sick of burrying our deads day in day out, in the name of war which has nothing to do with us. It’s not our war, let the yanks or nato clean up their own mess.

  3. Umer says:

    I appreciate the handling of event so far. I am afraid that, we may scum to international pressure and join conference at Bonn or an inquiry on bombing event over the dead bodies of our soldiers. We should remain firm on our stand. Pakistan has some excellent leaders in country specially in the shape of top Military General and ISI Chief, who must have taken this stand on very solid grounds. Before any discussion on new strategy and its implementation we must issue a time line demanding following steps to revert some of the decisions taken after the brutal NATO attack.
    a. An apology from US President over NATO attack and loss of two dozen Pakistani soldiers.
    b. Removal of John Allen as responsible commander behind this carnage.

  4. Agha Ata says:

    Refusal to be the part of the joint investigation suggests a totally different Pak- Army plan. It appears to be a part of a broader agenda. It would be diffiult to demystify the situation so quickly. But, we will know when time is right.

  5. Tariq says:

    By not participating in the joint probe will give the whole world a very wrong signal. It could even imply that Pakistan has something to hide or is not willing to even consider the possibility that there could have been an error on the Pakistani side in the unfortunate engagement. On the other hand, if Pakistan participates it will add a lot of credibility to it’s own claims regarding the incident. In my view,To protest and suspend NATO supplied etc. is perhaps justifiable, however by not becoming part of a joint investigation you are weakening your position.

  6. Indusonian says:

    The question is what are the international guidlines in order to investigate this incident and why they are not being followed by all the involved parties ?

  7. shahzad says:

    If i smatch on your face and then i ask u please come with me and investigate how is responsile what u will say that,s pakistan says no we will not be the part of your investigations.

  8. Telveer says:

    I am not sure what Pakistan gains by not participating in a joint investigation. If Pakistan’s allegation is that NATO forces deliberately killed Pakistan soldiers, why did NATO stop at 24? Why did NATO describe it as a accident? Does Pakistan think NATO is at war with Pakistan? How will the people of Pakistan know what the trust is? There may be much larger issues between Pakistan and NATO but this incident should be seen in a specific context of an accident instead of merging it into the bigger issue which is “why are so many terrorists hiding in Pakistan?”

  9. Abdul Karim says:

    Only one question to NATO/Americans is enough to expose their intentions and that is, since when Taliban or terrorists started camping on top of mountains?

  10. SP says:

    Refusing the joint probe, makes it suspicious on the total dynamics of the situtation.
    Now I think that the intensions of attack could be different. Only ISI and CIA might know the whole game.

  11. Ashah says:

    By not joining into the joint investigation even if it does not come to the right conclusion Pakistan Army is indicating two things.
    1. They have something to hide.
    2. They are liars, if ISI and the army can make such a Hulabaloo about mansoor Ejaj and the ISI chief can go all the way to london to talk to the fraud ! Pakistan can and should conduct the joint investigation and have an independent investigation of their own better still some heads in Pakistan Army should roll , it is about time.

  12. Ahad Khan says:

    It is a right decision and it shows that Pakistani authorities are firm at their initial belief that attack was not a mere mistake.
    The End Game is not possible without Pakistan’s support and current steps will highlight Pakistan’s importance to the world. Attack on Pakistan Army is a synonymous to attack on Pakistan and this is not feasible for US which is already suffering a lot in Afghanistan.
    Although the track record of Parliament’s resolutions is dismal but this time Govt seems to be more serious and people are hopeful that it will devise some reasonable strategy.

  13. Atif says:

    Right Decision!

  14. Javed Ali Shafi says:

    I believe Pakistan Army high command, collectively with the other concerned officers responsible must attend to hear what NATO has to say, shunning is neither civilised nor helpful for either side.Perhaps we might get some answers.
    Let’s not get carried away and be emotional.Innocent lives of precious human beings have been lost.
    I hope both sides should see this fiasco more objectively.And then move on.
    Long live Pakistan

  15. Fuad Rashid says:

    Border skirmishes have taken place between the US/Nato forces and Pakistani security forces in the past, which were subject to joint investigations,but didnt provide any tangible results.
    So keeping that in mind it is the right decision to stay away from a futile process. It sends a clear message to Isaf/Nato that we are the aggreived party with 25 dead soldiers and we will not allow them to be the judge,jury and the executioner. Enough is enough.

    Secondly Pakistanis in the UK are relieved and proud that we took all the measures that we have so far to show are frustration and anger due to the deaths the occurred in the dawn raid.

    Dawn has been censoring what ever i have posted in the comments, because it was critical of the US/Nato etc. This suggests that they would rather have the Pakistani nation enslaved and not stand up for itself.

  16. Sirat-ul-mustaqeem says:

    This is the time to get out of this so called war on terror and We all know that Bon Conference is just a drama to show the world that America has won the peace for Afghanistan and then they will get out of Afghanistan leaving Pakistan to clean up the mess. We should not go to this conference and let the world know that America has a lot of work to do and it has to pay more for the blood of Innocent it has killed over the years…

  17. Qamar Akram says:

    This could be a good decision only if they can stand against the Ameria. and it was much better to take such type of decisions when America was asking for air bases in Pakistan to attack on Afghanistan.

  18. Amjad Wyne says:

    Dawn’s chracterization of events as “snub” and “retaliation” are probably both inaccurate and inflamatory. Pakistan, as a small nation, is not in a position to do either of those two things – many other, much bigger nations cannot do that either. All that is being done can be described as a “protest” – and all parties have a right to do so.

  19. malik says:

    No, I believe it is the wrong decision. If you participate then you find out what the other side is privy to and your input is given at the right time. You can then formulate what took place as you will also see the same info.

  20. Shyam Kokku says:

    By not participating in a joint enquiry, Pakistan Army is basically giving an impression that they have nothing to say.

  21. Mashal Khan says:

    Wallah Kayani, We love you, go ahead, this is the right way and the right decesion, atleast now we can keep our head up here in forgien, We need the dignity and respect back to our soldiers, Pakistani nation is praying for you and are ready including me to sacrifice our lives and our families for pakistan and for PAK MILITARY. we love you ISI, and PAK Army, God bless you and give you patience to take good decesion for pakistan.

    • Gaurang says:

      I feel this is not a right step, something is being concealed. Participating in probe and publishing facts is duty of the authorities involved. I wonder what is good for Pakistan in not participating in probe, unless they know what really has happened. After all, it is open secrete that every time one hand knows what the other hand is doing.

    • Adeem Mohammed says:

      Not a good decision at all. This posture is sending a wrong message to the world that we are taking advance bail to reject whatever report the inquiry produce, it it does not fit us. As a brave nation, and definitely the incident took place inside our land, we must have someone in this inquiry team. Otherwise, simply reject any inquiry and its finding now itself. No need to wait for a unilateral investigation report till the month end and then simply say we reject it. The world will take the investigation report as valid until it is proved wrong by someone else.

    • Salotti says:

      What is wrong with trying to find the truth? It seems according to you Mashal Khan, that your country’s dignity is based on the official line (Kayani) and not necessarily the truth. Maybe the Americans are totally in the wrong, but maybe there is some blame to be shared by both sides. Your argument does not make any sense. on Facebook on Facebook