Does this mean they have some of their fighter jets stationed there ?
Pakistan has found new ways of earning money to get what they want. Renting bases, giving passages. Etc.
UAE shieks have palaces all over the country. There are many other similar airstrips all over the country and not all are used by UAE.
At this time pakistan should limit there airspace to only china, turkey and pakistan. Anything else fly over its country should get a$$ kicked. And give china 2-4 airbases with there fighter jets and sam on ground.
a very interesting post by on PAK-GCC relationships
Beyond the rhetoric, closer ties with GCC, let alone a GCC-Pakistan block, require Islamabad to make some very tough decisions. To date, democratic governments in Islamabad have shown themselves unable to make astute and timely choices.
Pakistan's security relations with the GCC have been a periodic display of indecisiveness by successive governments. The inability of short sighted, politically opportunist and strategically naive governments to recognise the benchmarks fr strengthening GCC-Pakistan accords has left a bad taste in many a GCC capitals, Riyadh more than any.
Unfortunately, like many other arenas, Islamabad suffers from tunnel vision when it comes to the security concerns of the GCC. Somehow, Islamabad has always garnered "friendly" and "brotherly" relations with periodic requests for fiscal support of defence related ventures, whether strategic or operation, but assumed a 'false sense of neutrality' whenever the GCC has found itself in supposed peril.
The word 'betrayal' became synonymous with the word Pakistan in GCC circles when the democratic government of Pakistan pandered to misplaced popular street support (read grandstanding and electioneering) rather than take effective and credible measures to defend GCC interests in the Gulf War. Riyadh still refers to this act as a betrayal of trust.
Today, yet another democratic government in Pakistan is following the same line and resisting requests for assistance based on arbitrary neutrality.
A clash of Saudi/Iranian interests is not one that Islamabad wishes or condones; however, if such a situation is emerging then neutrality is the going to be considered a betrayal by both sides. (Just like the insignificant 5 thousand deployment for "religious sites" was considered a betrayal by both sides in the Gulf War). Such an effeminate gesture will not win any admirers this time round either.
A decisive policy is required which demonstrates Pakistan's commitment to the territorial sovereignty of GCC states and also the rapid deployment of Pakistani troops at the request of the GCC.
This is not a simple choice and has some very serious implications if the deployment is used for political motives by either Riyadh or any other GCC actor. Once deployed these troops may be used to back or strengthen political or dictatorial steps that may be unsavoury or even legally borderline. Islamabad will have little or no control over such a misuse of its military personnel.
However, the strategic gains are worth considering.
In defence and commercial endeavours Islamabad has found the GCC tentative in supporting Islamabad’s efforts to assert a regional approach to India’s growing mercantile presence. Chah Bahar’s painstakingly slow progress may indicate India’s fledgling ability to exert influence but it does hamper Pakistan’s efforts in the region. In another arena, many a defence program have slowed pace since the transition to a democratic government brought a slowing economy and constant reworking of Pakistan’s regional position vis a vis its Western allies. The verbal tennis of asking for a more ‘hands on’ approach by the GCC in defence projects cannot stand its stead without Islamabad showing a similar or comparatively more vigorous commitment to GCC’s issues.
Pakistan must therefore make an unequivocal gesture to safeguard the territorial integrity of the GCC and thus imply (or ask for expressed) a similar commitment by the GCC for Islamabad’s territorial existence.
A tough choice it may be, but, given Islamabad’s strategic interests, it is the better choice.
Without making such harsh choices, all talk of closer cooperation is nothing more than populist headlining.
How many here consider themselves capable of making such a choice in the current climate?
UAE, US and Pakistan are all on good terms with each other.
US wouldn't mind who controls the base, as far as their job is being done.
I hope you never went through this before posting your argumentSingapore uses it for training and not throughout the year and so it is not a base!
The point is that its not something very unusual, its a part of international co-operations. is it a combat Base for UAE? most likely not be, recon? may be because UAE has been actively participating in ISAF operations2007-10-10 India on Tuesday signed an agreement with Singapore which will allow the island nation’s air force personnel to train at the Indian Air Force base in Kalaikunda, West Bengal, for the next five years.......The agreement to lease Kalaikunda was signed by India’s defence secretary, Vijay Singh, and Singapore’s permanent secretary of defence Chiang Chie Foo. Chiang is leading a delegation to India for the fourth ‘India-Singapore Defence Policy Dialogue’.
Singapore Leases Military Base In Eastern Mainland India For Five Years | India Defence
it does not need to cuz for pecific rim they have their own base in Diego Garcia, for China they are stationed in Korea and Japan.The US can have a base in Timbuctoo, but it has no base in India nor has any other country either!!
Pakistani troops should not be used by GCC tyrants to kill their own civilian protesters. They can use Erik Prince's Blackwater guns-for-hire for their dirty deeds.
Why don't they have the same attitude towards India? China? Russia?
It is because these countries have made it clear that they are not wh*res to be bought at the going rate?
Think about it why would Pakistan give an airbase to UAE and not to china & US will not allow them to take there F16 to Pakistan.
So now we have NATO working in the north west and south west of the country.
UAE to be first Arab country with Nato embassy
Polish minister announces landmark move to send ambassador after talks with Abdullah.
Dubai: The UAE is to make a landmark move by becoming the first Arab country to send an ambassador to Nato, Poland's Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said yesterday.
"We're very happy that the UAE is to become the first Arab country to open an embassy at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation [Nato]," Sikorski told AFP after talks with UAEForeign Minister Shaikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, who is on a visit to Poland.
"We're very delighted to have Poland as part of the Contact Group," Shaikh Abdullah told reporters.
Accrediting an ambassador to Nato is a key step for countries seeking to cement ties with the 28-nation, trans-Atlantic alliance.
The UAE already belongs to Nato's Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, launched at an alliance summit in the Turkish city in 2004, which aims to bolster bilateral security cooperation with countries in the Middle East.
The UAE and Qatar are both taking part in the Nato-led military campaign in Libya.
gulfnews : UAE to be first Arab country with Nato embassy
Don't Criticize , I am pretty sure at least one of the air-base in Pakistan is under the control of the Pakistan Army
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)