Ministry of Foreign Affairs has argued that the ban on hunting the Houbara placed last month by the SC would damage Pakistan’s foreign policy; the ministry has asked it be reviewed. The MoFA has also raised other points such as the fact that the Houbara, which makes a migratory journey into Pakistan in the winter months, is not strictly an endangered species and that provincial law, for example in Balochistan, permits limited hunting. But all these details are rather beside the point. The point here is that a bird much sought after by Gulf royals who arrive with their falcons to embark on elaborate hunting missions stands at such a central position in our national policies. The decision comes after one previously taken by the SHC, placing a ban on all hunting of Houbara. But the way the whole case has been put forward makes it seem almost ludicrous. Does the Houbara really figure as part of our foreign policy? And isn’t protecting the native species of our country not more important than pleasing guests who move in each year with large entourages, often disturbing native populations as well as the birds, and go home with huge hauls of the Bustard which is much valued in the Middle East as a delicacy? Since the Arab Spring has been increasingly perverted, and a GCC-Iran proxy war of sorts has started playing out in the Wider Middle East, Pakistan is being pushed in an increasingly difficult position. Parliament was cautious over Yemen because there was risk of deepening sectarian cleavages at home, not to mention engaging and compromising our military in a conflict we have nothing to do with; that too at a time of an internal existential war.
Relations have admittedly worsened since then, and it is natural for Islamabad to try and improve the climate. But for the government to push the Supreme Court to reconsider the ban on houbara bustard hunting – because it is allegedly spoiling relations with the Gulf – is as surprising as it is naïve. For one thing, it is unbecoming of a government to argue against a ban on hunting an endangered specie, especially if it is meant for sport and fun for foreign princes. For another, linking such things with deep-rooted foreign policy decisions betrays a startling poverty of imagination and understanding in the present foreign office and ministry. Perhaps this is the result of not having a dedicated foreign minister. Or perhaps this just shows to what depths our politicians and bureaucrats have descended. Either way, there is a need to breathe freshair and life, into the foreign ministry. Our friends, just like our governments, must respect the decisions of our courts and toggle foreign relations accordingly.
pk.shafaqna.com
