KARACHI, May 1: Because of a strong stand taken by Pakistan the developed nations move at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to link shipbreaking activity with such harsh conditions of environmental protection was foiled.

A move by Western nations at a recent IMO meeting to link shipbreaking activity with environmental protection such as certification for making ships free of hazardous and toxic materials before putting them for scrapping and other such harsh conditions were met with stiff resistance by Pakistan and other countries.

As a result of strong stand taken by Pakistani delegation led by Director General, Ports and Shipping Captain Anwar Shah the proposal put by developed countries has to be deferred.

The position adopted by Pakistan was fully supported by member delegates from India, Bangladesh, Turkey and China. There was consensus amongst developing countries that such harsh conditions will have negative impact on their economies in general and the shipbreaking industry in particular.

The recycling of ships is a fast growing industry in developing countries. If the Western nation's resolution was adopted, it would have a crippling effect on the shipbreaking industry in Pakistan and the region.

According to industry sources, presently the shipbreaking yards in the Western countries are lying idle and had the condition of environmental protection was imposed it would have benefited them at the cost of poor nations who have to provide jobs to their large skilled and unskilled workforce.

Another move of air pollution from greenhouses gasses, emission of exhaust gasses from ships by the developed nation also could not see the light of the day after strong resistance from developing countries.

The participants from developing countries at the IMO moot took it as developed countries move to sell their costly technologies of air-inducting and other systems to the poor nations.

However, this move was also frustrated by a joint stand taken by Pakistan with the support of China, India, Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia as they managed to register a strong reservation on its implementation, which led to its deferment.

After a heated debate on the issue where the head of Indian delegation went berserk thevarying factors. The seesaw growth of the crop differed from district to district; this certainly seems to have been the case inclusters of districts.

Farmers inform of an approxi-developing countries also succeeded in putting it on record in the official document of the IMO that this move was considered contrary to UNFCC Resolution (Kyoto Protocol, 1997).

Under UNFCC Resolution no proposal could be passed without majority vote but the Western nations, in order to avoid this, tried to take it up at the IMO level where voting has no value.

There was also another 'selfish' move from the developed nations of getting approval for a resolution that no old tanker would be allowed to pass through their Protected Special Sea Areas (PSSA) but the same was also opposed by the developing countries.

There is also strong US move to introduce such stringent laws where the Western Navies could be allowed to 'raid' any ship in the high seas under the garb of checking terrorist movement or haulage of WMD (weapons of mass destruction).

Therefore, US the sole superpower is seeking amendment in the document of SUA Convention. They have revised the draft and took it to IMO, however, Pakistan and other countries strongly opposed it.

The delegates from developing countries were of the opinion that it would tantamount to giving a legal cover to such unlawful act which is equivalent to 'sea piracy.'