MUCH rumpus has been created over the wordings of the apology issued by Hillary Clinton. The use of the word ‘sorry’ for the second time in the statement comes where the US secretary says: “We are both sorry for losses suffered by both our countries in this fight against terrorists,” where ‘both’ refers to herself and Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar. Many observers have been critical of Ms Khar’s inclusion in the apology.

Moreover, in order to craft a justification for the opening of the routes, a bizarre reason was advanced and wholly unsupported affirmations were given by the government, which have widely been questioned. It is said that Pakistan cannot afford to confront 49-member countries of Nato. Besides, the decision to withdraw the facility has rendered Pakistan diplomatically isolated.

However, research shows that 33 Nato countries in Afghanistan have less than 1,000 soldiers; so it means the Pakistani blockade did not affect them. More surprisingly, out of the 33, 16 European countries have less than 100 soldiers stationed there. The brief proves that Nato member-countries were almost unmoved by Pakistan’s blockade of US military supplies. None of the Nato countries was desperate to engage Pakistan to restore the container transport facility. The only country that was desperate to engage Pakistan to restore the supply routes was the US because the blockade affected its own military. Hence, Pakistan did not confront 49 nations or risk international isolation in closing Nato supply routes, as Islamabad faced only one: Washington!Pakistani authorities need to move diplomatically and confidently.MAIMUNA ASHRAFKarachi