On May 2nd U.S. special forces entered deep inside Pakistan’s territory, effectively killing world’s most wanted terrorist, and leaving undetected. This raid by some is considered a breach of Pakistan’s national sovereignty. Although there are arguments which suggest that Pakistan’s sovereignty has already been compromised by the presence of Osama Bin Laden, banned organizations, and wanted terrorists. Making it a fair game for international forces to chase them inside Pakistan.

Also it is only considered a breach of sovereignty when there is a “use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state,” according to the United Nations Charter. As far as the U.S. raid(s) in Pakistan are concerned, none of them were for the purpose of overthrow of Pakistan’s government, or to change Pakistan’s territorial borders.

If examined deeper, sovereignty seems to be a vague issue. Especially in today’s world it’s really a subjective and almost non existent argument. With rapidly growing influence of globalization in our societies and international treaties that are meant to eradicate borders and national sovereignty for greater global good, the importance of sovereignty has been replaced by the importance of peace and prosperity.

So when it comes to global world and greater interests no nation is truly sovereign. As we become increasingly globalized our interests are highly intertwined, we become highly dependent on one another. Each nation is no longer an independent sovereign nation, but rather a citizen of a global world. Being a global citizen comes with rights and responsibilities of citizenship. Some of which include protecting the environment that is shared by everyone and helping to keep the world safer and free of terrorism.

Organizations like United Nations, World Bank, World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund, and treaties like NAFTA, EU, and Euro Zones are all a part of this decreasing national sovereignty and increasing interdependence. These treaties and contracts amongst nations are formed mainly to integrate their economies, but also to have regional and global political security and a deterrence against war.

When countries group together like the European Union, they not only integrate their economies but also enhance their political weight in the world. Many Europeans believed that after World War II the European nation-states were no longer large enough to hold their own world markets and world politics. There was a need for a united Europe to deal with the United States and the Soviet Union. Hence a union was formed, which not only became a world’s largest economic giant, but also a political power, and a prosperous war free region.

With the recent financial crises, unions like Euro Zone are looking towards more integration and less sovereignty, rather than independence and individuality. They are heading towards becoming a fiscal union rather than merely a monetary one. This sort of action would make them equivalent to the U.S. model.

As a member of United Nations Pakistan has also given up its sovereignty to the rules, regulations, and the decisions of the UN’s body. Pakistan as a member of UN has to comply with United Nation’s charter and follow its guidance on laws, especially when it relates to human rights issues. Hence Pakistan’s sovereignty doesn’t fully exist the way it’s thought to be by some commentators in Pakistan.

Same is true for Pakistan under the International Monetary Fund’s guidelines and World Trade Organization’s restrictions. Pakistan does not have the freedom to implement any sort of fiscal and monetary policy that isn’t approved by those organizations. This also puts restrictions on what Pakistan trades and how it trades with other nations.

These are the issues Pakistan needs to analyze further as a nation. Whether they want to live as an isolated nation or join the ranks of many in becoming a truly global country. This would mean toning down the rhetoric on sovereignty and becoming integrated in the global economies and politics.

Huang Nubo giving a presentation on Iceland. (c) Getty

Iceland’s Minister of the Interior, Ögmundur Jónasson, rejected Chinese businessman Huang Nubo’s bid to purchase a large tract of territory in the northeastern region of the country. Huang had sought an exemption from an Icelandic law which prohibits nationals from outside the European Economic Association from purchasing large amounts of land. Huang wanted to purchase and develop a 115 square mile parcel of land in Grímsstaðir á Fjöllum, which would have equalled 0.3% of the country’s territory. He had planned to spend $200 million acquiring the land and turning it into an ecoresort, an investment that could have been beneficial to Iceland’s economy as it recovers from the financial crisis.

Ögmundur Jónasson: "Not so fast…"

Minister Jónasson reasoned that allowing the exemption would have rendered the law meaningless. If Huang had been allowed to buy the land, more individuals and companies might have been encouraged to buy up large portions of Iceland. Furthermore, he defended his decision by emphasizing that it was a company owned by Huang, Zhongkun Investment Group, rather than Huang himself, that sought to purchase the land.

The minister’s rejection of Huang’s bid did not sit well with all parties in Iceland. IceNews reported that Sigmundur Ernir Rúnarsson, a Social Democratic Member of Parliament, called the rejection “crazy,” “deplorable,” and “devastating.” He opined, “I find this a crazy decision by the minister who, in his intransigence, is probably unfit to take this decision in light of the declarations he has made on the case in the lead up to the decision. Quite apart from that, there are at least 25 precedents for cases of this kind. This is a deplorable message to the people outside the capital region where there is a need to distribute the tourism industry better across the country and better across all times of year — and this is a devastating message to send out into the world to investors who are eyeing the country.”

Social Democrats were more in favor of allowing the purchase to go forward, while Left Greens, the party of Jónasson, were against it. The Left Green Movement is more liberal than the Social Democrats and is also against EU membership. (By the way, if you’re interested in seeing what an Icelandic MP’s website looks like, check out Rúnarsson’s page here: http://www.sigmundurernir.is/. It’s quite similar to your American politician’s standard website, with information about his policies, upbringing, and family.)

John Haukur Hauksson, a landowner in Grímsstaðir á Fjöllum who was trying to sell his land to Huang, said, ”I am not satisfied with the way this matter was done. This administration is unbelievable.”

The rejection of a Chinese attempt to purchase a sizable portion of Icelandic territory demonstrates that Iceland values its territorial sovereignty. More importantly, the Left Greens do not trust Chinese investors to acquire their land. They do not see China as a completely harmless partner in Iceland’s development. This episode could bode ill for future plans for cooperation between the two countries in the Arctic.

In an interview with China Daily, Huang made his displeasure with the decision clear. “The denial reflects the unjust and parochial investment environment facing private Chinese enterprises abroad,” he criticized. Huang will no longer pursue any investments in Iceland and does not plan to challenge the government’s decision. Instead, he intends to take his investment plans to Finland, Sweden, and the U.S., where he hopes to find a friendlier environment for foreign investors. Huang told YLE, a Finnish newspaper, ”If I make the decision to invest, I want to buy the land as well…After my experience in Iceland, a few hectares would be enough. But if the investment climate in Finland is as hostile as it is in Iceland, I will give up on the idea.”

It would be ironic if Finland does not allow Huang to purchase land, given that its government was upset last year over a Russian decision to ban foreigners from owning land within Russia along the 1,250 kilometer Finnish border.

News Links

 ”Chinese investor’s Iceland resort construction bid rejected by minister,” IceNews

NATO attacked and killed Pakistan’s soldiers in cold blood. In today’s world of technology and social advocacy it is up to the Pakistanis to let the world know how they feel about this atrocious attack on their sovereignty. Please also spread the word and share extensively on your profiles/pages. E Rally for unity of Pakistan [...]

Cultural identity provides us with an opportunity to protect our cultural space individually, and this can pay positive dividends in a national sense.