Tengrinews TV Радио Tengri FM Радио Жұлдыз FM Laws of Kazakhstan
KZ RU EN
Write us +7 (727) 388 8020 +7 (717) 254 2710
искать через Tengrinews.kz
искать через Google
искать через Yandex
USD / KZT - 335.71
EUR / KZT - 357.36
CNY / KZT - 48.76
RUB / KZT - 5.23

Kazakhstan will not ratify the agreement with NATO

20 june 2011, 14:47
1
Photo courtesy of obozrevatel.com
Photo courtesy of obozrevatel.com
Kazakhstan will not ratify the agreement with NATO on Astana’s involvement in the international coalition in Afghanistan, Novosti Kazakhstan reports, citing a source close to the situation.

“During the current session we will not be considering this issue. We will get back to it in September. In the end, we will not ratify it”, the source said.

May 18 2011 Kazakhstan’s Majilis (lower chamber) had approved of ratification of an agreement with NATO about Astana’s involvement in the international coalition forces in Afghanistan. Ratification was yet to be approved by the Kazakhstan’s senate and signed by President Nazarbayev.

“The Agreement between Kazakhstan and NATO envisages sending 4 Kazakhstan’s officers to serve with the International Security Assistance Force headquarters in Kabul. They will be rotated every 6 months”, Mr. Abdrakhmanov elaborated.

Thus, the agreement implies “not sending Kazakhstan’s military troops [to Afghanistan], but rather contribution to the efforts of the Government - UN-recognized and voted for by the Afghan people – to ensure safety and reconstruct peaceful life in this country”.

Foreign Ministry’s spokesman Askar Abdrakhmanov reminded that the International coalition in Afghanistan comprises 47 nations, 19 of which are NOT members of NATO and 6 are members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

The Taliban had warned majority Muslim Kazakhstan that its decision to send troops to the NATO-led war in Afghanistan would have severe consequences and was not in its regional interest, Reuters reported earlier.
June 9 the Kazakh Senate refused to ratify the agreement, saying that such issues should be considered at joint sessions. However, at a joint session June 20 the issue was not on the agenda.

Нравится
Show comments (1)
Most Read
Most Discussed