Tony Blair’s visit

THE significance of the British prime minister’s brief visit to Islamabad on Friday has to be seen in the perspective of the mounting tension and anxiety gripping Afghanistan and the region generally over the impending US-led military action against terrorism. The geopolitical scenario remains unchanged. The battle lines had already been drawn and the political tone set in the first few crucial days following the Sept 11 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. Yet Mr Tony Blair’s visit was important for another reason. As a ‘special ally’ of the United States, which is calling the shots in the current war against terrorism, Britain is ideally placed to understand and convey Islamabad’s point of view to its other partners in the coalition which has been put together. Moreover, given Britain’s own historical experience in Afghanistan, Mr Tony Blair should be able to make a mature assessment of the security needs of the region. That would, hopefully, enable him to play a more moderating role, than he has so far, in the coalition’s planning of military and political strategy.

In that context, it is important to note that Islamabad’s concerns about a broad-based government in Kabul in the post-Taliban Afghanistan have been receiving sympathetic hearing in the West. This was confirmed by the British prime minister who said that every key ethnic group in Afghanistan should be represented in the new set-up. He also recognized Pakistan’s “valid interest and close involvement” in the future arrangements in Kabul. But this is also time for Islamabad to look beyond the immediate future. Some rethinking on the role Pakistan wants to play in the matter would be in order. Until the Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, Pakistan had no particular role to play in determining political rulership in Kabul. The British had set this pattern after the third Afghan war in 1919, when they burnt their fingers trying to meddle in that country’s internal affairs. Of course, the imperative of a friendly government in Kabul has always been there for Pakistan, but until the Soviet invasion it adopted political, diplomatic and economic strategies to woo the Afghans with varying degrees of success. Islamabad changed its stance in the eighties when it intervened on the side of the Mujahideen and followed it up later by trying to control the regimes in Kabul.

Of course, no one would suggest that Pakistan should put up with the idea of a hostile government in Kabul. But what is definitely needed is not just a broad-based arrangement but also a neutral set-up. Dissenting voices have been heard from Afghanistan warning Pakistan against playing a kingmaker’s role. Others have expressed strong reservations about the return of King Zahir Shah from Rome. Government-making there is by no means going to be an easy task, knowing the acute tribal, ethnic and factional divisions afflicting Afghan society. In this scenario, a more active role for the United Nations might prove to be a wiser option. The world body has in recent years made a positive contribution towards the rehabilitation and reconstruction of various war-torn entities which could never have seen peace without the UN’s political and administrative presence there. The UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (June 1999) and UN Transitional Administration in East Timor (December 1999) are the most recent examples where an interim administration, which was also neutral, was set up to ease the transition to a permanent peacetime set-up. It is time Islamabad gave serious thought to promoting the concept of a UN-supervised transitional authority in Afghanistan. Will the United States buy this idea? It is up to Mr Blair to explain to President Bush the nuances of a neutral and stable administration in Afghanistan.

Aid for environment

THE United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is to give aid worth over $42 million so that Pakistan can improve the quality of its deteriorating environment. The assistance will run over a five-year period and will enable the government to enforce the National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQs) that seek to protect the country’s air and water resources from all kinds of pollution. The funds will also be used to implement policies that seek to improve solid waste management and conserve the country’s fragile ecosystems. Another stated aim is to enable Pakistan to meet its various international treaty commitments, including obligations relating to the Convention on Biodiversity, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the UN Convention to Combat Desertification. The last aspect is especially important given our recent experience; part of the aid will be used to improve the management of dry arid land and enable communities to use water more efficiently.

However, certain issues need to be pointed out regarding the UNDP funding. The first relates to the enforcement of the NEQs, which are to be implemented using UNDP aid money. The NEQs became law in 1997 when the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act was passed by parliament. In the past four years, neither this government nor any before even considered enforcing the environment law because funding was never there. That, though, just goes to show the priority — or lack thereof — governments attach to environmental protection. Now that the money is going to be there, hopefully it will be put to good use. In fact, it is unclear whether the state of the provincial EPAs (environmental protection agencies) is such that they would be able to utilize this funding properly.

The government should see to it that the UNDP assistance is not wasted on hefty salary bills or for conducting an endless series of workshops and seminars in expensive hotels. Past experience suggests that this is what usually happens with donor funding. A cleaner environment will not be easy to achieve, unless the government has the will and the technical expertise to tackle the many sources of pollution. Hopefully, the UNDP funds will provide the necessary stimulus for such efforts.

Another cancelled tour

SRI LANKA’s decision to cancel their proposed tour of Pakistan will come as another blow to cricket fans in the country who have been starved of international cricket on home turf for a prolonged period. At least three major tours in quick succession have now been cancelled for political reasons of one kind or another. The Lankans were invited to play three one-day matches at very short notice following the last-minute decision of the New Zealand team to pull out of their proposed tour of Pakistan. The Kiwis were literally halfway to Pakistan when the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington occurred, forcing the contingent to go back home. While Sri Lanka were initially keen to step in to fill the vacuum, they finally decided against the idea after lengthy deliberations. The Lankans were obviously concerned about their security should conditions take an ugly turn following any strike against Afghanistan. In September, politics of a very different kind had scuttled the exciting prospect of India touring Pakistan. Unfortunately, the Indian government decided to mix sports with politics and refused to send its team to Pakistan, accusing it of sponsoring cross-border terrorism in Kashmir. Cricket lovers on both sides of the border were deeply disappointed. The biggest loser is the Pakistan Cricket Board, which claims to have lost a massive 15 million dollars because of the cancellation of the three tours. In this bleak cricketing scenario, the only flicker of hope is that the Sharjah tournament, scheduled later this month and featuring Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe, will go ahead as planned.