When US navy sees red, it can go dangerously blue on blue: DATELINE NEW DELHI
By Javed Naqvi
BLUE on Blue is the US Navy’s slang for its own warships destroying an American aircraft, by accident usually. We don’t have the code for blasting mud-walled huts with Daisy Cutter megaton bombs. Not yet. It still stands to reason nevertheless that the sensational claim by Osama bin Laden of being in possession of nuclear arms is not any less threatening to our safety and survival than the American propensity to go awfully wrong, sometimes tragically so.
Osama’s claim of being the world’s first non-state nuclear player has been greeted by a degree of very genuine fear. According to our friends in the Indian air force, the Uzbeks, whose scientists in the Soviet days had apparently developed a briefcase-fitting nuclear device, could easily be induced to sell their expertise to anyone, including of course to a bunch of religious bigots. And that’s worrying. But there’s no guesswork needed to fear a decidedly more palpable threat, perfected not by our enemies, but by some of the friends who claim to be our scout guides against international terrorism.
We don’t have a direct quote, but US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld has said more or less in as many words that there was no ruling out the use of “small, tactical” nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. Couple this patently demented idea with the track record of American recklessness on quite a few major missions and you will see how unsafe we all are under the command and control of an army that is crawling with potential Mad Majors.
It was bad enough with our own propensity in India and Pakistan to taunt each other to the critical edge of nuclear brinkmanship at any given opportunity; now we have actually imported a prescription for self-induced heart attacks — as a possible prelude to an outright disaster! Who knows? But just look at the record of mishaps, accidents, miscalculations that have visited the so-called nuclear veterans and the scene looks far from reassuring.
We do not know for sure if the Soviets rewarded or reprimanded their cavalier pilots who calmly shot down the Korean Airlines jumbo jet after it had strayed on its way from Anchorage to Seoul, instantly killing all of its 300 or so passengers and crew. What we do know for a fact is that the senior president Bush actually decorated his officer who was commanding the USS Vincennes on the fateful day in the Persian Gulf when in a nervous moment of fear and miscalculation he ordered the shooting of an Iran Air Airbus mistaking it for an enemy warplane.
And since USS Vincennes is back in business, chucking cruise missiles into a hapless landlocked country from the choppy waters of the Arabian Sea, it would be useful to recall what had happened on the other side of the Hormuz in July 1988 so as to be prepared for what could happen yet again.
Although it indirectly contributed to the end of the eight-year-long and bitter Iran-Iraq war, the destruction of Iran Air Flight 655 was an appalling human tragedy. According to most American analysts, it damaged their country’s world standing as a safe companion to court. There is also the view that the incident almost surely caused Iran to delay the release of the American hostages in Lebanon. Moreover, it may have given the mullahs a motive for revenge and, according to the Newsweek, “provoked Tehran into playing a role in the December 1988 bombing of Pan Am 103.
“For the navy, it was a professional disgrace,” the Newsweek said. “The navy’s most expensive surface warship, designed to track and shoot down as many as 200 incoming missiles at once, had blown apart an innocent civilian airliner in its first time in combat.”
That was not all. The Newsweek claimed after a prolonged probe that the Vincennes was inside Iranian territorial waters at the time of the shootdown — in clear violation of international law. “The top Pentagon brass understood from the beginning that if the whole truth about the Vincennes came out, it would mean months of humiliating headlines. So the US navy did what all navies do after terrible blunders at sea: it told lies and handed out medals.
“This is the story of a naval fiasco, of an overeager captain, panicked crewmen, and the cover-up that followed,” the magazine’s blurb on a sensational investigation had read.
How does all this have any bearing on the ongoing operations against Afghanistan? It does, frankly. Just replace Iran Air with PIA or Air India or any other civilian airline that plies the region. To add a nightmare to your disturbed sleep, imagine a civilian pilot turning into a kamikaze maniac who heads for the anti-terrorist armada a la the New York attacks. Or simply imagine a Korean Airlines-type accidental change of trajectory towards a USS Vincennes-type of trigger-happy commander. In a region crawling with nuclear weapons in the air, under the sea, on large masses of land, there could be no better place to start something completely unexpected.
It almost happened the other day, I mean in August 1999, when an Indian air force MiG 21 shot down a Pakistan reconnaissance plane close to their border.
According to the Indian version, the MiG 21s tried to force the Atlantique to land in India, but the “intruder aircraft turned in towards the MiG 21 in an attack position”. According to Pakistan, the Atlantique was unarmed and on a routine training drill within its territorial limits when it was shot, without any warning. From Pakistan’s perspective, the fact that the Atlantique was unarmed and the crew consisted of five officers and 11 other ranks, most of them trainees and the fact that the debris of the plane and all the bodies were found inside Pakistan would seem to support this point.
But Indians see a difficulty with that. They say that the Atlantique is proven to be an anti-submarine-cum-anti-ship maritime surveillance aircraft, capable of delivering Exocet AM 39 missiles that can attack vessels from a distance of 100km. It also carries nine MK 44 torpedoes, four air-to-surface missiles, 12 depth charges and 14 bombs. Also, if it was on a routine training mission, why was it flying so close to the international border? Article 2 of the agreement between Pakistan and India on prevention of air space violations, states: “Combat aircraft (to include fighter, bomber, reconnaissance, jet military trainer and armed helicopter aircraft) will not fly within 10kms of each other’s airspace”.
It is not important to figure out who was right and who wrong in this perversely routine gambit between the world’s two new gung-ho nuclear powers. It is important that we are still alive to ponder the question, until the next close call if we survive it.
* * * *
ALLO ALLO: On his current three-nation tour, when Atal Behari Vajpayee, prime minister of India, a nuclear weapons power, was on board his aircraft, he could not make a direct phone call to New Delhi’ — or for that matter anywhere, according to an Indian newspaper dispatch from Moscow.
For, Air India One, a 20-year-old Boeing 737-200, doesn’t have the facility now standard in all international aircraft, including Air India flights travelling to London, New York and Paris.
So as he travelled between Moscow and Washington on a 10-and-a-half-hour flight, the only way Vajpayee could send a message to New Delhi was through the archaic “relay-messaging system,” via the pilot, the report had said.
Under this system, the pilot would message the nearest ATC en route, which will then transmit it to the New Delhi ATC from where it was to be “suitably” forwarded.
Why does the Indian PM get such an aircraft? It seems the Boeing 737-200 series aircraft, though safe and airworthy, is an outdated machine that cannot be modified to install a hi-tech communication system. It isn’t compatible with satellite communication at all, so even a simple cellular phone can’t be used on this one.
There are aircraft operated by Air India, for example, the Boeing 737-400 series — where passengers on board can communicate through cellphones. But these aircraft are committed to passenger traffic, a priority in these days of raging recession. Is there a facetious moral to the funny story? Well, let’s suppose that the Indian air traffic controllers can henceforth be a part of the grand nuclear command and control system of which we hear so much these days?


Living with noble promises: KARACHI FILE
By A. B. S. Jafri
PROFESSIONAL street protesters had another field day last Friday, playing their fairly familiar games. At least one of the city’s public transport organizations said it was on strike. The others kept mum but chose to stay inactive. Most of the shops remained closed. For its part, the government had decided to go on a holiday, ostensibly in deference to the birth anniversary of the Poet of the East, Allama Iqbal. That was, for all practical purposes, a lucky coincidence for the government. What would the government have done had it not been so fortunately the anniversary of a national hero? Let us be content to wonder.
Will some Karachi maulana kindly tell the bemused 13 million people of this virtually besieged city how does burning tyres promote the cause of the Taliban, Afghanistan, Pakistan and also Islam? Where does the Holy Book enjoin upon the people of this bustling metropolis to go berserk for the good of Islam? Equally pertinent it is to wish to know about the value of pelting stones on moving objects like motor cars and buses ferrying people, and crossing nobody’s path. It remains profoundly unclear how we become better Muslims by indulging in these puerile pastimes. There certainly was a time when we were Muslims and crusading Muslims at that, conquering lands and building empires, without any tyres to be burnt and any motor cars to be pelted with stones. In our own time, we won the battle for Pakistan without resorting to such tactics as the good maulanas now urge the street urchins of Karachi to adopt — presumably for the good of Islam.
All of this kind of activity is contrary to the spirit of law. In most cases it can be shown to be irreconcilable with the letter of the law as well. Interior Minister Moinuddin Haider has once again said that he means to enforce law strictly. He also assures the people of Karachi that he intends to deal “sternly” with “anyone challenging the writ of the government, working against the national interest...” It is certainly a great deal of comfort to hear the Interior Minister say so. Indeed, we have heard him say all the right things over an over gain.
We in Karachi have heard Mr Moinuddin Haider promise to be stern about so many things that are a torment to us. Much, if not all, of our troubles in the nature of disregard for law, spring from the uncontrolled proliferation of the ‘deni madaris’. We can recall him promising to bring these institutions within the mainstream of the educational system of the country. He had also spoken wisely about reform in the curriculum of these so-called madaris. Our misfortune is that this kind of wisdom remains enshrined in noble words. Implementation somehow escapes these elevated intentions. As far as these madaris are concerned, have we not heard Mr Haider say they (the madaris) are doing sterling service to the nation by way of imparting education free of cost. What education, pray? Burning tyres and pelting public and private transport with brickbats?
Not long ago, we were told that the government would undertake a study of the city mosques and their sectarian links and loyalties. Quite obviously, the perception was that there has been a phenomenal growth in the number of mosques in the city and this needed to be looked into. Every sensible citizen can see that not all of these are genuinely developed places of genuine worship. In our culture a place of worship is ‘House of God,’ belonging to all. Most certainly not to any one person or party or sect or school of thought or belief. In Karachi most mosques now have sectarian designations. What the government had intended was to conduct a kind of census in order to ensure that mosques are not allowed to become bastions of feuding sects. That decision, like so many other good decisions of the Interior Minister, remains in serene repose in the files of the ministry.
In this city even the smallest mosque in the smallest of localities proudly possesses a minimum of four loudspeakers attached to its sound amplifying system. Very often one would find several mosques in the small tiny colony, standing virtually cheek by jowl. Come the time for prayer, the loudspeakers of all of them would be activated at the very same moment. The result: you may not be able to hear clearly any of the so many Azans. The learned tell us that the ordained discipline on this point is that no two Azans should collide. This discipline is observed in blatant violation by the pious themselves. Had the decision to carry out a survey of the city mosques been implemented this cacophony may have been taken proper care of. Alas, that was not to be, or has not yet come to be.
Concerned citizens of Karachi were assured that improper use (abuse) of loudspeakers, mounted on mosque minarets shall be ‘sternly’ curbed. These sound aids were to be used only, repeat only, for the Azan and Friday sermons. This decision is disregarded with scorn on the very same loudspeakers. These devices are switched on at all odd hours of the day and night.
There is no respect for the sick needing rest, children asleep or students preparing for their tests and exams. What is broadcast on these loudspeakers is more often than not in conflict with the government’s intention to keep mosque sermons above sectarian bias and excesses. Our benign government is not listening.
So, the ‘deni madaris’ continue to flourish, pouring out their ‘taliban’ into our streets every now and again to disrupt life. You see every second day a new mosque in your locality, duly fitted with four loudspeakers, blaring. Nobody quite knows on whose land, and in what consideration it stands. In most cases the sermons preach exactly what the government considers not in the interests of national unity and peace.
This is our tribute to our free society and to our kind-hearted Interior Minister.


Of women bandits
By Ghulam Ali
KARACHI: Sometimes one comes across situations in the world of crime when it becomes difficult whether to describe them as crime or something done out of innocence by touchy youth, which tend to pave the way for uniting two lovers through the sacred institution of marriage.
It needs to be given some thought why young boys and girls, whose love affairs face stiff opposition from their families, some time take to elopement. One such young man and a young girl were in a police station. They were called for questioning in the SHO’s office after they were apprehended by police. A lady constable was sitting beside them while the questioning was proceeding. When the investigation was in progress at one point the girl denied that she was kidnapped, and said she had eloped with her lover. As she was recording her statement, the lady constable became enraged and slapped the girl on her face. How you dare to misbehave with the officer. You keep quite and reply to questions appropriately, the lady constable reprimanded her. The girl sobbed and sighed and “rectified” her statement and confessed that she had been kidnapped. After this the girl was treated mildly.
Once civil marriage is registered in court, police have to accept lovers as lawfully married couples. However, police can arrest lovers outside courts before they enter the premises to get their civil marriage registered. This happens more often than not.
A foreign girl shared a flat in Clifton with an alleged call girl. She developed intimacy with sons of big landlords. But none of them was prepared to marry her. She became dejected with life and tried to commit suicide by taking an overdose of sleeping pills. The attempt at suicide was hushed up as telephones rattled from Islamabad. The girl was sent back to her home-country.
A woman ran a gambling den in Joharabad. It used to be frequented by women from near and faroff areas in the city. It came to the knowledge of the people when it was smashed by police under the supervision of a magistrate.
Lately, girls have also taken to serious crimes in the city. A gang of women bandits was active in Clifton a few years ago. They committed several house robberies in Clifton and also looted vans at gunpoint. They looted a bakery in Gulbahar and committed robberies in other places of the city beside Clifton. One of them, who came from a a good family, hijacked vehicles in Bahadurabad. She was known as a tomboy as she dressed in jeans and jackets. She was arrested after she hijacked several vehicles.
A call girl ran a prostitution den in the city. Two of her rejected lovers had attempted to shot her dead. Now that woman is old and devoid of any charm. She is said to have disappeared from social life and lives the life of a recluse.


Crisis and clarity: COMMENT
By Muhammad Ali Siddiqi
PAKISTANIS must perhaps be the only people in the world to whom the interests of other nations are more dear than their own. Also, they give an impression as if they lack the ability to be clear-headed in times of crisis and to know precisely where their interests lie.
Now a flashback: In August 1971, with another Indo-Pakistan war approaching, The Illustrated Weekly of India published a special number on the situation in East Pakistan. One of the articles focussed on the military aspect of the conflict and compared the two nations’ military strengths. The article paid handsome tributes to the Pakistan Air Force and raised the question whether China would come to Pakistan’s help in case of war.
The writer said he did not believe that China would come to Pakistan’s rescue. Nevertheless, he cautioned that India should not rule out such a possibility and should work out a suitable strategy. His advice: Under no circumstances should the strength of the Indian Army be scattered on three fronts (East Pakistan, West Pakistan, and NEFA-Ladakh), that India should offer only token resistance to China, and that all available strength should be hurled against East Pakistan to crush the beleaguered Pakistan Army in its eastern wing so as to achieve the political objective. If this meant reverses on the Chinese front, then public opinion should be prepared in advance for the loss of territory to China.
This was realism: above all, this was clarity of thinking in crisis. The Indians knew, as they do now, who the real enemy was and where their interests lay.
Back to the twenty-first century: are we Pakistanis capable of maintaining our cool and demonstrating realism in times of crisis? Going by what has been happening in our streets, especially on Fridays, one wonders whether we even know who our enemy is and where the threat to the country’s security comes from.
Let us start with one incontrovertible fact: we had no hand in triggering the avalanche of grim and stupefying events occurring since the morning of Sept 11. One event has followed another with rapidity and a logic of its own, and there is nothing we can do except to keep adjusting to them within the parameters available to us. We did not set off the chain of events, nor can we alter their course. What, however, we can do is to read the situation correctly, see which way the wind is blowing and flow with the tide instead of breaking our heads against the rocks.
The chain of events can be encapsulated here: George Bush declares war on terrorism; the Security Council unanimously calls for joint action against the terrorists; the US invokes Article 5 of NATO (which includes three nuclear powers and an economic superpower); China and Japan give categorical support to the US; most Muslim nations fall in line; green signals come even from Syria and Iran; India offers logistic support to the US. The whole world is with the US-NATO combine.
Then there is that proverbial “friend or foe” call. What choice did we have?
The call was not made to Mauritania, 5,000 miles from the Taliban country, nor to Indonesia on the Pacific; it was a call made to a semi-Afghan, semi-Taliban country. A ‘no’ from Bangladesh or Burkina Faso would have meant little to the US; a ‘no’ — even hesitation — coming from those who created, armed and nurtured the Mulla Umar regime would have been perceived in an entirely different light: it would have even been considered an act of solidarity with a country on which the US was going to declare war.
Then divine intervention — one of those events that change nations’ destinies: India, of all countries, came to our help, for it did not know what it was doing. Anticipating immense political and military possibilities beyond their wildest imagination, the Indians failed to control their nerve and showed their hand prematurely — New Delhi offered its logistic support too quickly. Had it waited and let Pakistan hesitate or make the wrong move, India’s offer would have been readily grabbed by Washington.
Instead, that one statement by Jaswant Singh — made without authorization from the Indian cabinet — did more to help Pakistan than possibly any other diplomatic move since Sept 11. Pakistan acted less to respond to America’s “ultimatum” and more to pre-empt India.
The choice before Pakistan was this: should it go with the entire world or should it be in the august company of Saddam Hussain and Mulla Umar?
Bargaining at that stage would have been counter-productive; in fact, it would have been a waste of precious time, for the more Pakistan delayed its response, the greater would have been the possibility of Pakistan being swept away by powers, forces and events beyond its control.
Economic aid is not the issue; the real issue is Pakistan’s place in the world. By making a correct decision, Pakistan has ended its isolation and is back in the international mainstream. This is an end in itself, peanuts or no peanuts.
Besides, it is not true that Pakistan’s support has been unqualified. Three of Pakistan’s crucial conditions have been accepted — one, India and Israel should not be part of the world coalition; two, the Northern Alliance should not suffer from the delusion that they would form a (pro-Indian, pro-Russian) government in Kabul; three, Pakistani troops will not operate beyond its borders.
Given the fact who our interlocutors were, and what the odds against us were, this is diplomacy based on common sense. We do not have and did not need a Tallyrand or Cavour.


The peril of the fisheries policy: DATELINE QUETTA
By Siddiq Baluch
FISHERIES are a very important sector of Balochistan. The FAO and other world agencies did much to develop this sector in the 1970s and 1980s. Two major fish harbours, at Pasni and Gwadar, speak of the interests the world agencies have shown.
Over the period the Pansi fish harbour has developed the problem of massive silting, which is blocking the shipping channel off and on. It makes windfall money for the corrupt officials who get fat kickbacks for undertaking the desilting of the navigational channel. Many millions are spent annually on the desilting for keeping the harbour operational for trawlers and fishing vessels.
The problem was never taken up for long-term solution by the previous rulers, though a short-term measure to overcome it proved more than lucrative for the politicians, if not for the officials at higher level. The officials lost interests when Pakistan began facing economic sanctions, which dried up the flow of international assistance or long-term loan for development of the fisheries in Balochistan. In other words, the sector has been turned into a small provincial government department whose annual budget equals just a very few millions necessary to meet some vital expenses and allowances admissible to the officials.
It may surprise some people that it was once regarded as the most lucrative department where the minister-in-charge could earn millions of rupees in a day. The agents would operate from their bungalows in Karachi’s Lyari, Kharadar and DHA to bring the required money for the minister. Not only this, at times cabinet members would also quarrel among themselves over the allotment of the fisheries portfolio.
Once a minister sacrificed his career spread over half a century just for getting a fat bribe from trawlers and vessels involved in unauthorized fishing. A former chief minister also kept his share, making inroads into the so-called autonomous domain of the minister for loot and plunder.
How the racket operated: there was a ban on fishing by big and highly mechanized trawlers, the area being reserved for unmechanized and small boats. Honest intention indeed! An ordinance was first issued during the initial days of Gen Yahya Khan, soon after revival of the historic provinces. It was further improved by the successive NAP government, and governor Mir Ghous Bakhsh Bizenjo issued a fresh ordinance banning fishing within the three-mile limit close to the Balochistan coast.
At later stages, the provincial government extended the limit from three to 12 miles, almost it covered the territorial waters of Pakistan, excluding the exclusive economic zone of Pakistan. Initially, some Russian vessels were spotted fishing close to the Pakistan territorial water. Islamabad immediately extended it exclusive economic zone to 100 miles, chasing away foreign trawlers and fishing vessels from the now defunct Soviet Union.
The Indians, at a later stage, hired or chartered the South Korean fishing vessels and started operating within the territorial waters. One such ship was caught spying. The ship and crew were released as the owner was Gen Zia’s schoolmate in East Punjab.
Corrupt officials at the federal ministry of agriculture permitted foreign flag vessels on the pretext of development of deep-sea fishing in Pakistan. They played havoc with the seafood resources of Sindh and Balochistan and resorted to indiscriminate fishing and trawling. They used bull trawlers to wipe out marine life in areas close to Ormara, Pasni, Kalmat, Pishokan, Jiwanri and Damb in the Lasbela district. Corruption was so rampant in the directorate-general of fisheries that a former directors-general, a grade 21 officer of the federal government, was caught red-handed in Karachi while accepting a bribe from a South Korean trawler owner.
Since then corruption is rampant in this sector. the local administration and the officials of the provincial fisheries department are involved in massive corruption. All those fishing boats which are paying over Rs30,000 a month are allowed to operate anywhere in Balochistan and plunder the fish stocks. According to a rough estimate, several thousand fishing vessels and trawlers are paying the monthly bribe to the concerned officials.
Former ministers would give permission to a larger number vessels for illegal fishing in return of bribe. Since there is no political government and no political minister, a few officials of the federal government agencies responsible for checking the smuggling have taken the lead, followed by officials of other federal and provincial government departments. The quota system is operating successfully in sending trawlers and fishing boats for illegal fishing in the prohibited territorial waters. Some other vested groups too are getting their share in the booty.
In order to check corruption, the present government has introduced a novel idea of regulating fishing and eliminating corruption. Now they have legalized the plundering of seafood stocks by asking the vessels to pay the required fee to the government. The real issue is conserving the seafood resources from unrestricted and massive exploitation. It is not the question of earning a small amount of money for the public exchequer.
The new has ordinance even permitted the most hated synthetic wire net for fishing close to the coast. Such vessels are asked to pay Rs50,000 a month and allowed to play havoc with the seafood resources of Balochistan. By all standards, it is an unpardonable offence against the poor fishermen and also amounts to eliminating marine life. Exactly the world fishing mafia did the same thing to Iran before the Islamic Revolution.

