| June 5, 2002 | Wednesday | Rabi-ul-Awwal 23,1423 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
KESC’s predicament
A strange intrusion
AFTER a lot of verbal excesses bordering on the grotesque, the South Asian mind seems to be veering round to common sense. On Monday, a defence ministry spokesman said in New Delhi that the Indian government did not believe in the use of nuclear weapons, nor did it “visualize that it will be used by any other country.” This is obviously an attempt at taking the sting out of what the Indian defence secretary had said earlier. In an interview with the Outlook magazine, the Indian official had said his country would “retaliate” with nuclear weapons and, therefore, the two countries must be ready for “mutual destruction.” However, Monday’s statement by the Indian defence ministry must come as a relief to all sane minds not only in South Asia but the world over. Last week, President Musharraf, too, made it clear that a nuclear war between Pakistan and India was unthinkable. Talking to a CNN interviewer, he said, “I don’t think either side is that irresponsible to go to that limit,” stressing that “one shouldn’t even be discussing these things.” Coming from both sides, this pledge not to resort to nuclear weapons must be welcomed without reservation. One only hopes that the two sides will build upon this informal consensus on the non-use of nuclear weapons and take further steps to avoid a war.
The statements have come at a time when a lot of diplomatic activity is going on to avert a catastrophe in the subcontinent, for even a conventional military conflict could prove that much damaging to both countries. What happens at Almaty is anybody’s guess. Russian President Vladimir Putin still hopes that President Musharraf and Prime Minister Vajpayee will be able to meet on the sidelines of the Almaty summit so as to reduce tension. While Pakistan had responded positively to the Russian initiative, India has remained obdurately opposed to talking to Pakistan except on its own terms. After Almaty, high-level efforts are to continue. Specifically, US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld are to visit Islamabad and New Delhi soon to try to lower tensions and put an end to the stand-off.
India’s pretext for avoiding talks is its charge against Pakistan that the latter is guilty of “cross-border terrorism.” Pakistan has, however, repeatedly declared that it will not allow the use of its territory for terrorism anywhere. The government has also cracked down on terrorist organizations, banned a number of extremist parties, arrested thousands of their activists and frozen their bank accounts. This way, Islamabad has been able to prevent infiltration into occupied territory from Azad Kashmir. However, if India thinks that the insurgency in Kashmir was the result of “cross-border terrorism” then it clearly has buried its head in the sand. The insurgency in Kashmir is indigenous — the whole world recognizes this truth. Over the decades, India had all the time and opportunity to try to resolve the Kashmir dispute in a manner acceptable to all the parties — Pakistan, India and the people of the disputed territory. However, it has failed to summon up the wisdom and realism needed to do that. Instead, it has relied on brute force to hold on to Kashmir. Let us hope that the sanity that India has demonstrated in matters nuclear is extended to Kashmir also. Let New Delhi give up its intransigence and have recourse to the only way out of the present stand-off — talks.
SOURCES within the Karachi Electric Supply Corporation have revealed that the beleaguered utility has been restrained from increasing its power generation capacity by the government, and forced to purchase power at a higher price from Wapda and a couple of independent power producers. The KESC, using its own power production facilities and resources, is able to produce power at the rate of Rs 3.2 per unit, which is the least expensive option after the Karachi Nuclear Power Plant which sells its power at the rate of Rs 3.09 per unit. However, to bridge the gap between supply and demand, the KESC has to buy power from Wapda at the rate of Rs 3.64, Tapal Energy at Rs 4.81 and Gul Ahmed Energy at Rs 4.82 per unit. Obviously, the high cost at which the utility is forced to purchase power from other vendors rather than being allowed to expand its own generation capacity, is passed on to the consumers. This is unfair, to say the least.
There was a time when the KESC had surplus power that it used to sell to Wapda. But then because of bad management, lack of timely repair work and increase in demand for power, the utility fell on bad days. It is now in dire straits, getting deeper and deeper into a debt-trap. Last year, the KESC’s liabilities stood at Rs 70 billion and it accumulated a deficit of Rs 40.5 billion, which is ten times its paid-up capital. Needless to say, such depressing statistics confound any hope for the utility’s proposed privatization. If the facts carried in a report in this newspaper are true, the unjust constraints imposed on the KESC by the government will surely hasten the process of its total bankruptcy. More important, the burden of the unfair and arbitrarily negotiated agreements with the independent power producers in question should be borne by the government itself and not passed on to the KESC consumers.
THE report that a full-fledged nursery is being run inside the premises of a government primary school for girls in Karachi serves to remind one of the unfortunate facts that many of the state-owned educational institutions are in a mess. One has heard of parks or amenity plots being encroached upon by builders but this particular case seems novel. In fact, the owner of the nursery justifies his illegal act by saying that he is actually providing a service to the school because of all the greenery and because his employees double as chowkidars at the school. The nursery — in operation for over two years — uses water and other resources provided at state expense to the school for the personal gain of the owner.
Clearly, the man does not understand the principle that the open area around the school building is meant for the use of the students. It would be safe to assume that the school’s administration must have had a personal motive in letting all this happen. In fact, the owner has been quoted as saying that from time to time people from the education department come and borrow his plants. Therefore, they must have known about this misuse of the school’s compound but looked the other way. Other circumstantial evidence that points to this deliberate official oversight is the fact that the nursery has been in business for two years and, according to residents, has been doing quite well. Will the education authorities wake up to this unpleasant fact, put an end to this illegal commercial intrusion into the premises of one of their schools and also take appropriate action against those who allowed the nurseryman to set up his shop there and run it for so long?