| September 14, 2002 | Saturday | Rajab 6, 1423 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Punishing power consumers
Net users’ complaint
ONE wonders whether India, in its present mood of anger and frustration, can muster enough courage and sagacity to coolly examine President Musharraf’s three-point formula for reducing tension in South Asia. Outlined in his speech at the UN General Assembly on Thursday, the proposal calls for a mutual troop pullback along the international border, observing a ceasefire along the Line of Control, and putting an end to repression in occupied Kashmir. This should be followed by a resumption of dialogue with which the people of Kashmir should be fully associated. Essentially, there is nothing new in the proposal except that all three points have been put together to underline the importance of a de-escalation process along the tense common border and to make a fresh plea for the international community to play a role in this context.
The last time President Musharraf spoke at the General Assembly in November, the situation in the subcontinent was less tense. There was no eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation, and India seemed to have got over its initial sour mood over Pakistan’s pivotal role as a front-line state in the war against terrorism. However, using the December 13 attack on the Indian parliament building as an excuse, it began massing troops along Pakistan’s border in a threatening posture. By May-June, the situation had become so critical that the international community feared a nuclear holocaust in South Asia. However, thanks to the efforts of the two countries’ common friends, a war was averted, but the confrontation along the border has continued because of India’s refusal to pull back.
Throughout this tense period, Pakistan has repeatedly offered talks to India anywhere, anytime, while New Delhi has spurned such proposals by refusing to talk or to de-escalate. Taking cover behind Pakistan’s alleged support to “terrorism” — an Indian euphemism for the freedom struggle — in occupied Kashmir, it has consistently refused to consider dialogue for a change. As pointed out by President Musharraf, New Delhi has also attempted to use the war on terrorism to “de-legitimize” the Kashmiri people’s fight for their right of self-determination. In spite of a degree of thawing in tension, one can never rule out the possibility of an outbreak by accident or “a strategic miscalculation.” What New Delhi hopes to achieve by its policy of military confrontation along the border defies comprehension. The troops have been there now for nine months, but this has not deterred the Kashmiris from fighting for their freedom or frightened Pakistan into abandoning its principled position on Kashmir. It may be wishful thinking in some hawkish quarters in New Delhi that Pakistan cannot sustain an indefinite military mobilization.
The confrontation will, no doubt, affect Pakistan’s economy adversely, but there is nothing to suggest that this country is about to experience a Soviet-like economic implosion as a result of the stand-off. In point of fact, it is both countries that have been suffering a drain on their economic resources because of the Indian decision to perpetuate the tension on the border. The Kashmir issue cannot be wished away, nor can it be solved by holding managed elections in the occupied areas. There is no other solution except that India should accept the only choice open to it: talks with Pakistan for a Kashmir solution that is acceptable to the two countries and to the people of Kashmir. One hopes Indian prime minister Vajpayee will respond to President Musharraf’s peace and de-escalation proposal positively when he addresses the UN General Assembly.
THE recent 6.5 per cent increase in tariff by the Karachi Electric Supply Corporation will be widely seen as outrageous. Of all the basic utilities, the KESC is arguably the most inefficient and grossly mismanaged. From the consumers’ standpoint, the blanket increase in tariff adds insult to injury. What is it if not total mindlessness on the part of Nepra that instead of fixing the underlying problems afflicting the functioning of the KESC — heavy line losses, theft of power and corruption — it has chosen to punish the majority of consumers who actually pay their dues? A more sensible course would have been to force the inefficient utility to cut its operational costs and excessive staff, improve its faulty distribution system, and curb power theft to control the heavy losses it has been incurring. The increase in power tariff is only the easy way out, and is unlikely to change the way the utility is being mismanaged as a matter of routine.
The approved 6.5 per cent average increase is no small matter. It translates into a 27-paisa increase per unit on an average. The tariff is conveniently linked to inflation as adjudged by the consumer index and is revisable on a quarterly basis. An average KESC bill still has more going into government coffers in the form of taxes and surcharges than the actual cost of energy. It would have been only fair if the government had reduced its share of such taxes and surcharges to bail out the KESC rather than pass on the increased operational costs to the consumers. It is time the higher authorities acted more responsibly and set a more equitable tariff for KESC consumers. After all, it is no fault of theirs that they live in Karachi and not elsewhere in the country, where power tariff is less inequitable.
INTERNET users in upper Sindh and neighbouring parts of Balochistan complain that they face a lot of trouble in getting a connection through their local service providers. The largest Internet provider in this region happens to be the government-owned Paknet which has a very small number of lines for a city the size of Sukkur. The net users say that over the past few years, the download speed has continuously become slower as has the time taken to connect to the Internet. Unfortunately, this is true of many of the country’s small towns and cities as well. In fact, such complaints have been reported from places like Muzaffargarh, Mardan, Turbat and Gilgit.
No doubt, the ministry of science and technology has extended the range of Internet connectivity to most of the country’s smaller towns and cities but clearly doing that is not enough. Greater coverage will bring little convenience or benefit to users in these areas if it takes an hour just to connect or equally long time to download a picture or send an email. The ministry should ask Internet firms that service such areas to at least increase the number of telephone lines available so that it becomes easier and faster to connect. In addition to that, the quality of PTCL’s telephone network has to be improved so that the quality of the Internet connection is not compromised. While this may take some time, since digitalization of analog lines is an on-going process, increasing the number of telephone lines for users in upper Sindh is something that can, and should, be done promptly.