North Korea’s startling revelation

THE world is right in being alarmed by the North Korean admission that it has been developing nuclear weapons. Nuclear proliferation in any form is dangerous and must be discouraged. Pyongyang should be persuaded to adhere to its commitments made in 1994 and to the NPT. But there is another aspect to the startling development. It underscores the untenability of the American position on Iraq. The US is straining at the leash to attack Iraq and overthrow President Saddam Hussein because the Bush administration alleges, without producing any credible evidence, that Baghdad is developing weapons of mass destruction. It is prepared to launch its offensive to protect what it calls Western values and to unseat a regime that threatens peace with or without the United Nations authorizing the action. What now? Since the US believes it enjoys the monopoly of deciding what is right and what is wrong for the world, and since ordinary mortals like us are supposed to look up to it as our guardian angel, will it also now be prepared to attack North Korea and bring about a regime change there? In that case, it will have to go even beyond that and aim at changing the political system altogether because North Korea is still run on Stalinist lines. The evidence against Iraq is deductive at best; in relation to North Korea, there’s a smoking gun, obligingly presented to the sheriff by the accused himself. No inspections are needed there.

US officials have been tying themselves in knots in trying to make a distinction between North Korea and Iraq. They say they will take the “peaceful” route to make North Korea dismantle its nuclear weapons (it is already supposed to possess two atomic bombs). They argue that Iraq is in a different category because, in the words of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, it committed aggression against Kuwait (which, of course, it did), used chemical weapons against its own people, tortured Iraqi dissidents, carried out terrorist acts, and lied to weapons inspectors. Yet, just a few months ago, President George Bush had grouped North Korea with Iraq and Iran in an “axis of evil”. On other occasions, Libya and Syria have also been branded as “terrorist” states purported to be working to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Is it oil that makes Iraq different? Or the US interest in seeking to maintain the regional hegemony of Israel, which is itself an atomic power? Or a bit of both?

North Korea has just proved that the world is too complex and complicated a place to be ordered and reordered according to the Bush administration’s simplistic but ominous notions of ‘them’ and ‘us’. The US cannot obviously bomb every non-western nuclear power into submission. The only principled and moral position is that there should be a voluntary renunciation of the manufacture, possession or use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction by everyone, with the big powers taking the lead. When no country is in a position to threaten others with its nuclear might, only then will there be credibility and respect for any move for a universal regime of disarmament. Meanwhile, North Korea’s revelation, if it is not just a diplomatic ploy, may yet prove to be the turning point that, in a twisted sort of way, thwarted America’s ambitions in Iraq and the Middle East.

Heritage in decay

THERE are four stages in the decay of a historical monument: neglect, vandalism, encroachment and demolition. The last but one, encroachment, often sets the stage for the final demise of a monument as unabashed pursuit of vested interests becomes the dominant factor. It is disquieting to see many of Pakistan’s historical treasures falling victim to all three: neglect, vandalism and encroachment. Two recent cases in point are the celebrated Lahore monuments, the tomb of Jehangir (1646) and the Wazir Khan mosque (1635). This is despite the fact that both the monuments are among Lahore’s prime historical treasures which can now only sarcastically be called “protected” monuments. The custodian of the former is the archaeology department, while the latter only just feeds the coffers of the auqaf department.

Both Jehangir’s tomb and the Wazir Khan mosque are in an alarming state of decay because of official neglect and resulting encroachments. While unauthorized concrete-built houses have been constructed within the precincts of the Dilkusha gardens housing the tomb of Jehangir at Shahdara, the auqaf department continues to turn a blind eye to the expansion of some 24 shops lining the southern wall of the Wazir Khan mosque. The shop owners — all tenants of the auqaf department — have dug big holes in the mosque’s walls inserting iron rods to support the shops’ unauthorized structures and overhead sheds. If such acts of vandalism and defacement of national monuments are allowed to go unchecked in a city like Lahore, one can well imagine the fate of other similarly “protected” monuments in far-off places. It is time the government enforced stricter control over the management and upkeep of national monuments, and held all those entrusted with their protection and care accountable for their criminal neglect, where such neglect is palpable.

In spite of neglect

PAKISTAN’S sole gold medal winner at the Asian Games in South Korean city of Busan, boxer Meherullah, is right on target when he says that successive governments have failed to give any sport other than cricket or hockey any kind of encouragement or support. Despite the fact that he earns a measly Rs 3,500 a month working with the Karachi Port Trust, Meherullah has so far managed to win four international medals in his boxing career. In fact, had it not been for the boxers, Pakistan would have returned rather red-faced from South Korea. Other than the one gold medal, they won four silvers and a bronze, making the largest contribution to our overall tally of 13 medals. Even at the Commonwealth Games held earlier this year, Pakistan’s only gold medal was in boxing.

There was a time when, along with cricket and hockey, Pakistan was also a vigorous competitor in athletics and many other areas of sporting activity. The army used to provide a congenial support system particularly for athletes. Much of it seems to be in the past. It is a testament to the perseverance and hard work of our boxers — invariably from impoverished backgrounds — that they have done so well, despite lack of any official support. And when you compare their financial condition with how much some of our cricket stars make through salaries, allowances and endorsements, then it all begins to seem skewed. Perhaps Meherullah’s remark to this newspaper that eating his gold medal will not reduce his hunger pangs, might shame the sports ministry into substantially increasing allocations for boxing and other neglected sports. If some of our contingent have done so well without any real support, imagine how much more they could do with better facilities, training and meaningful encouragement.