| December 4, 2002 | Wednesday | Ramazan 28,1423 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Controlling arms
A case for subsidy
ONE year after the historic Bonn conference, Afghanistan is far from what one would have wished it to be. The Kabul government continues to be shaky, there have been at least two attempts on the life of President Hamid Karzai, warlordism thrives, and the writ of the government remains confined to the capital city. Earlier this week, there were clashes between forces loyal to Herat governor Ismail Khan and those belonging to Amanullah Khan. Acts of terrorism continue, and American and international forces off and on come under attack from the remnants of Taliban supporters. Also active is Gulbadin Hikmatyar, who is back in Afghanistan after being expelled by Iran. All these serve to give to the world the image of an Afghanistan that has failed to clean up the mess after the end of the US-led coalition’s war on terrorism.
Afghanistan’s problems are immense and complex. More than two decades of war has pauperized the population and destroyed its economy and infrastructure. The country’s orchards stand ruined because small-scale irrigation works were destroyed during the war. Its once flourishing tourism industry has disappeared. Also in a shambles are roads, bridges and the communication network. Millions of refugees who had fled the country have returned home. But hundreds of thousands continue to stay in neighbouring countries, especially Pakistan, and many who returned to Afghanistan have moved out again because they found no work. What Afghanistan needs now is peace, political stability and economic rebuilding. The money pledged by the Tokyo conference earlier this year was generous — $ 4.5 billion. But those who pledged the money seem reluctant to part with it because they doubt whether the Kabul government is in a position to utilize aid effectively. Still, a good $1.2 billion has been received by the Kabul government, but most of it has been spent on humanitarian assistance. No development project has been started, except one — the highway linking Kabul to Herat.
The basic issue remains peace. Without an end to warlordism, no development work is possible. The Security Council last month extended the tenure of the 4,800-strong International Security Assistance Force for another year. But its activity remains confined to Kabul and its environs. President Karzai himself has repeatedly called for extending its jurisdiction to other towns. But no decision has yet been taken in this direction. Many foreign observers often say that the presence of foreign troops will prove counterproductive, because Afghans have a tradition of resisting foreign armies. The best course under the circumstances is for Afghanistan to have an army of its own. Afghan watchers say the country needs an army of 70,000. But so far the Karzai government has been able to raise a force of only 3,000. Until such time as Afghanistan has its own army, there is no choice except that the ISAF’s mandate be extended to cover the entire country. A new constitution is to be framed, and elections are due in 2004. All this would not be possible without an end to warlordism and violence and the extension of the writ of the Kabul government to the entire country. Those behind the formation of the ISAF are obviously afraid of suffering casualties. But there is no other way out. Drawn from 22 nations, the ISAF has to go the whole hog if the aims of the Bonn conference are to be achieved and Afghanistan is to have peace and stability, and the task of economic reconstruction is to go forward.
THERE have been conflicting accounts of the current state of the illegal arms market in the tribal areas. One report yesterday said weapons from Darra Adam Khel, one of the major centres of the trade in arms, were being smuggled by couriers to North Waziristan that borders the Khost province of Afghanistan — amidst fears that these were meant for Taliban and Al Qaeda remnants. A few days earlier, it was reported that modern arms supplied to Afghan warlords by the allied forces were being sold off and smuggled into the tribal areas for sale. Yet another report some time ago had claimed that many arms shops in Landi Kotal were forced to close down following the ouster of the Taliban regime and that prices in the bazaar had dipped.
It is hard to understand what is really going on in the remote and rugged regions of northern Pakistan where the manufacture and sale of weapons have become something of an established tradition. Before the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, the trade was largely seen as a cottage industry and a source of pride for the craftsmen involved. The US-led jihad and the Zia regime’s wholehearted participation in it lent the whole business a menacing edge, and soon not only the entire tribal belt but Pakistan itself was awash with illegal arms. The Mujahideen needed weapons, and what they could not get from abroad, they copied and manufactured in the Darra factories. The war ended, but the weapons remained, and became symbols of power and oppression and instruments of tyranny. They had a direct bearing on the law and order situation within the country.
The Musharraf government started a de-weaponization programme and prohibited the display of arms in public. It was recently stated that over 200,000 illegal arms had been seized in 16 months, although the figure was probably based on police claims that could be inflated. Even this must be only a fraction of the number of unlicensed weapons in circulation. The arms factories and arms traders of the tribal areas, where the state writ runs hesitantly, are a different ball game altogether. An investigation of the situation there should be undertaken followed by a determined push throughout the country to carry forward the de-weaponization drive.
GONE are the days when PIA, feeling its responsibility as the national flag carrier, used to subsidize its fares to remote destinations to facilitate the people from these economically depressed regions. The subsidized flights included destinations such as Gilgit, Skardu and Chitral in the northern Pakistan, and Pasni, Gawadar, Jiwani and Turbat in the Mekran region. Both the regions are heavily dependent on the PIA link since travel by road is not a preferred option. The roads — where these exist — entail long and hazardous journeys over rough terrain.
That PIA, by removing subsidy on these routes, has deprived the people of these remote areas of an affordable mode of travel is clear from the fact that flights to these destinations are now cancelled all too often for lack of sufficient passengers. The cancellation of four flights between Peshawar and Chitral last week is a case in point. The one-way fare on this particular sector, which used to be Rs 290 in 1997, has now risen to Rs 940. This is despite the fact that the largely unmetalled road between Dir and Chitral through the difficult Lowari Pass remains snowbound for nearly five months a year, leaving travel by air the only way in and out of the Chitral valley. The government should look into the matter, and if the airline cannot put the subsidy back in place because of financial constraints, it should consider picking up the tab and restore the subsidy in the larger public interest.