| April 16, 2003 | Wednesday | Safar 13, 1424 |
A technical issue turns political
Who is calling the shots?
European Union leaders face dilemma
Urdu and Gandhiji’s archives
Sharjah performance praiseworthy but caution advised
THE dispute over water distribution for Kharif between Sindh and Punjab has taken a serious turn this year too. For the past five days, statements by the Indus River System Authority (Irsa), Sindh and Punjab governments officials have created an unwelcome situation over an issue that could have been resolved much earlier. On Sunday, Irsa turned down a plea from Sindh that the arrangement evolved earlier in the week be revised, allowing the province water downstream from Kotri.
A SHOWDOWN appears imminent between the establishment and those who want to restore the supremacy of the constitution. This became very clear on Tuesday when the combined opposition once again disrupted the proceedings of the house with comfortable ease while the ruling alliance looked on helplessly.
It was pathetic to see Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali sitting there helplessly surrounded by loud-mouths like Abdus Sattar Lalika and Sheikh Rashid Ahmed doing nothing as the opposition in one voice kept shouting down the speaker or anyone who tried to speak his mind from the treasury benches. The house itself met only for about five minutes before the Maghrib prayers. And the post-prayer session lasted no more than 10 minutes.
The intensity of the combined opposition’s agitation on Tuesday made it even more clear what it wants vis-a-vis the LFO and the matter of a uniformed president. On the other hand, the ruling alliance presented a picture of total confusion. It perhaps thought that it could get the opposition to let the house run its normal course just on the mere promise of a settlement. Its leadership perhaps had seemingly misled the president into believing that everything had been taken care of and, therefore, it was safe to summon the sixth session of the NA in order to test the water for calling the joint session.
By the look of things, there is hardly any hope that the president would accede to the demands of the opposition by Friday when the house is expected to meet again. But the opposition in turn appears prepared to take to the streets if the ruling alliance failed to get the president to agree to its demands. They seem all set to convert the ongoing “million marches” on Iraq into a PNA-like street agitation against the LFO and the uniformed president. Such an agitation would certainly lead to a collapse of the present system.
Surprisingly, the MMA which has a stake in the system appears ready to burn its boats. President Musharraf, who has the largest stake in the system, perhaps thought he could manage opposition inside and outside the elected houses with the help of the ruling alliance. But the ruling alliance does not seem to have either the political capability or the will to confront the opposition inside the house or on the streets. This would mean that in a crunch situation, Gen Musharraf would have to use his administrative powers to quell any street rebellion challenging his authority. And that would be the day when a real showdown could take place between the political forces on the one hand and the extra-constitutional elements on the other.
In the backdrop of what had happened on Tuesday in the NA, it does not seem possible to hold a joint session of the two houses. Even a budget session appears rather difficult to summon. Meanwhile, it has been learnt that those of the PML-Q who were made to lose their elections, and those in the party who did not so far get any share from the political “loot” are in clandestine contact with the combined opposition. Already, it is said, messages have started to be exchanged among all these political elements with only one aim — to restore the supremacy of the constitution.
Khawaja Asif of the PML-N, and his parliamentary party leader, was in his usual devastating mood on Tuesday. Talking to journalists outside the hall, he ridiculed the prime minister and his information minister, Sheikh Rashid, for equating Saddam Hussein with Pervez Musharraf. The two have wondered publicly a number of times in the recent past at what they understood as a contradiction between the MMA’s glorification of Saddam Hussein and its refusal to accept General Musharraf as Pakistan’s president.
Mr Asif said he failed to understand why anyone glorifying Saddam, should accept a uniformed president in Pakistan. There is, indeed, nothing common between the two, he added.
He went on to say, Saddam had served under a military president but was never a member of his country’s armed forces and the uniform which he wore was that of his party’s.
The irony is that though the water issue between the two provinces pre-dates Partition, the recent bickering emanates from ill-will that seems to underlie political ends. While Sindh wants water distribution to be made on the basis of the 1991 Water Accord, Punjab wants water going downstream Kotri to be shared by the two provinces or in other words, leave the area inhabited by 0.7 million people of lower Sindh go dry and the Arabian Sea erode an estimated two million acres of agricultural land.
Reports about the deliberations of the Irsa’s advisory committee held in Islamabad on Wednesday, based on a briefing by the authority’s chairman, Nasar Ali Rajput, give the impression that Sindh had forgone its right on releasing water downstream Kotri and agreed to share that water between the two provinces. This was quickly refuted by the Sindh irrigation secretary who also claimed that when he raised the point that the distribution should be made on the formula as laid down in the 1991 accord, he was told that the chief executive wanted to maintain the status quo till a final decision.
This has created a commotion among the people of Sindh, as the water flow downstream Kotri during the past three years has been nil and the sea has encroached upon fertile lands. Sea tides have reached the Thatta-Sujawal bridge, 130km upstream, destroying everything that could grow on the river’s banks.
The water dispute between the two provinces has seen many unpleasant phases. Even during the Indus Water Basis Treaty, the requirements of Sindh were taken into consideration, including the eco-system of the delta and future farm requirements. After the water works were completed under the treaty, it was decided that any province embarking on a new irrigation project would seek the consent of the other party concerned and water availability situation. Even as general practice, the interest of the last beneficiary is taken into consideration before any decision is made. Unfortunately, we have not developed such a culture. The Kalabagh Dam and Greater Thal Canal projects have yet to be approved by Sindh.
After the Water Accord of 1991, officials of Punjab had second thoughts: the accord did not suit its future plans. Hence, on April 2, 1994, it held a ministerial meeting in Lahore at which a new formula was evolved based on the average needs of irrigation used by Sindh during the five-year period of 1977-82. Since during that period there was more rainfall and inundation, more water was thrown into the sea to save barrages and waterworks. This went against the interests of Sindh, but it was argued that Sindh was misusing Indus waters and future distribution should be made on the basis of the 1994 cabinet decision. Sindh protested against this and called for observing the 1991 Accord.
When the Nawaz Sharif government was ousted, Sindh raised the question in October 1999 calling for the intervention of Gen Pervez Musharraf, who sought a report from the law ministry. The ministry said that the 1994 cabinet decision had no legal status. Irsa, therefore, restored water distribution according to the 1991 Accord from March 21, 2001.
The latest discord too comes from the wrong interpretation of various clauses of the 1991 Accord, under which after the filling of the two dams, at least two million acre feet of water has to flow downstream from Kotri to prevent incursion by the of sea, provide irrigation water for the catchment areas, and prevent the eco-system of the delta from degradation. This has led to an exchange of lengthy arguments between the two provinces.
We have turned a technical issue into a political one which has created bad blood and mistrust. In August 2001, when a similar situation arose, the chief executive intervened and saved the situation from aggravating. But it has to be solved permanently. And the fact remains that it requires political will, honesty, acceptance of the realities and upholding national and international laws. Let us learn a lesson from those countries where a common source of water passes through more than one country and province. Above all, political will has to prevail. The Council of Common Interests or the Supreme Court, too can offer guidance, but it requires a spirit of political accommodation to achieve a durable solution.
WHO is calling the shots in the NWFP? Is it Chief Minister Mohammad Akram Khan Durrani who is at the helm in the province? Or is it a group of ‘ayatollahs?
We have here in the province Nifaz-i-Shariat Council, a 21-member super watchdog body that sits and watches the government lest it digresses from the Shariat. This council of ‘ayatollah’ is responsible for all things that are even remotely associated with governance, from formulating policies to actually implementing them. Among the many onerous tasks it has on its hands is one that pertains to ‘Islamizing’ the media. It has wide functions that include everything and exclude nothing. It sets the guidelines and makes recommendations for legislation.
The only person who represents the NWFP government on that council of guardians is the law secretary who also works as the council’s ex-officio secretary. Those who wonder who this gentleman is, suffice it to say that he worked as ‘qazi’ in Malakand Division, a territory governed under Shariat Regulation.
Besides the council, there are several committees, task forces and think-tanks. While the council and some of the task forces have representatives from virtually all the six religious parties that form the Muttahida Majlis Amal, the think- tanks are an exclusively Jamaat-i-Islami affair. The Jamaat has a significant following in the bureaucracy and there is a whole lot of former and present civil servants who are only too keen to offer their services to set the path right for this government. This explains the recent transfers and postings relating to top positions in the province, some of which have been given out to obvious party loyalists and junior officers posted against senior positions.
Where does this all leave the Durrani government and the NWFP Assembly? While the council is framing all laws and vetting them too for the government, the NWFP assembly will find it nearly impossible to oppose any legislation brought before it in the name of Islam. There are stories galore as to who is doing what at the expense of the chief minister. Worse still, the MMA government does not trust the bureaucracy. The alliance appears to be haunted by the fear that the civil servants are hell bent on discrediting its government. Bizarre as it may seem, it explains why that the NWFP cabinet holds a ‘cabinet’ meeting (without the bureaucracy) to take decisions before another cabinet meeting (with bureaucrats present) is held to rubber-stamp the decisions. In fact, so huge is the mistrust that even the chief secretary, who averted a clash between the government and the governor Iftikhar over the FATA MNAs holed up in the chief minister’s house ahead of the Senate elections, was not invited to the ‘informal’ cabinet meeting. It was only after he firmly put his foot down that the chief minister grudgingly agreed to let him in and give his opinion on technical matters.
Official summaries sent to the chief minister for decisions and signatures get stuck for days and weeks. And guess who provides the icing for the cake — the number two man in the NWFP government, Senior Minister Sirajul Haq. A good person otherwise, to the misfortune of the NWFP this former firebrand student activist of the Jamaat-i-Islami holds the all-important portfolios of finance, planning and development. Anyone can guess where things are heading in the NWFP as for as money and development are concerned. This is in contrast to the premature sacking of the managing director of the Bank of Khyber, whose contract was due to expire on May 4 but who was relieved while on a visit to Karachi. His removal was followed by a notification of yet another ‘supervisory’ body to oversee the introduction of ‘Islamic products’ in BoK.
EUROPEAN Union leaders seeking to rebuild transatlantic relations following fierce pre-Iraq war feuding with the United States face a tough dilemma. All 15 EU governments want the United Nations to take the lead in post-war Iraq and have little sympathy for Washington’s unilateral moves to impose its own agenda on Iraq’s reconstruction. But leading policymakers in Brussels and other European capitals — including Paris and Berlin which led the anti-war camp in the EU — say the bloc cannot afford another sterile diplomatic standoff with America.
Still, much as they try to avoid a clash, another acrimonious transatlantic dispute over Iraq and perhaps over Syria and Iran — seems inevitable. French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder joined forces with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin in St Petersburg on April 12 to call for a central UN role in rebuilding Iraq’s economic and political infrastructure.
The message is expected to be hammered home even more forcefully by EU leaders meeting in Athens today (Wednesday). Diplomats say the 15 heads of state and government will demand that the UN, not coalition forces, must set the agenda for Iraq’s reconstruction, arguing that this is necessary to give international legitimacy to the operation. The presence of UN Secretary- General Kofi Annan in Athens on April 17 could boost the EU stance. It is also significant that Europe’s calls for a central UN role in rebuilding Iraq — including the setting up of key administration structures — are shared by Russia, China and Japan.
America, however, is, again, not in a listening mode. EU officials are especially surprised at the hardline anti-UN stance being taken by Secretary of State Colin Powell, long seen as Europe’ “multilateralist” ally in the US administration. Mr Powell has caused repeated dismay in EU capitals by making it clear that victorious coalition forces will not stand aside and let others lead developments in post-war Iraq. President George W. Bush’s pledge to British Prime Minister Tony Blair in Ireland earlier this month that the UN would have a “vital role” in Iraq referred only to humanitarian operations in the country, Powell said.
There is EU agreement, even from France, that coalition forces have a primary responsibility to restore law and order and ensure the security of Iraq in the immediate aftermath of the war. Europeans also clearly share America’s final goal of installing a democratic government in Iraq. But the two sides diverge significantly over the intermediate phase, with the US already planning to put in place an interim authority composed of pro-American Iraqi exiles and the EU insistent that the UN should take the lead during the transition phase.
Reasons for the EU’s focus on the UN are manifold. EU governments believe that having fought a war which many see as illegal under international law, the US must move rapidly to restore legitimacy. And the UN, they argue is the only organization capable of providing such legal cover.
EU policymakers are also convinced that putting the UN in charge will ensure that the new administration in Iraq is accepted by its Arab neighbours and other Muslim countries. They believe that the world body, which has already managed difficult transition situations in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Kosovo, has the expertise and know-how to deal with post-conflict realities which coalition troops lack.
But convincing the US of these arguments remains a problem. EU leaders recognise that their influence over a victorious America is minimal. Even Mr Blair, America’s staunchest ally, has been unable to convince President Bush to concede anything more than an advisory role to the UN. There is also concern that Washington’s increasingly belligerent language against Syria — and possibly soon Iran as well — will widen the transatlantic rift at a time when both sides should be trying to heal past wounds. Many in Europe, including Mr Blair, are also disappointed with America’s reluctance to move swiftly on ending Israeli-Palestinian violence by publishing a long-awaited peace blueprint for the region.
Still, officials in Brussels insist that all is not lost. America will eventually get accustomed to dealing with a more confident Europe that can say no. Also, once the euphoria of success wears off in Washington, EU officials say the Bush Administration will realise it needs Europe to deal with the complexities, and huge financial costs, of rebuilding Iraq.
WAS Gandhiji opposed to the Urdu script as the general impression is or he was an advocate of Devnagri as well as Persian scripts for Hidustani, the only language which he considered deserved to be the lingua franca of India.
A startling disclosure about Gandhiji’s last opinion on the issue has come as a surprise to the historians of Urdu-Hindi controversy. Gandhiji appears to have turned the tables on those chauvinists who would do everything to convince us that he was opposed to the Persian/Urdu scripts of the language he wanted to call Hindustani in place of Hindi-Urdu.
A note in Gandhiji’s diary dated October 10, 1947 — (being the English translation of the Urdu text, the Urdu text is perhaps itself a translation) reads as follows:
“It appears that the issue of national language has come to the fore. I have been told that it will be Hindi in the Devnagri script.
“I cannot agree with this opinion. I cannot be the enemy of Urdu or Hindi. I have understood the issue and I believe that only that language could be truly national which sought to be an amalgam of Hindi and Urdu — having both scripts — Devnagri and Urdu — for it.
“Therefore I have to emphasize that it is Hindustani. I will continue to say so not caring whether I am the lone supporter of the view. I have seen a paragraph of a news item stating that Hindi, in the Devnagri script, will be the language of the province. This news has pained me.”
Ever since Gandhiji’s diary note has come to the knowledge of the advocates of Hindi, quite a few learned bodies working for the promotion of Urdu in India have strongly voiced that why did Gandhiji’s much referred to opinion of the late 30s — Hindi in the Devnagri script — sought to rigmarole the identity of Urdu script when the latest leaf from his archives was so clear.
Naturally the United Provinces, where up to the advent of the 20th century more than 80 per cent Urdu publications were edited and owned by Hindus, turned against Urdu. Some Hindu scholars lived by teaching Quran. Many Hindus were considered authority on Arabic language and literature. Malik Ram was one such scholar.
Malik Ram is only one recent name to be cited. In fact the services of Pandit Ratan Nath Sarshar, Munshi Jawala Parshad Barq, Sir Kishen Parshad Shad, Nubat Raj Nazar, Munshi Durga Parshad Suroor, Pandit Brij Narain Chakbast, Munshi Maharaj Bahadur Barq, Munshi Sukh Dayal Saksena Raish, Pandit Amar Nath Sahir, Pandit Jag Mohan Nath Raith Shauq, Pandit Brij Mohan Datataria Kaifi, Pandit Labho Ram Josh, Munshi Prem Chand, Munshi Tilok Chand Mehroom, and many others from the relatively young set such as Firaq, Krishen Chandar, Kanhaiyya Lal Kapoor, Khushtar Garami, Kashmiri Lal Zakir, Ram Lal and Joginder Paul, et al, cannot be ignored. In fact there is a galaxy of writers whose genius blossomed in Urdu script. If not for any other reason, then for the simple reason that Urdu script did not, in anyway, hinder the development and promotion of Hindi in the Devnagri script. The Hindi writers should be generous to the Urdu script.
When Gandhiji took up the cause of untouchables he did it with a view to bringing them into the fold of Hinduism. Gandhiji’s opposition to the extension of the principle of separate electorate to the untouchables resulted in strengthening Indian nationalism. For similar reasons a contented minority enjoying the facility of having its own script for Hindustani language was in the best interests of India.
Credit should go to the Indus Peace and Spiritual Tenor, Karachi, for organizing a seminar on mysticism entitled A Humane Sufi Solution to War.
Presided over by Prof (Dr) N. B. G. Qazi, the speakers at the seminar thought that our world of tensions and wars needed the mystics’ way of responding to the challenges of war. The Iraq war served as the reference point. It was considered uncalled for and immoral. Some speakers thought it to be too ironical that the land of Rabia Basri, Junaid Baghdadi and Husain Bin Hallaj was being destroyed with a kind of excuse which reminds us of the wolf and goat fable. The world’s strongest country could, if it wished to make a short work of any country, could turn to mediaeval rule of the jungle. Unless unilateralism was eschewed as something immoral, the cause of civilization could not be taken up, let alone served.
Asodo Mal, Sabir Chishti, Zia Ansari and Agha Saleem, Dr Anwar Zia Ahmed and Dr Qazi threw light on different aspects of mysticism. A consensus emerged that all religions sought to strengthen ethical values and respect for human life. Mysticism is a philosophy of religion with an accent on ‘Love for all.’ It is love which ensured service to humanity. It was a pity, they thought, that the contemporary world was heading towards a catastrophe.
Ms Shabnam Abdullah did well to organize this seminar. The participation of the Theosophical Society and the Vegetarian Society of Pakistan suggested that the reason for a seminar like this could be to instil in the hearts of the members of the assembly love for the Creator and its creatures.
It was an interesting coincidence that soon after the seminar on mysticism, Zafar Azim’s book Roomi Ke Naghme was launched in a city hotel.
The presidium comprised Dr Farman Fatehpuri, Dr Manzoor Ahmed and Dr Ismail Saad, the Vice-Chancellor of Hamdard University. This scribe also spoke.
Zafar’s is a well-researched book making use of the latest researches on Rumi’s thought and Dr Farman Fatehpuri thought it to be the second best effort to have focused on Rumi in the modern context.
The Iraq war has made us think what mysticism can offer to a beleaguered world.
TWO cheers for the Pakistan team. The third will have to wait till the team plays at a venue other than Sharjah and against an opposition stiffer than Zimbabwe and Kenya and a Sri Lanka that has re-grouped after self-destructing itself.
But Pakistan looked like a team and there was a spring in its step. It might be pertinent to point out that Rashid Latif, Mohammad Sami, Younis Khan, Yousuf Youhana, Abdul Razzaq, Taufiq Umar were all members of the Pakistan World Cup squad. Faisal Iqbal, Misbah-ul-Haq and Mohammad Zahid have toured with previous Pakistan teams though it can be said of Zahid that he is destined to be the best-man at a wedding but never be the groom.
What then gave this team a new look? Was it a change of leadership? There appears to be no doubt that there was better communication between the players though it was not evident in the running between the wickets which remained a basis of discussion and there was no Inzamam-ul-Haq on whom the blame could be placed.
For once, we had a team that was on trial and no player could take his place for granted. It is the yardstick of performance that has to be applied at all times. At the same time we should not be so enthralled by youth that we start to discredit experience.
The committee appointed by the PCB to review the failure of the Pakistan team does not tell us anything, which we did not know. Even before the World Cup had got underway, some of us had warned against the hype and the lifting of expectations sky-high.
The team that came to the World Cup without too much fanfare was Australia. The multinationals in that country preferred to invest their money on their products and not on national pride. Had Australia, somehow, not won the World Cup, I doubt very much that Ricky Ponting would have got the sack or the team’s coach, John Buchanan. Indeed, so low profile is the coach that one is hard-pressed to remember his name.
Pakistan’s performance in Sharjah has come in for a lot of praise. But once again, there is need for caution. The next time round the team will come under pressure because expectations will be high. Both criticism and praise should be in moderation.
Of the new lads, Mohammad Hafeez and Umar Gul show promise. Hafeez looks a pretty cool customer but one should not damn him with praise considering what happened to Mohammad Wasim and Imran Nazir. Give him a long run but teach him to place a high price on his wicket.
Umar Gul is only 18-year-old and he will add to his pace but he’s not going to be a tearaway fast bowler. There is enough anger in him so that he bowls a bouncer when he is smacked for a boundary. But line and length is what he should perfect. He is a tall young man and this gives him a huge advantage. There is no reason why Australia should be the only country to produce a Glenn McGrath.
The PCB should be well pleased. But well begun may be half-done but there is still a long way to go. The door should not be shut on the so-called ‘ageing’ players who have been ‘rested’. In a sense, the roles have been reversed. Now, they will have to win the places they had taken for granted and this is a healthy development.
I was disappointment that neither Wasim Akram nor Saqlain Mushtaq turned out for PIA in the domestic one-day tournament, particularly in the final. I am someone who had had a lot to do with the employment of cricketers in the national airline.
While providing them with lucrative employment, it was expected at the very least that these cricketers would play for PIA, not only in domestic tournaments but in club matches as well. And they used to do so. The brighter ones among them also learned their trade and have gone on to hold senior executive position, a primary example being Wasim Bari who is now a director.
Our policy had been to allow the cricketers, as other sportsmen that PIA employed, a full run to play but encouraged them to be productive members of the airline. This policy had been Nur Khan’s brain-child and all subsequent managements have followed it.
But if senior cricketers like Wasim Akram and Saqlain Mushtaq find it “inconvenient” to turn out for their employers this policy may undergo some revision!
The question of giving Bangladesh Test status keeps coming up every time its team plays. I was among those who had welcomed their entry into the big league. Indeed, I had kick-started its international cricket when I took a private team to Bangladesh in the 1980s.
The interest in cricket was enormous and the then president of the Bangladesh cricket board, Kamal Z. Islam had been the moving figure in the development of cricket. I had felt then that Bangladesh cricket was in excellent hands. But with a change in government, he too was changed.
Bangladesh should have graduated to the stage when its cricket team starts to win a few international matches. But it has maintained a losing streak that is something of a world record. It continues to sack captains and coaches at regular intervals, as if, that was where the fault lay. I felt very sorry for the coach, Mohsin Kamal. In no way could he have been held responsible for the troubles of Bangladesh cricket.
I was not however surprised when he got the sack. I have a special affection for Mohsin Kamal. He was a member of the private team that I had taken to Bangladesh, then a young fast bowler who bowled with a run-up that started from somewhere near the sight-screen but he was really quick. I hope that the PCB will be able to utilise his services in one of the academies or as a coach of a junior string.
Bangladesh need to play against a team that it can beat. The losing streak has to be broken. There is the danger that losing can become habit forming and the cricket public will turn away from the game.
Bangladesh does not need to lose heart. Just give the captain and coach some security and a free hand. I am sure that the talent is there.