Friendly fire deaths

ONE would mourn the death of two Pakistani soldiers in a clash with American forces near the Afghan border in North Waziristan on Monday. In a brief press release, the Inter-Services Public Relations said the US forces had “mistakenly fired” at a Pakistani post near Imalkhel. While casualties from friendly fire are not new to war, what is going on along the Afghan-Pakistan border is not exactly war; the two soldiers fell victim to post-war chaos. Often those involved in military operations give an impression as if they are groping in the dark. The enemy is perceived to be ubiquitous, yet he is elusive. Last month, there were anti-Pakistan demonstrations in Afghanistan, and its embassy in Kabul was vandalized following a border incident. Some Afghans alleged that the Pakistani troops had intruded into Afghan territory, a charge denied by Islamabad. Nevertheless, the incident last month and the one on Monday serve to highlight the challenging nature of the task involved.

The border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is porous because the mountainous terrain and caves provide an ideal cover for militants and peddlers of all sorts. An added difficulty is the two-way movement of genuine traders, refugees and members of divided families. In this situation, any commander could mistake a friend for a foe. The basic issue is the Karzai government’s complaint that the remnants of the Taliban use Pakistan territory as a base to carry out raids into Afghanistan. Islamabad, on its part, stands committed to cooperation with Kabul in rooting out the Taliban and Al Qaeda. In fact, as a member of the US-led war on terror, Pakistan has — even in the wake of the ouster of the Taliban government in Kabul — continued to play a significant role in combating militancy. However, the task is not easy, because the Taliban still enjoy a measure of sympathy in some parts of Pakistan’s tribal territory. The best course, under the circumstances, is for Pakistan and Afghanistan to cooperate closely politically and militarily to deny room to any groups for mischief.

Nobody knows the topography of the border region and the character of the population on both sides more than Pakistanis and Afghans themselves. Consequently, commanders from the two sides should themselves get together to plan operations in a way that should make infiltration across the Durand Line an impossibility. This would involve joint patrolling, besides coordination at the higher level to avoid misunderstandings and friendly fire. If the border is patrolled vigorously with necessary coordination and planning, there would be no need for “hot pursuit” operations.

Not all the attacks in Afghanistan are carried out by militants based in Pakistan. In many cases, those involved in terrorist activity are Afghan nationals based in Afghanistan itself. This is because even more than one and a half years after the installation of the Karzai government, Afghanistan is without a sufficiently large and disciplined army. Worse, the International Security Assistance Force refuses to operate beyond Kabul. This has not only emboldened anti-Karzai elements — all of them not necessarily pro-Taliban; the warlords in the outlying provinces, too, refuse to accept Kabul’s edict. Thus, both sides should be equally concerned about eliminating the illegal crossing of the border and incidents of friendly fire.

Reviving the KCR

THE proposal by the Railways to the federal cabinet to take over the Karachi Mass Transit Programme (KMTP) as a first step towards a revitalization of the Karachi Circular Railway (KCR) is ill-advised. The Sindh government has objected to it, and rightly so, arguing that urban transport is the responsibility of the provincial or local government and that, in any case, the revitalization of the KCR does not fall under the KMTP. The Railway proposal comes in the wake of a high-level meeting in Karachi last month in which it was decided in principle to revive the KCR.

There is consensus over the need for a mass transit system in Karachi and to have a railway component as part of this. But little has been done on the ground to achieve this. In 1999, the Railways shut down the KCR, claiming that it was not financially viable. Now that there is a decision to restart it, a number of issues need to be looked into. For one, dual tracks need to be laid to cover the entire KCR loop to ensure speed as well as safety. Old train timings would also need to be adjusted to make intervals between trains minimal. In addition, the KCR needs to have some degree of autonomy. It can be separated from the Railways so that an independent management can run the train service. Also, a settlement needs to be reached between the city administration and the Railways over the ownership of the land on which the KCR runs. The absence of such an understanding has led to widespread encroachments on KCR lands. Finally, the KCR has to be part of an integrated scheme. It will only draw passengers in large numbers if there are feeder bus services available as part of a multi-modal transport system. It is only after these issues are looked into that the KCR would be ready for revival on a long-term basis.

Why these grace marks?

IN AN intriguing move, the Board of Secondary Education and the Board of Intermediate Education Karachi have allowed grace marks up to two per cent (22 in all) to candidates who failed their examinations between 1999 and 2002. This is to apply retrospectively but will be a one time exception to allow the unsuccessful candidates who appeared for their examinations in the specified four years to get through. Since the education authorities did not deem it necessary to explain the rationale of this ingenious measure, it is difficult to justify it. The only advantage it seems to offer to the boards is the financial windfall they will get. Already 12,000 forms designed for this purpose have been sold at Rs 25 per form while 3,000 have been filled in and submitted with the required fee of Rs 200. It is a different matter that for many undeserving candidates this will come as an unexpected blessing out of the blue.

Should the boards have allowed grace marks to the failed students and that too retrospectively? One wonders what is the use of examinations if even those who are not qualified to pass are declared successful for some unknown reason. As it is the education standards in the country have been falling catastrophically. Many universities abroad do not even recognize the degrees awarded by Pakistani institutions. There are others who want to get the degrees verified to ensure that they are not fake or obtained by fraudulent means. Given these poor credentials, what credibility will our certificates be left with when the boards themselves start to award grace marks to students who actually do not deserve to pass.

It is time the education authorities addressed the issue of academic standards. The need of the hour is not just to expand education and make schools accessible to all. It is equally important that the quality of textbooks, pedagogy and examinations is spruced up to ensure that the students actually acquire knowledge and skill, rather than a certificate that is not worth the piece of paper it is written on.