| September 16, 2003 | Tuesday | Rajab 18, 1424 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
America’s own meddling
Long wait
IN a nationally televised speech on Saturday, President Pervez Musharraf said the nation must take a decision on building as many water reservoirs as it can and take in hand the construction of at least one of the two dams — Kalabagh or Bhasha — by 2004. There is no denying the fact that Pakistan needs to work urgently to better utilize its water resources. But how this is to be done remains a centre of much controversy. Indeed the debate over dams has not followed a rational and objective pattern. For his part, President Musharraf has said that a purely technical issue has been turned into a political one and he wants to resolve the matter through consensus. He is quick to point out that some vested interests are instigating people against these projects, creating false and baseless impressions about them. This would have the effect of casting all those against these projects in a negative light, although the objections of some may be based on sound technical grounds. It is apparent that Gen Musharraf feels strongly about the construction of the Kalabagh and Bhasha dams. The challenge before him now is to develop a consensus. This consensus can only emerge on the basis of proper research and analysis which can then be put before various platforms for debate.
Through his statements, the president has preempted the work of the technical committee he had set up last month under the chairmanship of Mr A.G.N. Abbasi, a respected irrigation expert, for this purpose. This committee was formed to investigate and give recommendations on controversial water related projects like the Kalabagh Dam and the Thal Canal. At the same time, the composition of a parliamentary committee, also being set up on the same lines has yet to be announced. The wiser path to tread would be to allow these committees to come up with their findings and recommendations and then proceed on debating the issue in that light and coming to some agreement and consensus.
The first question that needs to be examined is whether the issue of improved water management and distribution for all the provinces will be served with the construction of these dams. Another issue that the committees need to look at is the financial feasibility of building such big dams. In fact, one big question mark that hangs over the Kalabagh project is the source of over seven billion dollars that will be needed for its construction. Most donor agencies are reluctant to fund big dams on account of the large number of people and the land that these dams affect. Another misconception that has come out of the dam debate is the belief that the water that flows into the Arabian Sea is wasted and should be utilized. On the other hand, it is argued that this is a natural process that should not be tampered with as the water passes through the Indus delta, which has a vibrant life and utility of its own. Already, the reduced flow of the Indus into this delta has resulted in vast areas in the coastal belt being rendered useless with sea water moving up and creating widespread problems of salinity.
Finally, aside from the technical aspect of this issue, there is the political dimension that has to be carefully handled. The long delay by successive governments in taking a decision has only complicated the issue. Sharp inter-provincial differences over other matters such as the National Finance Commission Award and the Indus River System Authority have created an atmosphere of distrust in which it is easy for suspicions to take root. If the Kalabagh Dam has to be built, it has to done by evolving a consensus and not bulldozing it through. Perhaps it is time the Council of Common Interests was also brought into the picture.
THE foreign office’s dismissal as “absurd and baseless” of the declassified US intelligence report claiming that Pakistan had helped Al Qaeda launch its operations in Afghanistan in the 1990s comes as no surprise. What is surprising is that the CIA should have chosen to omit references to America’s own backing and funding of Osama bin Laden and his guerilla fighters trained by American servicemen to wage a jihad against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan up until 1989. The timing of the report — now being made public — also leaves a bad taste in the mouth for Pakistan, a country that was as close a US ally back then against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan as it is today in Washington’s “war on terror”. The American media has used the report to dig up more dirt on Pakistan and raised questions about Islamabad’s trustworthiness at a time when President Bush does not tire of praising General Musharraf for his country’s wholehearted support to America’s global war against terrorism.
It is reports like these that continue to appear in the American media which raise doubts in Pakistan about America’s own trustworthiness as a friend. The fact that such reports are often attributed to official American intelligence sources lends further credence to claims here that America will once again abandon Pakistan after its objectives with regard to terrorism are achieved. In that context, it does not make the government’s job any easier to be close to Washington — especially at a time when the government and the opposition are at loggerheads over the president’s new-found powers under the controversial Legal Framework Order. But one does hope that the meddling of the ’90s by our intelligence agencies is over, and that the political government now exercises effective control over them.
THE conditions existing in most of the jails in the country can best be described as inhuman. Pakistani prisons suffer from overcrowding as well as a lack of facilities that inmates are entitled to under the Jail Manual. Jail officials say that the crux of the problem is over-crowding, which puts an added burden on the limited facilities available. For example, in the 30 jails in Punjab, against accommodation facilities for over 17,000 prisoners, nearly 50,000 prisoners were lodged in 2002. What makes this bad sitation worse is the fact that the vast majority of inmates are under-trial prisoners.
Because of bureaucratic delays, corruption at various levels and the over-burdening of the judicial system the length of time spent by many prisoners waiting for their cases to be heard usually exceeds the prison sentence provided under the relevant law. The state of desperation in jails today can be gauged from the fact that in the past two years, there have been four serious jail incidents in which some prisoners were either killed or managed to escape. The most recent one in July resulted in the deaths of five persons, including three judges, in Sialkot jail as prisoners took hostages to press for their demands.
In the case of under-trial prisoners, since their cases have not been decided, they cannot benefit from the remission in sentences granted on certain national occasions. It is time the government took the problem of the law’s delays and prison congestion more seriously. For one, a fast-track system should be put in place, which would ensure disposal of cases in a matter of days or months, not in years. To clear the massive backlog of cases, the cooperation of the judiciary should be sought and a sympathetic attitude adopted for those booked under minor offences (as has been tentatively attempted at some places). At the same time, due attention should be paid to improving the state of affairs within the country’s 150 jails. This will end the suffering of thousands of prisoners and under-trials and the prison system will be relieved of some of the pressure it finds extremely difficult to cope with.