| December 3, 2003 | Wednesday | Shawwal 8, 1424 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Leave the temple alone
Slow development spending
BASICALLY of an academic interest, the so-called Geneva initiative for peace in the Middle East has no chance of success. Denounced by Israel in strong terms and getting half-hearted support from the Palestinian Authority, the peace plan has some laudable features. Under preparations for years, the 50-page document unveiled with great fanfare in Geneva on Monday has been produced jointly by Yasser Abed Rabbo, a former Palestinian information minister, and Yossi Beilin, an Israeli ex-justice minister. Among those who have blessed the initiative are former US president Jimmy Carter and British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Carter has called it “a promising foundation” for peace and said the alternative could be “permanent violence.” The most positive feature of the plan is the creation of a Palestinian state comprising the Gaza Strip and 98 per cent of the West Bank. On one of the most sticking issues — Al Quds — the document proposes a city with a shared Palestinian-Israeli sovereignty. However, the most controversial part of it calls for the Palestinians to renounce the right to return of 3.8 million refugees.
Ever since European settlers started coming to the holy land following the Balfour Declaration, terror has been the principal means used by Zionist thugs to drive the Palestinians out of their ancestral land. Terror groups like Hagannah, the Stern Gang and Irgun now belong to history, but their names remain associated with massacres of Palestinians and destruction of their towns and villages. When Britain pulled out in 1948 and the first Arab-Israeli war ended, more than half of Palestine’s native population was made to flee the country. Among the villages destroyed and their populations massacred was Deir Yassin, whose very name reminds the world of the brutality that led to the creation of Israel. The number of Palestinian refugees continued to swell as Israel conquered more Palestinian lands in the 1967 war and began establishing Jewish settlements. Today, the Palestinians are spread all over the Middle East, Europe and the Americas, and cannot return to their country because Israel must maintain its “Jewish character.”
Immediately after Israel was founded, one of the Knesset’s first acts was to pass a Law of Return. Under this law, a Jew living anywhere in the world can “return” to Palestine. But the Palestinians have no right to return to their own land. The Geneva document upholds the Israeli position. That the Palestinian side should have accepted this shows to what lengths they are ready to go to achieve peace. No wonder, there were demonstrations against this concession by the Palestinian negotiator. Ariel Sharon has, of course, rejected the plan, calling it “dangerous.” More amusingly, he said the Geneva initiative did not fit into the US-backed roadmap. This is a ridiculous thing to say, because the Israeli prime minister has done all he could to sabotage the roadmap prepared by the Quartet and unveiled by President George Bush on April 30. Nevertheless, any move that seeks to bring peace to the holy land needs to be commended. The Geneva initiative goes to show that all Israelis are not supporters of Sharon’s hard line and that there are those who genuinely want a peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The Geneva document may be a disappointment for large sections of the Palestinians, but at least it repudiates the concept of a Greater Israel by providing for a Palestinian state comprising the Gaza Strip and most of the West Bank.
THE Peshawar Cantonment Board’s decision to demolish a residential compound for minorities housing a 140-year-old temple there is most regrettable. The cantonment board plans to build a commercial plaza on the site of the temple and residential compound inhibited by some 70 families of the minority Balmiki community. Not only does this go against the government’s repeated claims of safeguarding the rights and interests of the minorities, it sends the wrong message to the rest of the world and reinforces our image abroad as an intolerant and bigoted society that does not care much about its minorities. In fact, there are several arguments against the razing of the temple. Firstly, the temple is not an abandoned relic but a living place of worship for the minority Balmiki community living in the compound and outside. This is the foremost reason to preserve and protect it. Secondly, the cantonment authorities can surely find an alternative site for the proposed commercial plaza, one that does not require demolishing either a residential compound or a temple within it.
It is unfortunate that the cantonment board should have decided on such a course of action in the first place in utter disregard of the human and political considerations involved in putting down an old temple and residential compound to make way for a shopping centre. The plan also shows a disturbing degree of insensitivity on the part of the cantonment board’s management and reflects society’s double standards. The mere thought of a possible demolition of a mosque to make way for a commercial plaza would be enough to start a riot in this country but we find nothing wrong in doing the same to a house of worship for people from a religion other than our own. Since the cantonment board comes under the purview of the defence ministry, the federal government must see to it that constitutional guarantees to minorities in Pakistan, especially with reference to protecting their places of worship, are not violated in this particular case. The temple and the residential compound must be left alone, and the cantonment board directed to look for an alternative site for its project elsewhere.
ACCORDING to reports, in the July-September, 2003, quarter development spending was a mere 15.5 per cent of the budgeted Rs 160 billion. If the trend continues, the fear is that the annual allocation may not be fully utilized. Over the years, the axe of resource scarcity has always fallen on development spending. Now with fiscal space available, weak monitoring, bureaucratic hassles and absence of project management expertise continue to hold up progress on execution of projects. Long years of measly government spending on physical infrastructure and human development have had a discouraging effect on private investment. No doubt, the provisional estimate of PSDP of Rs 129.2 billion for fiscal year 2003 was a marginal improvement over previous year’s figure, but it did reflect a fall in development spending as a ratio of GDP. The outcome of prolonged squeeze on development spending has been growing unemployment, falling incomes, lower purchasing power of the middle classes and increasing poverty. In the first quarter, only Rs 24.851 billion were reportedly utilized.
Traditionally, financial releases are slow to come following the new budget and picks up in the next two quarters followed by hasty flows in the last quarter of the fiscal year, affecting efficiency and quality utilization. In the last two years, the principal accounting officers of various ministries and divisions have been authorized to draw 45 per cent of the budgeted amount without prior approval to ensure better utilization. But what with bureaucratic delays and lack of managerial, financial and technical skills of project sponsoring authorities, funds are not released on time. Often ministries with clout get projects which is beyond their capacity to execute within the prescribed time. Delays result in cost overruns. Given the resource constraint, prudent allocation and timely spending is imperative to get maximum results within the stipulated time. Every rupee should be well spent and fully accounted for. It is not enough to make financial allocations. Equally important is close monitoring and skills of project managements to ensure timely and efficient implementation. All snags should be removed. It is time to focus on execution of policies and programmes.