| 07 January 2004 | Wednesday | 14 Ziqa'ad 1424 |
Social charter
Academic wrangling
Finally, the president of Pakistan and the Indian prime minister had a meeting in Islamabad on Monday - a fitting climax to the path-breaking 12th Saarc summit. Even though there were hints that such a meeting on the sidelines of the Saarc conference was a possibility, nobody was sure of it until it materialized on Monday.
The meeting lasted a full 65 minutes and was originally described by the Pakistan foreign office spokesman as a courtesy call. However, as things have turned out, it proved to be far more substantive than one could have expected, for the two sides have agreed to a "composite dialogue" which is to begin next month.
As a joint press statement issued in Islamabad on Tuesday pointed out, "the two leaders are confident" that the dialogue will lead to a peaceful settlement of all bilateral issues, including Jammu and Kashmir "to the satisfaction of both sides." For Pakistan, the Musharraf-Vajpayee meeting and the scheduled beginning of a dialogue next month will be seen as constituting a small diplomatic triumph.
All along these years, Islamabad was asking for just this - that a dialogue should begin between the two countries. The inclusion of the phrase "to the satisfaction of both sides" in relation to Kashmir also implicitly recognizes Pakistan's long-held stand that it is a party to the dispute, along with the people of Kashmir.
Even by itself, the meeting is significant. Precisely this month two years ago, Pakistan and India were locked in a dangerous eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation. Following the terrorist attack on the Indian parliament building in December 2001, New Delhi massed its troops on Pakistan's border in a threatening posture, making Islamabad respond in kind.
In the summer of 2002 the two nuclear-armed neighbours had come so close to a devastating war that the world was having nightmares. Mercifully, good sense prevailed, and troops were pulled back. The issue since then was whether the military scale-back would be followed by a comprehensive and meaningful dialogue between the two countries.
In April last, Mr Vajpayee, in a statesman-like gesture, broke the deadlock by offering to talk to Pakistan without any preconditions. Later in the year, the two sides took a number of confidence-building measures - including the restoration of travel links - that have led to a distinct lowering of tension. What was missing, however, was a face-to-face dialogue between the top leaders. This, too, has happened - and what better occasion than a gathering of the leaders of the South Asian family.
The people of South Asia, and the entire world, expect the two governments to maintain the momentum towards peace. The problems the leaders of Pakistan and India face are gargantuan. They are as much a leftover of history as they are a result of the mess the two sides have made of their relationship. The problems may be daunting, but they are not beyond solutions. Given a sense of realism and a shared vision - the vision of a South Asia free from tension and conflict - Pakistan and India can make it.
The Musharraf-Vajpayee summit proves that a meeting of minds is possible if the two sides show flexibility and avoid pointless rhetoric. One hopes that the dialogue beginning next month will attempt to find a solution on Kashmir that is acceptable to all the three parties. The issue needs a solution because it has been the single biggest source of war and conflict in South Asia.
Social charter
The signing on Sunday of the Saarc Social Charter by member states is a good omen for the region's multitudes of impoverished people. The ten-point charter requires the signatories to take legislative, executive and administrative measures for the social uplift of their peoples.
It also binds the seven South Asian member countries to share and review the implementation strategies of their respective socio-economic uplift plans in the fields of education, health, human resource development, poverty alleviation, women's development, youth mobilization, population stabilization, drug rehabilitation and reintegration of minorities and migrants programmes.
The charter, if adhered to and implemented in right earnest by respective governments, could bring the much-needed social change in the living conditions of South Asians over 30 per cent of whom live below the poverty line.
The incidence of poverty and that of social apathy towards underprivileged sections of society - at 38 per cent - is among the highest in Pakistan in the region. Many of our key social indicators have shown a downward slide in absolute terms over the past decade, mainly as a result of the government steadily distancing itself from responsibility in public health, education and housing.
The move towards a market-based economy, and what the government under advice from international donor agencies calls rationalization of the socio-economic sector, has resulted in this state of affairs. While this policy might make international money-lenders happy, it has not helped vast sections of Pakistanis improve their living conditions over the corresponding period. In this regard there are many lessons to learn from countries like Bangladesh and India, which have not compromised their public-sector social uplift programmes to suit the whims and fancies of foreign donors.
Academic wrangling
THE surprise announcement that the vice-chancellor of the Karachi University has been relieved of his position raises the question as to why a high-level academic was removed in so unceremonious a manner by the governor. It also brings into question the considerations that are taken into account when appointing academics to such prestigious slots in the first place by the powers that be.
Take the example of the appointment of the vice chancellor of the newly-set up Dow Medical University last week. This appointment has caused many in the medical community to question it, keeping in mind professional experience and academic seniority. The principal of the Dow Medical College, which forms part of the new university, has reportedly resigned in protest against the appointment.
The academic council of the college has also expressed its reservations about the choice. A question that many ask is whether merit is the sole criterion which is taken into account when appointments like this are made.
Like all other organizations, academic institutions need stability as well as competence in their leadership. This can be ensured if the top hierarchy of the institution is selected in a free and fair manner for a prescribed term. In his position as the chancellor, the governor cannot afford to be seen as a party to the internal politics of any institution.
This causes demoralization in academic circles besides affecting standards of the institution concerned. From the academic wrangling which has occurred this week what is apparent is that these institutions have fallen victim to petty politics.
This does not bode well either for Karachi University or for the newly-established Dow Medical University. At stake is not just the position of the vice chancellor but the reputation of the university itself. The sooner the mess in institutions of higher learning cleared up the better.