| 22 January 2004 | Thursday | 29 Ziqa'ad 1424 |
APHC-India talks
Supporting cottage industry
Among the latest of Israel's acts of bullying is the threat Ariel Sharon has held out to Jordan over the "wall". A day after threatening Jordan, Israel bombed Lebanon, claiming to hit Hezbollah bases there.
The action followed the death of an Israeli soldier who was driving a tractor. The UN now has established that the Israeli tractor had intruded into Lebanon.
Addressing the parliament's foreign affairs commission on the question of the wall, the Israeli prime minister said Jordan would have "much to lose" if it continued to oppose the wall which his government was building.
Rightly termed by Palestinian President Yasser Arafat as the Middle East's Berlin Wall, it is several layers deep, and consists of fences, trenches and barbed wires. Purportedly designed to prevent suicide bombers from entering Israel, the wall's real aim is to steal more Palestinian territory.
As planned, the wall intrudes into the West Bank to include many Jewish settlements within Israel. This way, Tel Aviv proposes to arbitrarily determine the borders of the future Palestinian state. Aware that the International Court of Justice is to take up the issue, Israel has made it known it will change the wall's route. However, it has not so far given details about how specifically it intends to alter the wall's alignment. The Palestinians call it the "apartheid wall" and say it is designed to abort the viability of the future Palestinian state.
As Israel's neighbour and bordering occupied West Bank, Jordan is obviously concerned about this fence which threatens to scuttle the roadmap. As Jordanian Foreign Minister Marwan Moasher said, the wall must be destroyed. Mr Sharon's reply is to threaten Jordan with consequences. This threat follows another policy declaration - that more resistance leaders, including Hamas's Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, have been targeted for murder.
One does not know what The Hague-based ICJ's decision will be. But does it matter? Has Israel ever cared about the dozens of UN General Assembly resolutions that have condemned it for its violations of human rights? For instance, following a massacre in Jenin, the UN appointed a commission to go to the West Bank and investigate the massacre. But the Sharon government refused to let the UN team in.
General Assembly resolutions are not binding. However, Israel has shown an equal contempt for Security Council resolutions even though they are binding. So far, Israel has violated 32 SC resolutions - more than any other country has.
The building of the wall should be seen against the repeated threats Sharon has recently held out - that he will take unilateral steps to solve the Palestinian question. What those unilateral steps will be like is not clear. But it is obvious that Mr Sharon intends to ditch the roadmap to peace.
The US-backed roadmap provides for a halt to the building of Jewish settlements, calls for disbanding those built after March 2001, and visualizes a Palestinian state by 2005. However, Mr Sharon continues to expand the existing settlements in violation of the roadmap. On the question of the wall, the Bush administration has had the good sense to criticize Israel.
But Mr Sharon knows that in this election year the Republican administration cannot afford to annoy the Zionist lobby and will do nothing to stop the building of the 'apartheid' wall. The next 10 months to the US election thus provide an opportunity for Mr Sharon to do as much mischief as possible and get away with it.
APHC-India talks
Nothing could be more timely than a ceasefire in the Valley by India as the All Parties Hurriyat Conference leaders begin a peace dialogue with the Deputy Prime Minister Lal Krishna Advani in New Delhi today. The APHC leaders have urged India to do so as a confidence-building measure that can set the tone for a meaningful dialogue.
Given the recent positive turn in relations between Pakistan and India, Pakistan's declaration of a ceasefire along the Line of Control in Kashmir, and the reduction - in India's words - in the so-called infiltration into held Kashmir across the LoC, a similar announcement of a ceasefire by India in the Valley will have a positive impact on India-Pakistan relations too. More important, such a measure can help the moderate faction of the APHC bring hardliners back into its fold and possibly have a restraining influence on militants.
The fact that New Delhi has come round to holding a dialogue with the Hurriyat on the future of Kashmir is a recognition of the APHC's credentials as a representative body. Also, having a strong feel of the pulse of there, the APHC knows what kind of peace formula will work in Kashmir and what will not.
The APHC's desire to see New Delhi declare a ceasefire as the political dialogue begins should be seen in that context. For its part, Pakistan's stated position on the subject is clear: that it will go along with any political solution that is acceptable to the people of Kashmir.
The split within the APHC makes a political solution that much more difficult. And closing this rift should also be seen as a major concern of all parties interested in durable peace in the region.
Supporting cottage industry
The Sindh cabinet's decision to exempt cottage industries in certain localities of the province from property tax is a long over-due move. This concession should be given to all such industries in the country. Cottage industries in Pakistan play a very important, but understated, role in the economy of the country.
While there is no accurate data as to their output, most economists agree that the activity that these units generate play a vital part in the country's economic life. For one, these small units, which usually operate out of houses and comprise family members who perform different tasks in producing an item, create employment for people who would otherwise have no source of income.
More important, many of those who work in these enterprises are women, who would otherwise not have the opportunity to engage in economic activity outside their homes or in a larger setting owing to religious and social taboos.
While the government has set up organizations that fund and advise on how to run small businesses, not enough is being done to support this economic sector. Partly to blame are the cottage industries themselves as they shy away from any interaction with officialdom in the fear that this would lead to some restrictions or taxation on their work.
On the other hand, the potential that these cottage industries have is enormous. Before us we have the example of Italy, which capitalized on its small business houses to turn around the country's economy.
Some of the products that these small industries produce are world class. Owing to the benefits that arise from this economic activity, the government should focus on ways to promote and develop these industries so that they are able to produce goods that are increasingly in demand within the country and abroad.