Holding on to preemption

Both President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair have separately but almost simultaneously announced investigations into the intelligence obtained prior to the Anglo-US invasion and occupation of Iraq and on which the war against that country was based.

The inquiries have been forced by domestic pressure on the two leaders, but are also meant to deflect continuing criticism of the inability of the coalition forces to discover any WMDs, whose alleged presence was cited as the justification for attacking Iraq.

Mr Bush is under particular stress on this account in this election year, with his leading Democratic rival repeatedly pointing out how the American president had misled his nation - by promising to build an international coalition, honouring UN inspections and going to war only as a last resort.

Senator John Kerry, the Democratic presidential hopeful, has said Mr Bush did none of these things before launching his offensive. The head of the large CIA team that hunted for WMDs in Iraq, David Kay, has resigned, saying everyone was wrong in believing that Iraq had stockpiles of such weapons.

In Britain, the soundness of Mr Blair's decision to join the US in the unseating of Saddam Hussein was brought under fresh questioning when the Hutton report, while blaming the BBC and exonerating the prime minister for the events leading to the suicide of weapons scientist David Kelly, ignored looking into whether Mr Blair's repeated assertions that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to international peace were true. The report has been described as a whitewash by Mr Blair's critics.

There is, in the US as well as in Britain, a political and moral dilemma for the people of the two countries to confront and resolve. But there is a more important dimension that concerns all states and people everywhere. The failure to discover WMDs not only knocks the bottom out of the case built up to occupy Iraq, but exposes the deceit, hypocrisy and falsehood that mark the Bush administration's theory of preemption and regime change.

Under this doctrine, you can convince yourself that some country or some leader poses a threat to your interests and then unilaterally undertake to invade that country and dislodge its leader. Your conviction may be based on false or deliberately cooked up intelligence to cloak other strategic objectives, yet if you have the armed might, you can go ahead and bomb countries and occupy them.

Iraq had a dictator, even a cruel one and one who for long years, incidentally, enjoyed American support, but it was for the Iraqi people to remove him. What has happened is that, in removing the dictator, the US has totally destroyed and destabilized a fairly prosperous country. It has ruined large parts of ancient cities, killed and maimed innocent civilians, and robbed countless people of their livelihood. All this in the name of unsubstantiated claims and allegations.

In a juster world, with a more rational balance of power, this might have been classified as a war crime. Now, one can only hope that the notion of preemptive strike has been so thoroughly exposed and discredited that the world and the United Nations - and the people of America themselves - will not permit it to be invoked again.

Mina tragedy

The death of 244 pilgrims in Mina in a stampede during the stoning ritual on the final day of the Haj is a tragedy of the first order. While this year's incident cannot be compared to the 1990 tragedy in which nearly 1,500 Hajis were crushed to death in a mad rush through a pedestrian tunnel, lessons need to be learnt from it.

For one, last year, 20 pilgrims died at the same place in similar circumstances which should have been reason enough for the Saudi authorities to take extra precautions about the flow of people for the stone throwing ritual this year.

The flow should have been staggered and better regulated to avoid the frenzied rush that often ensues in the limited space that houses the pillars that symbolize Satan. Also, more efforts should have been made at crowd control, especially at this point, where people tend to let their emotions get the better of them.

The Saudi authorities have spoken of the presence of obstructions in the form of personal belongings that some Hajis carried with them to this site. One needs to know why this was permitted considering that this too played a part in causing the stampede.

It would, however, be unfair to blame the Saudi authorities alone. This year, over two million people performed the Haj, which by any standards is a massive number. By and large, arrangements for their accommodation and movement have been satisfactory. However, in some instances, it has been observed that some pilgrims resort to practices or tendencies that obstruct others in the performance of their religious rites. It is incumbent upon the home countries to ensure that their pilgrims are trained and briefed in such a comprehensive manner that they do not cause disturbances that lead to such tragedies.

At present, Pakistani intending Hajis undergo a briefing session, which largely sticks to the rituals involved in Haj. This needs to be broadened and made more meaningful so that Pakistani pilgrims are also briefed on their behaviour during the pilgrimage; so that there is a sense of discipline in their actions and an element of collective responsibility. A factor that adds to confusion during Haj is the lack of communication between the largely uneducated pilgrims and the 'muallims', who are now all supposed to be Saudis. The Pakistani Haj mission clearly needs to increase its staff of facilitators.

Minister's return

The Punjab sports minister who disappeared during a trip to the Tribal areas has returned home and was able to celebrate Eid with his family. But his return as well as his three-week disappearance still need to be fully clarified.

Private TV channels quoted Mr Naeemullah Shahani as saying that he had managed to escape from the clutches of his kidnappers when they went to offer their Eid prayers and left him unguarded. The Frontier police have been making their own statements on the kidnapping and efforts to rescue the minister.

Something rather seems amiss with the way the saga unfolded. If one is to believe Mr Shahani's version, then it does not put the law enforcement agencies, all busy looking for him for three weeks, in a good light.

The kidnappers, it seems, were not all that professional given the circumstances of their hostage's escape. But despite that they managed to elude the government's vast security apparatus.

The minister says that he had gone to North Waziristan to attend a funeral and not, as some reports had suggested, to buy a stolen car. Even if he did go to attend a funeral, the minister must have known that it is always advisable to inform the local administration in advance of any trip to Fata, especially since his ministerial status would have entitled him to an official armed escort. Mr Shahani's failure to do so not only led to trouble for him but also made many people worry about him.

It was reckless of him to have undertaken the trip without due precaution. One hopes that after the Eid euphoria dissipates, the Punjab government will, to use an expression much in the news these days, 'debrief' the minister and investigate the entire affair.

The reports relating to Mr Shahani's disappearance and abduction must be thoroughly inquired into and the findings made public.