| 21 February 2004 | Saturday | 29 Zilhaj 1424 |
Jashn-i-Baharan or Basant?
'Big three' summit does not herald break-up of EU
Hardwork pays off
Many in Pakistan have rallied to defend the country's bomb-makers (needlessly and incorrectly called "scientists" although they are technologists and have not created any new science). This is even after abundant proof that they have freely spread nuclear weapons secrets and equipment around the globe.
Some vociferously argue that, by not having signed the NPT, the bomb-makers are blameless since they broke no law or treaty by sharing nuclear secrets with other parties. But this legalistic argument is weak, unconvincing, and insufficient to prevent serious damage to Pakistan.
For over 15 years Pakistan had repeatedly assured the world that it was a responsible nuclear power whose nuclear weapons were solely aimed at deterring nuclear India.
It rejected accusations of having proliferated nuclear weapon technologies. These angry denials coincided, as we now know, with the surreptitious activities of our bomb-makers.
In other words, we were all taken for a ride. The enormous credibility gap this creates will surely be a handicap for all leaders of Pakistan, present and future.
The transfers to North Korea are relatively prosaic. Having developed the bomb, Pakistan needed missiles to deliver them. North Korea was willing to supply them, for a price. Like the URENCO centrifuges, all Kahuta had to do was put them together and stick a star and crescent on them.
But the real problem is considerably more serious. For years, Pakistan's powerful Islamic parties have openly embraced the bomb, chanted slogans in praise, and even paraded cardboard replicas through the streets.
For them, it is more than just a means to defend Pakistan's national frontiers - it belongs to the entire Muslim ummah. In doing so, they borrowed from the prison notes of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the first person to have written of the need for an Islamic Bomb.
The notion of sharing the 'bomb' for ideological reasons has caused more alarm than the profit motive, as has been ascribed to explain the activities of Dr. A.Q. Khan and his cohorts.
From the inception of the bomb programme, the Pakistani establishment sought to turn its nuclear successes into larger gains. For one, it wanted - and gained - the support of hundreds of millions of the Muslims the world over by claiming to provide a Muslim "success story" (that this involved replicating a sixty-year-old technology for mass destruction is a sad commentary on the state of the Muslim world).
For another, it enabled Pakistan to enjoy considerable financial and political benefits from oil-rich Arab countries. Among others, Libya reportedly bankrolled Pakistan and may even have supplied raw uranium.
After Pakistan successfully tested in May 1998, the Saudi government gave an unannounced gift of four billion dollars worth of oil spread over a period of five years to help Pakistan tide over difficulties caused by international sanctions.
Whatever utility such a strategy may have had in previous years, to promote an Islamic bomb in the post-9/11 world is both military folly and a political suicide. Unfortunately, some pan-Islamists and those who work in the country's nuclear establishment seem incapable of realizing this.
While it is inconceivable that any Muslim country will request Pakistan for nuclear weapons, there is little doubt that some non-state actors are more enthusiastic.
One recalls that two years ago highly placed members of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission wanted to play their role in the jihad against America. In a fit of Islamic solidarity they went to Afghanistan and met Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. It is difficult to believe that they were the only ones so inclined.
For the moment the efforts of some Pakistani bomb-makers to peddle nuclear secrets appear to have been stymied. But merely by having tried to do so, and invoking solidarity with the ummah, they have put Pakistan in mortal danger.
This could have horrific consequences. Imagine, for example, the situation arising from an atomic explosion in some American city. A superpower, blinded with grief and rage, would be sure to exact a terrible price.
Mere suspicion might form the basis of action. It is quite possible that the Americans would bomb Pakistan first - perhaps with nuclear weapons - and look later for justifications.
Iraq stands as a reminder of America's genocidal fury and the desire to avenge 9/11. The subsequent non-discovery of weapons of mass destruction has been shrugged off by George Bush and his neo-con cabal.
The fallout from the escapades of Dr. Khan and others is certain to affect the level of secrecy and opacity that Pakistan's nuclear establishment has tried so hard to maintain.
Editorials and articles published in influential US newspapers suggest that intense pressure will surely be applied by the US government. The demands would likely include on-site inspection and monitoring of Pakistani fissile material production at the enrichment facility at Kahuta and elsewhere, the plutonium production reactor at Khushab, and all centres where nuclear materials are processed and stored.
Pakistan is certain to strongly resist this demand and, for the moment, may even partially succeed. However, as a compromise between allowing some transparency and avoiding the accusation of having sold out to the Americans, it is possible that the government may secretly allow the installation of cameras and various sensing devices in nuclear installations and an audit of fissile materials.
In the longer term one can expect more direct pressures. This could include economic sanctions - or even military action - if the political situation changes dramatically.
This could happen if Pakistan's cooperation with the US in fighting Al Qaeda falters, or if an Islamic group is successful in eliminating General Musharraf and his replacement is considered to be an Islamic radical. One must then expect a determined effort to put Pakistan's nuclear weapons under international (read: United States) control.
It is time to give up the fantasy of a Bomb for the ummah, and time to rein in Pakistan's bomb-makers. Their illegitimate nuclear commerce has created a nightmare for the reputation, safety, and security of their own country.
It is difficult to know what Dr. Khan meant when he said he had acted out of "good faith". One wonders what kind of faith allows for putting instruments of mass murder on sale in the open market.
The writer is professor of physics at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.
Jashn-i-Baharan or Basant?
I have yet to find out the true implication of the term, Jashn-i-Baharan. All that I can think of at the moment is that it has been coined to bypass the word 'Basant'.
As we all know, it has almost become a fashion these days to bypass such an important part of the body as the heart, hence why not bypass the innocuous word 'Basant'? All the reformists are crying hoarse that Basant is a Hindu festival. So why not kill it via a bypass?
Anyway, whatever it may be, the Jashn-i-Baharan was celebrated, and is still being celebrated, in the city in a big way. Why bemoan that the Indian actresses could not be brought over to Lahore? Don't we have enough ladies among our own jet set who can outdo them on several counts? And why crave for Indian actresses?
Those who thought that Indian participants were essential for the Jashn-i-Baharan celebrations were not disappointed. We had so many of Indian origin around, including the three-man team who climbed up the roof to join night kite flying atop a five-star hotel.
To top it all, an all-Pakistan mushaira had been arranged which went on much beyond midnight. Almost sixty poets were there to 'entertain' the gathering. It is beside the point that one columnist wrote a stinking piece about another who was organizing the whole show.
They appeared to be quarrelling like burglars over the division of spoils. Why not behave in a sporting manner and allow the other to make hay while the sun shone for him? Patience has its own reward. Perhaps the aggrieving columnist will get his chance one day.
The mushaira passed off peacefully but it is unfortunate that it lacked the basic fun - hooting. Even the TV producer, Ayub Khawar, who conducted the proceedings, remained serious.
Khalid Ahmad did provide some respite by his sharp interludes but they could hardly reach the entire crowd gathered in the largest of the Alhamra halls.
Another unfortunate thing about present-day mushairas is that the poets come up with their age old compositions. Munir Niazi, for one, had nothing fresh to offer, he just repeated his oft heart verses. Even my, old, old, friend from Peshawar, Khatir Ghaznavi, was almost forced to repeat his:
Go zara si baat par barson key yaraney gaye
Leikin itna to hua kuch loag pehchaney gaye
However, Ataul Haq Qasmi did impress me when he said:
Khushbuoan ka ik nagar aabad hona chahiye
Is nizam-i-zar ko ab barbad hona chahiye
Zulm bachhey jan raha hey kucha-o-bazaar mein
Adl ko bhi sahib-e-aulad hona chahiye
* * * * *
Talking of Jashn-i-Baharan, I am reminded of the days when there used to be an annual conference of writers at Islamabad. It was sponsored by the Pakistan Academy of Letters which had hardly anything better to do. So when a person in Islamabad said something about a forthcoming writers' conference, a cynic remarked: "So, the Horse and Cattle Show is coming here as well!"
* * * * *
Rubia Jilani seems to be emerging as a crusader for the cause of English literature. She is persisting with the activities of her English Literary Society almost single-handedly.
I have found her arranging one function after another at the Chaupal hideout in Nasser Bagh to project a book or some author. This time she got people together to talk about Prof Bashir Ahmad Chaudhry's collection of poetry, Rhymes of Soul, which was published last year. The function was presided over by Prof Agha Yameen while offering their opinion about the book were Prof Nasir Siddiqi, Shamshad Shafiqui and Siraj Ahmad.
Introducing the poet, Rubia said Prof Bashir, besides being an educationist, was an arduous research scholar. His book under discussion, she added, was a vortex in which ascendancy had been given to truth, parallelism, basic fundamental rights and amelioration of the impassive society.
She said going through his poems, one felt that Prof Bashir had a strong fear of Allah within himself and it made him rational, virtuous and even stunning.
Prof Nasir Siddiqi, while calling the book one of philosophical thoughts, was emphatically of the view that the poet had shown his unflinching love for the Holy Prophet and laid stress on the golden principles which ensure social justice and peace for humanity.
Whereas Shamshad Shafiqui called the poet an aesthete and a preacher of ethics, Siraj Ahmad felt that since his poems dealt with social problems, they were not only realistic but also progressive.
'Big three' summit does not herald break-up of EU
Ignore the doomsayers: the unprecedented - and controversial - tripartite summit in Berlin Wednesday, attended by the leaders of Germany, France and Britain, does not herald the break-up of the European Union. The soon-to-be 25 nation EU is here to stay - and expand further eastwards into the Balkans, and perhaps Turkey, in the next decade.
However, all is not well in the Union. The Berlin encounter - bringing together Europe's largest and most powerful economies - is a signal of important new developments taking place in the EU.
It represents the beginning of a new era of multi-track, multi-speed cooperation among small groups of states within the bloc. And it reflects a serious case of pre-expansion jitters being experienced by most EU governments.
The EU's enlargement, to include eight former communist nations in central and eastern Europe as well as tiny Malta and Cyprus, was never expected to be an easy affair. But the seriousness of the expansion challenge is only just beginning to become clear to many in Europe.
Europe's rhetoric is still fiercely pro-enlargement. The Irish EU presidency has promised lavish celebrations in Dublin on May 1 to welcome the incoming states. But the reality of opening the door to ten new states in a big bang expansion is making many uneasy - in Brussels as well as in other EU capitals.
Germany, France and Britain have made it clear that EU spending despite expansion should be capped at the current level of about one per cent of GNP. Western Europe's poorer regions, which receive millions of euros in development aid every year, are fretting over signs that their handouts will be slashed because of the entry of even more impoverished regions of eastern Europe. And everybody is openly sceptical about decision-making in an EU composed of 25 sovereign states, each of which will fight to defend its national interest.
The Berlin summit was clearly a pre-enlargement show of strength by Germany, France and Britain, a powerful signal that even in a union of 25, size will matter. The meeting also reflected a determined effort by the three leaders to heal their differences over the Iraq war, which was opposed by Berlin and Paris, but enthusiastically supported by London.
Most significantly, however, the German-France-British initiative is a sure sign that life in the new EU will revolve around shifting alliances among small groups of countries.
The EU will continue to provide an overall framework or umbrella for European integration, but practical cooperation on priority issues will be left to a smaller number of like-minded countries which decide to work together, albeit for a short period of time.
France and Germany make no secret of their ambition of forging ahead with EU integration within small groups of "pioneer" states. Britain, long outside the EU mainstream, is now eager not to be left on the sidelines.
Many are fiercely unhappy at the German-French-British directoire and warn that the EU will not dance to the tune of the bloc's Big Three powers. Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has slammed the Berlin summit as "a big mess and a counterproductive mistake".
The meeting was a "clumsy attempt" to substitute European integration with "an exclusive core of countries that proceed at different speeds and in different directions", warned Mr Berlusconi.
Spain, although less vocal in its criticism, has also made clear that it opposes such initiatives. In stark contrast, however, the European Commission has signalled that it welcomes all kinds of pro-integration moves and sees nothing wrong with like-minded nations pushing a joint agenda on to the EU table.
After all, say EU officials in Brussels, calls for regenerating the EU economy made in Berlin by German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, French President Jacques Chirac and British Prime Minister Tony Blair are no different from what the EU has been saying collectively for several years.
The Commission's task is not getting any easier, however. The EU executive is entangled in a series of complicated financial disputes with Germany and France and remains on uneasy terms with Britain. Commission President Romano Prodi is already planning a comeback to Italian politics after his term in Brussels expires in November.
Other Commissioners are also planning their future careers. This has resulted in a clear weakening of the Commission's clout and the emergence of a power vacuum at the heart of the EU. Small wonder then, that the EU Big Three are moving to fill the gap before the doors of the once-exclusive club swing open to ten new members.
Hardwork pays off
When I recently moved to a new apartment, I was introduced to the chowkidars, vendors and even to those who provided service at the doorstep. Halima Masi belongs to the last category.
One day, the bell rang and when I opened the door I saw a figure, frail but strong, who had seen about 73 summers. With a box on her head and a basket in her hand, she looked a picture of dignity and determination. "Samosay, roll, chahiye?" Did I really want those things! How could I refuse? I bought a dozen vegetable rolls for Rs35.
She comes every 10 days and at each visit I glean some facts about her life. With an only son, she had migrated to Pakistan from Rajkot as a widow at the age of 25 to live with her parents in Ranchor Line.
Although her father was a man of modest means, he did not believe in women working outside the home. But Halima Masi, with the permission of her mother, joined a mill. From then on, she began a meaningful life. She wanted to be independent, earn on her own, educate her son and also to realize her dream of performing the Haj.
She learnt to make fried stuff during her tenure as a cook in a wealthy household. One day, she made some kababs, rolls and patties, put them in a box and left the house to sell them in nearby, flats.
She felt no shame in carrying the box on her head, but her son did. He tried to dissuade his mother by saying, "What will the people think of me? That I can't support you?" "Tut, tut" Halima Bai said, and rebuked her son. Instead of remaining at home, idle and sick, she said, she'd rather be on the move and healthy. The son shook his head but remained silent.
More than 35 years of hard and honest work has earned her a flat of her own, a family of 13, -- a son, grandchildren and now great grandchildren. "Mera ghar to baghicha hai!" she says, my house is a garden in flower.
A religious minded person, she performed Haj with her son for Rs76,000 (two persons) when the rial was for Rs3. She prays, fasts in Ramazan and of course her business is very brisk during that month. "Do you take vitamin pills?" She laughed: "No, never". "What do you eat, Masi?" "Jo Allah de dey!"
Rain or shine, nothing deters Halima Masi from carrying on. She once hurt her eye, shoulder and back badly when she was knocked down by a rickshaw. But Halima Masi goes on.