| 30 April 2004 | Friday | 09 Rabi-ul-Awwal 1425 |
Wheat shortage
Attacks in Thailand
After much wrangling, the big powers have managed to browbeat the non-permanent members of the UN Security Council to drop their resistance to the draft resolution on weapons of mass destruction.
This was adopted unanimously on Wednesday and requires all 191 members of the world body to pass laws to keep WMDs out of the hands of non-state actors. Coming after seven-months of intense negotiations, the adoption of the resolution is seen in Washington as a diplomatic victory for the Bush administration.
Whether that is really so is doubtful. But no one would question the validity of the proclaimed goal of this move - namely, to prevent individuals and private organizations from manufacturing, acquiring and developing such weapons.
After all, the WMDs have already complicated international relations. If they were to fall into the hands of individuals who live beyond the pale of law, the world would be heading towards a nuclear disaster.
The problem with the resolution lies in its implementation and in the motives of the permanent members. One feels sceptical because Pakistan had to fight a long battle to get some amendments incorporated in the draft.
Now, the resolution does not provide for any retroactive measures. Hence persons violating its terms before it was adopted cannot be held answerable. Nor can any state act unilaterally to enforce the resolution, although it has been adopted under chapter VII of the Charter.
The Security Council will monitor the implementation but it is not clear how this will be done. Pakistan has said that it will not allow any inspection of its nuclear facilities under the terms of the resolution.
There are two reservations which have been expressed, even though the resolution got through because no one opposes its underlying principle. First, it is feared that the resolution might provide the pretext for the big powers to interfere in the nuclear programmes of the so-called non-nuclear club states and thus undermine the international disarmament system.
Secondly, by empowering the council to monitor implementation and take further decisions when required, the resolution has in effect formalized the predominant role of the permanent members in determining the course of action to be taken.
No wonder, Pakistan has stated categorically that it opposes the move to let the Security Council legislate for the world and take charge of non-proliferation issues. China has also called for a global treaty on the issue in the long term.
It is plain that there are too many anomalies in the non-proliferation and disarmament regime which is in force at present. It is based on the status quo as it was nearly four decades ago.
The scene has now changed. India, Pakistan and Israel have developed nuclear weapons, even though their status is not recognized as such. Other countries are striving to acquire a nuclear capability, with the help, possibly, of non-state actors.
The international equation has changed with the end of the cold war and the emergence of America as the sole superpower which is willing to use its predominant force to trample on the rights of other states. This has added to the insecurity of the Third World states some of which aspire for a nuclear status to strengthen their security.
Can their concern be questioned when there are other states which have an arsenal of WMDs that can destroy the world many times over?
Wheat shortage
The decision by flour mill owners in Sindh on Wednesday to call off their strike is a welcome development. This will help reduce atta prices which had registered a 20 per cent rise during the week.
Flour mill owners called off the strike on an assurance by the Sindh food minister, Arif Jatoi, that the seven flour mills closed down last week by the government will be allowed to re-open.
Mr Jatoi also promised to take up the question of restrictions on wheat movement between Punjab and Sindh at a meeting on Friday in Islamabad. Unless this issue is tackled, the breather provided by the re-opening of the flour mills may prove a temporary one.
Punjab's decision two weeks ago to restrict the movement of wheat out of the province has affected supply in Sindh. The Punjab government says that it has taken the step of a temporary ban in some districts so that it can meet its procurement target for wheat for the year.
The Sindh government has responded by saying that it is for the federal government to ensure uninterrupted supply of wheat throughout the country. It argues that this is because the procurement price as well as the stock position is determined by Islamabad.
The NWFP too agrees with this point of view and considers Punjab's ban on wheat movement wrong and detrimental to inter-provincial harmony. For its part, the federal government, which has declared wheat a freely movable commodity, has so far not reacted to the ban imposed by Punjab.
The situation has given brokers an opportunity to hoard wheat for profiteering. In view of a drop in wheat stocks in Sindh and a ban on its movement from Punjab, it is feared that another wheat crisis may well be around the corner, in which case the real sufferer will be the common man.
Attacks in Thailand
It is not clear what the exact motive was behind Wednesday's attacks by groups of Muslims against government security posts in southern Thailand. The military action in response to the attacks resulted in the killing of some 112 people, with five among them belonging to the Thai security forces.
In Bangkok, the generals and the Thai prime minister were at odds as to the nature of the attacks, the former terming them part of a campaign of violence by Islamists against the state, while the latter attributing these to criminal elements.
Initial reports suggest that the attackers acted under the influence of drugs, with some of them also carrying certain emblems of the Muslim faith in the form of beads and cloth bands with Islamist slogans inscribed on them.
Thai intelligence sources have disclosed that they were aware of the possibility of such attacks and had prepared to deal with the contingency. The admission of foreknowledge has drawn criticism from rights groups which say that the attacks could have been pre-empted and the loss of life avoided if the security forces had acted before rather than after the attacks.
Predominantly Muslim, southern Thailand has long been a hotbed of bandits, drug pedlars and an Islamic movement of sorts - the latter deriving support from the disgruntled young men who feel left out by Thailand's economic boom.
The last time a rebellion-like situation arose there was in the early 1980s, but the movement was put down by the Thai military. Nobody knows the real motive behind Wednesday's attacks, but it is likely to be a combination of what the Thai government and the military believe it to be.
The bottom line in Thailand, as elsewhere in the world, is that a restive population, for whatever reasons, falls an easy prey to the designs of criminal and extremist elements - Muslim or non-Muslim.
The Thai government would do well to investigate the real reasons behind the latest attacks and perhaps begin a process of economic uplift of the country's southern part.