| 03 August 2004 | Tuesday | 16 Jamadi-us-Saani 1425 |
Al Qaeda's impudent threat
Worthy winners
The deal that the rich and the poor nations struck on the issues of agricultural subsidies and tariff barriers against industrial goods at Geneva on Sunday augurs well for the WTO-led globalization process.
The stalled talks on free trade among the 147 member states are now likely to go ahead. After years of haggling, the rich nations seem to have been persuaded to see that their adamant position on agricultural subsidies was not only holding back negotiations on global trade but was also giving the globalization efforts a bad name.
Since its advent, globalization is being seen to benefit the rich at the cost of the poor. The former have tended to use the rules of the WTO to force the developing countries to offer the goods and services of the former a level playing field in the latter's markets while the rich have bent the same rules so as to deny market access to the poor nations' goods and services.
The biggest hurdle in the way of the WTO negotiations have been the billions of dollars of agricultural export subsidies the rich nations offer to their farmers. On the other hand, using the multilateral donor agencies which are under the influence of the rich nations, the developing countries are being forced to withdraw all such subsidies to their farmers.
As a result, most developing countries, which have very little industrial base and are heavily dependent on farm product exports, have been seriously affected by the relatively 'cheaper' agri-imports against which they have also been forced not to put up even a reasonable level of tariffs.
Not only that, those developing nations which have the potential to achieve a reasonable level of industrial development have been forced to abandon their plans in the face of 'cheaper' imported manufactures unhindered by 'restrictive' tariff walls.
A case in point is Pakistan. Mainly an agricultural country, over the years, despite many odds, it has also established a reasonable industrial and services base. However, in the face of pressures from the donors like the IMF, World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, it has been forced to reduce its tariff walls across the board over the years.
On the other hand, the same donors have put pressure on it to drastically reduce all kinds of subsidies. In the upshot, our manufacturing sector as well as farm products have become increasingly uncompetitive in the world market.
On the other hand, the highly subsidized imported agricultural products and manufactures from the rich world are gradually making it difficult for the national economy to survive on its own. As a result, Pakistan has become highly indebted.
Most of these debts have been incurred to cover our import needs because our farm exports are restricted by the monopoly enjoyed by the rich countries in the international market by virtue of the highly competitive prices their heavily subsidized farm exports carry.
Led by the US, the European Union and Japan have been resisting pressures from the poor countries on this score and getting away with it because of their political hold over most of the world.
So, there is a possibility that they would drag their feet on the question of a firm date when they would completely eliminate their subsidies. It is, therefore, imperative that the developing countries continue their pressure and keep it up until the rich deliver on their promise.
Al Qaeda's impudent threat
Al Qaeda has now become a greater threat to this country than most would like to believe. The admission by Al Qaeda's Egyptian branch that it was behind the attempt on Mr Shaukat Aziz's life gives out a message loud and clear that it is at war with Pakistan.
It goes without saying that, from Al Qaeda's point view, Pakistan is following a pro-US policy whose object is the decimation of the Osama bin Laden network. However, it does not even occur to Al Qaeda that Pakistan has reason of its own for pursuing a certain policy line in dealing with terrorism.
No country can afford to follow a foreign policy dictated by others - be it aid-givers or groups like Al Qaeda. That Islamabad committed blunder after blunder and often followed a policy that was crafted by intelligence agencies rather than by the foreign office goes without saying.
The pampering of the Taliban, followed by a U-turn in 2001, is just one example of it. This has led to a deep division within the nation itself.
Al Qaeda is not alone in this. It could have counted on the support of those elements in Pakistan who are themselves opposed to Islamabad's foreign policy. In fact, there is no dearth of radical Islamist elements who would like to see Pakistan take another U-turn, whatever the consequences.
But instead, Al Qaeda has chosen to resort to terrorism to compel Pakistan to change the orientation of its foreign policy. This is not going to happen. Indeed, its campaign of terror in Pakistan is proving counterproductive, for those killed in its attacks are innocent civilians.
Those who lost their lives in Fatehjang on Friday, in the two attempts on President Pervez Musharraf's life, and in the attack on the Karachi corps commander's convoy were innocent Pakistanis, or minor security officials facts which are unlikely to endear Al Qaeda to any significant section of Pakistanis. Finally, the Al Qaeda leadership must ask itself whose cause it is serving by trying to destabilize the Muslim world's only nuclear power.
Worthy winners
A rare unity of purpose, faith in themselves, and, above all, luck enabled Sri Lanka to win the Asia Cup by defeating India by 25 runs in Colombo on Sunday. India had done well to restrict the Pearl Islanders to a modest 228 for nine wickets in their 50 overs and had more than a fair chance of beating the home side but this was not to be.
When India began their run chase, Sri Lanka soon made it clear that they had a man for every occasion. They bowled and fielded magnificently. Apart from a few lapses, they held their catches superbly and gave India no chance.
There was a brief flurry by Zaheer Khan towards the end but it was too little too late. Sri Lanka won all the honours. Skipper Atapattu was the man of the match and Sanath Jaysuriya the man of the series.
Rahul Dravid, the Great Wall of India, was no longer impregnable and it appears that Sachin Tendulkar is beginning to tire of his own genius. He top scored with 74 but was nowhere near his best.
What of Pakistan? They ended a poor third which, considering their skill in all departments of the game, was only just. Their batting is as brittle as in the fifties, their bowling is fearsome in pace but is often far too wayward to be effective.
In fielding, too, they have their own weaknesses specially close to the wicket. More than anything else, they do not have the together ness which is essential for a match-winning combination.
Their new coach, Bob Woolmer, will have to work harder than at any time during his career to mould his boys into a team which can win matches under stress. This is a tall order, indeed, but not beyond Woolmer's known reputation as a master builder.