Moscow's announcement that it would take pre-emptive action against terrorists anywhere in the world comes in the wake of the carnage at Belsan. Women and children were among the hostages treated cruelly and murdered, with the final death toll reaching 400.
For that reason, Russia's anger is understandable. The whole world has condemned the crime and extended its sympathies to the victims' families and the Russian government. However, Moscow's handling of the crisis has been questioned world wide, especially by the European Union.
Against this background, the Russian army chief's statement that his forces could launch pre-emptive strikes against terrorists anywhere in the world must be viewed with concern.
Already, the unilateralist policy of the Bush administration in pursuit of its doctrine of pre-emption has proved counterproductive. As Iraq shows, it is a dangerous principle and can be misused for purposes other than the elimination of terror.
All governments are agreed on co-operating with each other to root out terrorism. In this, there is no difference between Muslim and non-Muslim governments. The greater the co-operation among world governments, the better will be the chances for achieving the common objective.
Russia would help eradicate terrorism in the world and in its own region if it coordinates its activity with that of the rest of the world rather than issue threats that would cause unease in the Central Asian Republics and the region generally.
At the same time, it must try to improve its human rights record in the Caucasus. Chechnya has been bleeding now for more than a decade, but Moscow has done nothing to meet the Chechen people's demand for self-determination. There have been no genuine elections in Chechnya, and the brutal treatment of the Chechen people has had a negative effect on the Muslim world.
This has served to strengthen anti-Russian feelings in the region. If Moscow is serious about pacifying Chechnya and helping the world community's fight against terrorism, it should know that unilateralism has little chance of success.
Charged parking anomalies
The Karachi city government has done the right thing by deciding to suspend charge parking until the issue has been reviewed by a committee and either a new parking system has been formulated or changes and improvements have been suggested in the existing one.
The suspension has come after the city council passed a resolution demanding an end to charged parking on the grounds that it was being misused to fleece the public. It is a positive development in that it shows that for a change the Karachi city council has chosen to speak out and make itself heard on an issue of widespread public interest.
Badly-run charged parking schemes have drawn criticism in other cities as well, notably Lahore, and local governments would do well to take into account public complaints.
Whenever a new parking plan is put in place, the Karachi city government should remember that nowhere in the world are motorists required to pay for parking for a period stretching from eight in the morning to midnight as well as on Sundays and public holidays.
Also, a uniform rate of Rs 10 for parking anywhere in the city is unfair and unrealistic. The rate should vary depending on traffic congestion. Residents of flats in some areas had in the past filed lawsuits against the city government saying that in the absence of any parking lots within their building premises, charging them for parking was an infringement of their legal rights.
A uniform rate for the whole city makes little sense given that the idea of charged parking is to regulate traffic flow and to charge motorists for precious parking space.
The city government should examine the possibility of having various slabs depending on the conditions in a particular area. Many shopping centres have parking lots which are not used for that purpose and the authorities should persuade their owners to open them for public use.