New era of partnership

The five-day state visit of Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz to China, from December 14 to 18, was truly a historic one. During his first visit as head of government, he initiated a change in the character of the "all-weather friendship" that resulted in the hosts adding yet another epithet to describe the friendship, when they called Pakistan "China's most reliable partner".

Starting with the Boundary Agreement, concluded in 1963, that eliminated the only possible source of contention, the graph of friendship and cooperation has gone steadily upwards. The writer was privileged to fly by the PIA inaugural flight to China in 1964 and heard Vice-Premier Chen Yi proclaim that the hostile attempts to isolate China had failed.

The Karakoram Highway was built between 1967 and 1978 and remains a marvel of engineering across the world's highest mountains in which some 500 Pakistani and Chinese builders lost their lives.

The privilege of being a member of the joint Sino-Pakistan Delegation that formally opened it to civilian traffic in 1982 also marked the start of my tenure as Ambassador to this great country.

Forty years of association with this emerging great power, have provided reassurance, as well as security to Pakistan, and Pakistan has not been wanting in extending its full support to China, starting with a period when China confronted hostile powers to its east, west and South. The tree of friendship planted in those years has become tall, strong and deep-rooted, and is now yielding fruit.

Sino-Pakistan friendship assumed the character of a strategic partnership, in which the US joined during the years the former Soviet Union adopted an expansionist policy, and attacked Afghanistan in 1979.

However, after the end of the Cold War following the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989, US perceptions changed radically as the Muslim world was viewed as the successor threat to communism.

Pakistan was placed under sanctions, and not only denied economic and military aid, but even military equipment purchased and paid for was not delivered. China became the only source of sophisticated arms, and of advanced technology for development such as nuclear power reactors.

This friendship has endured and gained deep roots because it is based on shared principles of state relations, such as the UN Charter, and its essence that is contained in the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.

Despite changes of government and of leadership, this friendship has been maintained and enjoys broad support in both countries. The start of the new century has witnessed a shared effort to build up the economic dimension of their relations, which has not kept pace with political and strategic relations.

The 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations, in 2001, was utilized to launch a major effort to build up trade and economic cooperation between the two countries. Premier Zhu Rongji availed of his visit in May 2001 to announce China's decision to increase its investment on a massive scale.

He picked out some major projects, which China would finance and construct, such as the Gwadar Port, the Thar Coal Project, and several other infrastructure undertakings, in order to promote progress and prosperity in Pakistan.

President Musharraf visited China four times, concluding some major agreements in the economic field during his visit in November 2003. However, as both countries have made steady progress, and Pakistan's financial reserves have grown substantially.

Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, who has visited China as Finance Minister, was keen to raise the level and status of the economic relationship to that of partnership.

The focus of negotiations during the prime minister's visit was on building up the structure of a partnership. It was agreed that joint companies would be set up for investment, and for infrastructure development, with equity participation from both sides. From the joint infrastructure development fund of $4 billion, the contracts would be given only to Chinese firms.

A preferential buyers credit of $500 million had been created during President Musharraf's visit in 2003. Agreement was reached on the procedure to be applied for utilizing this fund. A protocol was also signed to expand the preferential tariff list, and to speed up completion of study to set up Free Trade. An MOU was also signed for expanding the Saindak gold-copper project.

Two areas were picked for closer cooperation. One was oil and gas exploration in the offshore areas. The other was in agro-based industries, since Pakistan lags behind in agricultural productivity, and a high proportion of produce is wasted for want of processing for export. Joint ventures will be set up in rural areas for food processing, and in fishing areas for canning for export.

Areas other than economic and commercial were also addressed. Cooperation in higher education and science would be expanded. Thirty additional scholarships would be awarded for Ph.D students, while China would offer assistance for the teaching of Chinese in Pakistan.

China would also provide financial support for the Chashma II Nuclear Power Plant. Agreement was reached also on the financial and technical arrangements for the Thar coal project. China would provide a grant of RMB 50 million to finance various programmes for assistance.

Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz is considered to be specially attached to the US where he has spent many years in high business positions. The recent visit to China gave proof that where national priorities and interests were involved, he can act in the national interest.

He displayed a very cordial relationship not only with his counterpart, Wen Jiabao, who will visit Pakistan in the first quarter of 2005, but also with other Chinese leaders.

He also addressed Chinese intellectuals in Beijing, and businessmen in Shanghai. The Chinese defence minister called on him, and it was agreed to maintain the defence cooperation between the two countries.

Both sides took significant steps to build their economic relations in a manner that would reinforce their traditional friendship. Pakistan agreed to classify China as a "market economy country".

This would facilitate increased economic interaction, especially Chinese participation in joint ventures, and readiness to invest in special economic zones. It may be added that the European Union had not responded positively to the Chinese request to be included in market economy countries. Pakistan's taking a lead in this matter would persuade more countries to take this step.

Several other areas for cooperation have been under discussion, and it is expected that the visit of Premier Wen Jiabao in early 2005 will lead to the announcement of more agreements.

Chinese leaders reiterated their assurance that any improvement of relations with India would not be at the cost of its time-tested friendship with Pakistan. China also welcomed the moves made by Pakistan to pursue a dialogue with India.

China was also pleased that the relationship was evolving to that of partnership, and China regarded Pakistan as its most trusted partner in the region.

The Rao that I knew

Much praise has been showered on the late Narasimha Rao, India's former prime minister. Probably, he deserves all that. But there were chinks in his armour. The two incidents to which I am privy showed him in a different light.

So did the interview I had with him when he was in the wilderness. His reactions might have been healthy and positive. Yet, he did not give them a concrete shape.

The first incident refers to the demolition of the Babri masjid. Whether he did little because he did not want to or whether he was helpless to take action because of the BJP government in Uttar Pradesh, where the demolition took place, is a matter of conjecture, if not opinion. I do not want to comment on that. I will confine myself to what I know.

Two or three days after the demolition, he invited some senior journalists to give his side of the story. I was one of them. He was at pains to explain that BJP chief minister Kalyan Singh betrayed him after giving a solemn promise to protect the Babri masjid at all costs. Rao said that the BJP leaders also assured him on that point but they, he said, cheated him.

I tried to meet Kalyan Singh who promised to call me whenever he visited Delhi. He did not contact me although he was critical of the then Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and the BJP some time after the demolition. My purpose was to verify Rao's allegation that Kalyan Singh went back on his word. Kalyan Singh has returned to the BJP fold since and does not want to open his mouth.

When Rao said repeatedly that he was let down, we did not press for an answer to the charge that he had connived at the demolition. His officer-on-special duty Naresh Chandra, former cabinet secretary, gave us details of how the demolition took place and tried to explain why the centre could not do anything to save the masjid.

I asked Rao how a small, temporary temple came up overnight after the Centre had taken over the administration of UP. He said he sent the Border Security Force from Delhi but the plane could not land at Lucknow because of fog. He had no answer when asked why the Central Reserve Force Police or the army, already in Lucknow, was not deployed.

However, he assured me that the temple would not be there "for long." Those words still ring in my ears. I have written about his assurance but I had no reply from him even though he lived some 12 years after meeting us.

To be charitable, I could argue that he wanted to implement what he had promised but found little support from his Congress party colleagues. Or, he thought he would give the BJP a propaganda point in the state elections after he had dissolved the assembly and forced the party to face the polls.

To be uncharitable, Rao had no intention to remove the temporary temple and he made the remark to cover up his deliberate inaction so as to allow the masjid's demolition.

Nearly four years after the demolition, he tried to defend himself in an interview he gave me at his residence. He said: "If one of the parties goes with non-secular, religious programme, saying that they are going to build this or that, the results cannot but be disastrous.

There are communities which may be having a lot of difficulties, constraints and conflicts in the religious affairs but election is not the way out for resolving them."

"The BJP wants to polarize India, 85 per cent of the people on the one side and 15 per cent on the other," Rao said. "This polarization is going to be disastrous for the country. If you take Ram as your weapon, I cannot fight Ram although I can fight you. I refuse to believe that Ram belongs to you. You are trying to monopolize Ram."

The worst period in the country, according to Rao, was the 13-day rule of Vajpayee in his first stint. Even before getting a vote of confidence, they went about doing things which even a legitimate government would hesitate to do. He said: "Their law minister wanted to start all types of inquiries and made no secret of his intentions against whom he was moving."

Rao made no secret of his determination to keep the BJP out of power at the centre. This was why, he said, his party was supporting the Deve Gowda government. He could not say how long this position would continue.

It could be for two or three years. He said they would not falter. "History will not say that it was because of the Congress party that the Deve Gowda government fell."

The second incident refers to Kashmir. The late Rajesh Pilot, then minister for state for home affairs, phoned me on behalf of Rao to inquire whether I could help the government to persuade Yasin Malik, a youthful Kashmiri leader, to break his fast-unto- death.

I did not know anything about the fast until I met Yasin at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). His demand was that the security forces should be withdrawn from Hazratbal where they had been camping for some days.

The government wanted to stop militants from using it as a shelter like they had done earlier. The government was willing to move out the security forces provided there was an assurance that militants would not return. Yasin was willing to appeal to militants not to misuse religious places but he could not give assurance on their behalf.

I could not understand why the government was not prepared to station the security forces at some distance from Hazartbal. The force did not have to be inside the shrine to stop its misuse. State governor Gen Krishna Rao was totally opposed to shifting the security forces. Pilot seemed helpless.

This was when Narasimha Rao intervened and told Pilot to agree to the phraseology of the statement which I had drafted in consultation with Yasin. Ultimately, the government agreed to withdraw the security forces and placed them at a point where they could keep a watch on Hazratbal. It took some time to finalize the statement.

I rushed back to AIIMS to convey the news. To my horror, I found some hefty security men already surrounding Yasin trying to feed him forcibly. Doctors were ready with a tube to push it down his throat.

Even the delay of a few minutes would have been a disaster. I wondered how the right hand of the government did not know what the left did. Bureaucrats who negotiated the agreement had not kept the government servants at the AIIMS informed.

Tension in Kashmir disappeared with the breaking of the fast. Rao's accommodation was bold and effective because the withdrawal of the security forces from Hazratbal had become a matter of prestige.

He did not bother about the criticism once he felt he was right. I was not surprised when, subsequently, Rao said that "the sky is the limit" to reach an agreement with the Kashmiris. Why that assurance was not pursued is beyond me.

The writer is a leading columnist based in New Delhi.

Curbing harassment at workplaces

The sexual harassment of women is nothing new. Laws to check it have been around in the West for quite some time now. In Pakistan, the situation is quite different. It is only of late that the number of women working in the service sector firms and corporations has risen rapidly.

Complaints range from unwanted or unsolicited remarks like those complimenting looks or attire, to physical contact and suggestive remarks, or even lewd comments, in the presence of female colleagues.

Other more overt forms of harassment include suggestions by a male boss to a female subordinate that link her promotion or career growth to how much time she is willing to spend with him on a non-professional basis.

There are many, including women themselves, who may think that there is nothing really wrong with such behaviour, and that it is something that their culture or value system does not necessarily condemn.

Though not necessarily true in all cases, the attitude of both men and women depends in large part on exposure to other cultures, education and experience of working in overseas jobs.

While this is not to say that sexual harassment does not take place in, say, a firm in America or the UK, in such cases the companies involved are more likely to have in place certain codes and procedures under which an aggrieved person can at least file a complaint.

Rules governing sexual harassment and seeking to punish offenders, especially in a society like Pakistan's, can be quite a grey area. For instance, most men who pass personal remarks would think there is no harm in complimenting someone on her looks or her clothes.

But the point remains whether the person for whom the remarks are intended wants to hear them. The argument in favour of this - and it is quite a strong one - is simply this: women, like men, go to their job to work and not to become the centre of their male co-workers' or boss's attraction or to receive compliments from them.

Hence, when workers and employees indulge in such things, it tends to sharply reduce professionalism. In fact, just a similar kind of incident happened not too long ago in the National Assembly when a female member of the house, Kashmala Tariq, protested to the speaker after a male MNA passed a remark with reference to her looks.

For working women, the absence of any law means not only that such harassment can go unchecked, but also that most victims will choose to be silent than speak up for fear of losing their job.

There is a strong chance of this happening, not least because of the subordinate position generally occupied by women in our society, but also because of the fact that in the corporate world it is the men who are usually in decision-making positions. If a woman does find the courage to speak up and blow the whistle on a harasser she will more often than not find herself running against a wall.

First, her own colleagues, females included, will play down the issue and "advise" her not to get all worked up over what they believe is a non-issue. Not only that, if she is married or is single and lives with her family, she will risk damaging her own reputation. So not only will such a woman need to have supportive colleagues, she will also need to have a supportive husband or family.

Even if the matter is raised, since the offender will be of similar rank, it will be his word against the woman's. If an internal inquiry is set up, it is bound to be more receptive to the case of a male superior officer's and discount the woman's testimony, seeing her as a disruptive influence on the company's working. In the end - and this is based on real cases - the woman who is the victim will be forced to resign and leave.

To counter this, an Islamabad-based umbrella organization called AASHA (Alliance Against Sexual Harassment) has drafted a code of conduct at the workplace, which it says has been done at the behest of the Ministry of Women's Development.

After consultations in all four provinces, with representatives of trade unions, employer's associations, academics, lawyers and members of civil society, the organization says that it has drawn up a workable 'code of conduct for gender justice at the workplace'. The code described gender harassment as the following:

"(i) Abuse of authority - a demand by a person in authority, such as a supervisor, for sexual favours in order for the complainant to keep or obtain certain job benefits, be it a wage increase, a promotion, training opportunity, a transfer or the job itself.

"(ii) Creating a hostile environment - any unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favours or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature, which interferes with an individual's work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile, abusive or offensive work environment.

The code requires the organization's management to conduct "awareness sessions" where employees will be told of the consequences of such harassment, both for the person who violates the code as well as the victim.

It is also made responsible for ensuring that the code is followed "in letter and spirit" and to see to it that each complaint is dealt with properly.As far as implementation of the code is concerned, the draft says that the ministry of women's development and the ministry of labour will constitute "vigilance committees" to monitor and supervise the application of the code at the district level.

These committees will have as members representatives of both ministries, "workers representatives", employers, and one male and one female representative from "civil society organizations".

For sexual harassment cases in public sector organizations, the draft proposes the posting in the federal capital and every provincial capital of a female officer of not less than Grade 17 (deputy director in the directorate of labour who will be responsible for helping implement the code of conduct).

Private sector organizations will also be required to have in place three-member enquiry committees to which all such cases will be referred. At least one member of such committee will have to be a woman, the draft suggests.

Two methods have been suggested for filing a complaint. The first, informal, one involves the complainant taking the matter up with the supervisor who can then mediate between the complainant and the accused and, if needed, provide counselling.

The second approach is through a formal complaint filed through the CBA or worker's representative or directly to the company's enquiry committee. All such complaints, through formal or informal, channels will be strictly kept confidential.

During the investigation period, the organization will have to try and minimize interaction between the complainant and the alleged offender so as to prevent any possible retaliation on the part of either.

Formulation of such a draft is a small first step towards having an environment in which women who are harassed at least feel emboldened enough to come forward and file a complaint.

Other than the fact that Pakistan happens to be a male-dominated and patriarchal society (which other country asks its adult female citizens to constantly write "husband's" name on passport or national ID card forms), there will always be the issue of giving evidence to prove sexual harassment given that it is likely to happen when the victim and the perpetrator are alone.

While it is encouraging that a ministry has helped formulate this code of gender conduct, it remains to be seen if and when the government approves it. For the time being, over 200 private sector companies have adopted the code, and that is a start. But even in that case, who is to know how many are actually enforcing it and how many have adopted it just to look good and progressive to the outside world.