| May 15, 2005 | Sunday | Rabi-us-Sani 6, 1426 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
Bill to reunite immigrants with family
Squash affairs
Trade liberalization
Manchhar water
‘21st century atheism’
Young doctors
State of Muslims
Transplant law
Okara incident
Retirees’ woes
DR Mahtab Shah’s letter (April 25) reveals startling facts with regard to fake degrees awarded by universities and the treatment meted out to those who point this out. Ever since the requirement of bachelor’s degree for contesting election, some of the politicians are out to obtain degrees by fair means or foul. In the same breath, the politicians ask their voters to obtain a degree and get a job from them.
Ever since the requirement of a PhD for promotion to Grade 19 onwards, there is a similar move on the part of candidates to obtain a PhD by hook or by crook. The worst part of the end-game is ignoring merit for selection on the part of authorities. Very unfortunately, meritocracy has been on the decline for quite some time now in our country and hence the menace of fake and worthless degree.
What prompted me to write this letter is the shocking response of the university to violation of academic freedom and freedom of speech in respect of Dr Shah, who has been a professor for the last two decades. Anyone who has spent a considerable time in a university campus knows what the university community wants from higher education. For most of them the university is a place for self-discovery and for a meaningful acquisition of knowledge.
Understanding the nature of knowledge, its unity, its varieties, its limitations and its uses and abuses is necessary for the success of our democracy. After all, political empowerment and economic opportunity have the same root: the spread of knowledge. In other words, societies become more democratic as citizens become more knowledgeable and cultured.
The primary purpose of a university is to advance our understanding of life, the world, and the universe. It is to to transmit as much of human understanding as we can from one generation to the next and add as much new knowledge as we can to the existing store of human knowledge. In addition, universities are charged with nurturing a distinctive character — what I would call the scholarly temperament. Academic freedom and freedom of expression go to the heart of the university, to the rights and responsibility of the university administration, to the nature of teaching and scholarship. It is a freedom we share only on campus; in the classroom it encompasses a student’s right to learn and the professor’s right to breathe easily.
When intellectual diversity and freedom of speech are suppressed, university campuses turn into areas of repression which compel a faculty to proclaim: “I did not see, I did not hear and I did not say”. One guiding principle should be to respect the separation of the university and the state. Universities do not penalize faculty members or students from comments they make as citizens in public debate.
When we threaten those with whom we disagree with termination of job, charge-sheeting and setting of committees, we undermine the very institutions that are in place to keep us free. We become a lynch mob. We do not educate, we do not learn, we are diminished.
PROF (DR) NAZIR A. MUGHAL
Vice-Chancellor, Preston University
Karachi
AN organised group of legal residents in the US has urged Congress to support a new bill which will help unite spouses and minor children of legal immigrants, even as the Bush administration is reportedly on the brink of passing an anti-immigration law that will empower the authorities to take draconian steps against anyone they think is an illegal citizen or alien.
The group, Unite Families (www.unitefamilies.org), wants congressional representatives to support the bill, HR 1823, proposed by two Democrats — Sheila Jackson-Lee and Robert Andrews.
The bill will amend provisions of the V-visa — a temporary, non-immigrant visa type — and will remove the current restrictions on that visa. According to members of Unite Families, it is unfair and cruel to break up nuclear families. The bill will allow legal residents to unite with their immediate families and thereby end years of family separation. Many legal permanent residents (green card holders) are currently living in the US, separated from their spouses and infant children. They are waiting for their I-130 petitions (petition for relative) to be approved.
Statutory numerical limitations on available visas, coupled with immigration backlogs, cause waiting times of five years or more. During this long wait, the foreign resident spouse and young children are not allowed to enter the US, even for a brief visit. The permanent residents, on the other hand, must reside predominantly in the US and thus the web of US immigration laws ruthlessly separates married couples from each other and from young children. The amendments will help in allowing foreign resident spouses and minor children of legal immigrants to enter the US temporarily while their I-130 petitions are pending with the immigration department.
Acting on this bill will fulfil President Bush’s promise that he made during his 2000 campaign: “If we are a nation that believes in family values, we need to help husbands and wives and children of permanent residents be allowed to visit while the INS is handling their paperwork.” Group members point out the contradiction is in the current political atmosphere: the claims to promote family and moral values, yet having polices that break up families — immediate families of law-abiding, taxpaying legal immigrants.
“Our immigration laws and procedures are very complicated and they even appear tough. However, divided families and forcefully separated couples talk of the ugly and inhumane side of our immigration laws,” the members complain. “We seldom hear or think of the legal immigrants — those who became immigrants through legal procedures and those who never broke any law. Recent debates on the bill are intended to help illegal immigrants only. The Congress ignores the suffering of taxpaying, law-abiding legal immigrants,” they protest.
ASHER MAJID
Karachi
THE promotion strategies of the Pakistan Squash Federation (PSF) have been criticized in the press by former professional players on the circuit, namely Jansher Khan (Dawn, April 28) and Faheem Gul (Dawn, May 7). Both appear to have completely lost sight of the mandate of the national sports association, i.e., to promote the sport in the rank and file of society. True that some gentlemen officers of the Pakistan Air Force bankrolled professional Hashim Khan to match his skills with the best in the world. True, also, that Hashim Khan subsequently blazed a glorious trail for Pakistan. However, the PSF’s exclusive preoccupation with promoting professional players in the world rankings is entirely misplaced.
The PSF’s only mandate is to promote the game within the school and college systems, and not with a view to promoting professional excellence in the game but to inculcating mental and physical agility within our youth, and thus benefiting the entire nation in its search for competitive advantage in the global village. This indeed is the reason why air force officers play squash in the first place.
Instead of constantly looking for government handouts via the PSF, and generating unnecessary and damaging controversy by squabbling over scarce resources, our professionals would be better served by proving their worth to the private sector and gaining commercial sponsorship, a practice followed by professional players all over the world.
Our earlier generations of world squash champions earned fame and money, thanks to squash. How much of this have they reinvested in the game that gave them so much? Jonah Barrington earned the undying gratitude and respect of his countrymen by selflessly and tirelessly dedicating himself to promoting squash within the English school system, with no expectation of any reward or remuneration. Perhaps it’s time that Jansher and Jahangir and the rest of their professional colleagues from Pakistan did the same for their country.
ADIL AHMAD
Karachi
THE International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization are urging developing countries to liberalize their trade regimes to benefit more fully from international specialization. Trade liberalization, however, needs to be introduced with care.
A sudden lifting of protection will cause irreversible losses of capital, labour skills and technological capabilities if, as is often the case, import competing firms are unable to adapt rapidly. Strengthening the competitiveness of import substitutes takes time and resources, as does the expansion of export supply capabilities. Both processes involve a prolonged learning process.
The experience of successful country exporters in recent decades puts into question the simplistic view that any form of protection is inimical to export success. Although rapid export growth has often been a crucial element of good economic performance, there is no automatic link between trade regime and export growth.
Some countries with rapid export growth have, indeed, had fairly liberal trade regimes but others have not. Most successful exporters managed to combine elements of both export promotion and protection. Typically, they have gone through a phase of import substitution before breaking into international markets.
Many of them gradually converted previously inward-looking industries into outward-oriented ones, while maintaining some degree of protection and have introduced across-the-board import liberalization only after, sometimes well after, the upturn of exports.
This suggests that trade reform should follow a sequence in which protection is reduced substantially first on inputs needed by the export sector, and on other goods only after export supply capabilities have been built up.
AFTAB AHMAD KHAN
Karachi
ONCE again the water authorities are channelling Manchhar water into the Indus. They have indicated that the flow will be in the ratio of 1:40 to dilute the pollutants.
It is strange that such poisonous water is diverted to drinking sources, when it could be used for agriculture or simply wasted down the outfall drains.
The health department issues early warnings, aware of the fact that the effluents cannot be removed by boiling or other methods.
At present 8,000 people of lower Sindh suffer from water-borne diseases. What further monitoring do the authorities require? These actions will not absolve them of their responsibility towards public health.
In the Northern Areas plentiful rains and snow have created vast reserves of water in our dams and reservoirs. Why then are the people of Sindh forced to drink contaminated water?
RAFI ADAMJEE
Karachi
IN the article, “The 21st century atheism,” Mr Dylan Evans, while presenting a model of atheism, has depicted religion by a parable (Dawn, May 3). He does acknowledge that religion is more truthful than science in its depiction of the longing for transcendent meaning that lies in man’s heart. “No scientific theory has ever done justice to this longing; and in this respect religions paint more faithful pictures of the mind,” he confesses.
In the parable he portrays religion as a painting of a beautiful landscape by an artist on the wall of his house. It is so realistic that people coming to are struck by it and take the wall for a window providing a view into a real world.
To end this impression, the artist removes a brick, thereby showing the illusory nature of the painting. This shattering of their illusion upsets some people but the “wise ones” among the spectators thank him for revealing the fictitious nature of the landscape.
Mr Evans says religions merely provide potent metaphors and images to represent human aspirations for transcendence but these should not be taken literally. He also makes the fundamentally wrong assumption that all religions are a creation of human beings whereas at least the three Abrahamic faiths are divinely revealed, but his unbelief won’t let him believe that. One would like to propose a parable for atheism that may bring about a change of paradigm for the atheists and also keep any impressionable minds from being misguided:
There was a community of people who were all born with layers of some kind of coating or veils over their eyes, which effectively made them blind. They had no conception of what the world or the universe was really like. There came a man who said he was a messenger sent by God to heal them of their malady.
He taught them that there were things such as the sun, moon, stars, flowers, sunsets, rainbows and so on, which they would be able to see once the veils over their eyes got removed by acting on his words. At first they were suspicious but in time realized he was an absolutely honest, loving, caring and morally upright person.
Some of them followed his instructions and gradually the layers of coating started coming off their eyes. At a minimum they began to perceive the presence and absence of the sun: clearly; there was light and there was darkness. The few who were most diligent gained complete vision, enjoying the beauty of flowers, rainbows, breathtaking sunsets and the moonlight shimmering upon the waters
All human beings have a “third” or spiritual eye that normally lacks sight. But prophets and saints do have the spiritual vision to see the invisible world, the heaven, hell, angels, “jinns” (demons), etc. That is why they have such strong faith. If we follow their teachings about prayer, meditation, control of the self, leading a moral life and so forth, we will be rewarded by much spiritual elevation and certainty of faith and could even become saints ourselves.
An example may serve to illustrate. If an un-magnetized iron bar is suspended from its middle by a string, it will point in no particular direction. After being magnetized, however, it points in a north-south direction. Thus, it is able to detect or “see” the Earth’s magnetic poles that it couldn’t before. Similarly, our “third eye”, when suitably activated, is able to see the invisible world.
Those of us who have been fortunate enough to enter the company of spiritual masters witness their “karamaat” (lesser miracles), and benefit from their teachings, find it much easier to believe in the truth of religion. The longing for transcendence referred to by Mr Evans is the desire inborn in every spirit for a communion with its Creator, but the West’s materialism prevents it from accepting such realities.
S. QADRI
Karachi
THIS is with reference to the press conference held by Prof Salman Waris, president of the PMA, Multan, and other members of the executive committee on May 3. The issues raised by the PMA president represented the voice of young doctors today. He addressed the issues of pay rises for registrars and house officers. When the government is making efforts to bring up the best health facilities in the country, young doctors are being deprived of the basic facilities of job security and reasonable pay. How can we ask a doctor to serve the nation when he has to toil for his own bread and butter in the early stages of his career?
Today labour laws safeguard a labourer from working for more than 10 hours a day but there is no law for a young doctor working in an emergency ward for more then 36 hours at a stretch, coping with intense mental and physical pressures.
Young doctors of Pakistan support the efforts of the PMA president for bringing up the issues of increase in number of seats for registrars, permanent employment of contract doctors and increase in the pay structure of house officers.
How can we stop our doctors who prefer to go abroad instead of serving their own nation if we do not address their problems? Something needs to be done about this issue at all levels if we have to see the best doctors around.
DR MURTAZA HAIDER JAFERI
Multan
US President Bush has demoted the officer held responsible for the atrocities committed by American soldiers in Abu Ghraib prison from the rank of a major-general to a colonel. On the same day the American soldier who shot dead an injured unarmed Iraqi in a mosque in Fallujah was cleared by a military tribunal. What kind of justice is this?
Imagine the outcry if — when Daniel Pearl was killed — the response of the Pakistani government had been merely to demote the IGP of Sindh to an SP. Who will stand up for the helpless Muslims of this world? Surely not the helpless Muslim rulers. There was a time when for the honour of a single Muslim woman, the Caliph would mobilize his armies. How the Ummah yearns for those days to return.
DR IRFAN PARACHA
Lahore
THE article “Temporizing on transplant law” (April 27) by Ms Zubeida Mustafa typifies our society’s apathy towards important issues. Government functionaries, after all, are our own people.
For rich foreigners, Pakistan has become a centre for transplant tourism while our own citizens die in their thousands each year for want of organs at their end-stage organ failure, be it kidney, liver, heart, etc.
We the people are to be blamed for the shelving of the transplant bill. I hope that those who know more about the importance and benefits of this law will fill your columns with letters so that this bill is placed on the table to be made into a law. The answer to Ms Mustafa’s million dollar question is “society’s apathy”.
H.R. CHAGLA
Karachi
THE other day Dawn carried a news item that the minister of defence had slapped a senior police official of Okara because of the “administration’s” reported failure to make the minister’s “function” there a success.
Assaulting a government servant on duty is a serious offence. From a subsequent report, one gathered that Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain had called on the minister and offered his regrets at the incident. This added to the confusion about the real happening. Aslam Piracha’s report in Dawn of May 7 appears to confirm the original account.
Our senior parliamentarians are supposed to be role models for our services. Had the SSP exercising his right of self-defence retaliated, it would have been the lead story in the world media and harmed the reputation of the federal government.
S.Z. HAIDER
Lahore
THE case of those who retired from government service before 1972 when the pay scales were extremely low and pension rules restrictive needs no pleadings. They should be provided with a lump sum instead of any percentage increment.
RAFAT A. KHAN
Karachi
You can also send letters to the Editor
Just send your message to the following address:
Make sure you include your full name, postal address, e-mail address, and in the case of Pakistan your day-time telephone number.