| May 18, 2005 | Wednesday | Rabi-us-Sani 9, 1426 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Not the right remedy
Closure of refugee camps
REPORTS that Israel plans to resume work on the separation barrier later this month must arouse concern among all those who want a resumption of the peace process. The separation barrier — the Middle East’s Berlin wall, as Yasser Arafat called it — will be so routed that it will cut off from the West Bank the land on which one of the biggest Jewish settlements is located. The idea behind the move is to gobble up more Palestinian land and annex the settlement, Maaleh Adumim, to occupied Al Quds. The separation barrier has been declared illegal by the International of Justice, while the establishment of settlements is a violation of Security Council Resolution 446. So adamant is Israel on the question of settlements that it has made a mockery of the two major peace agreements it has signed or accepted.
Both the Declaration of Principles (DoP), signed in Washington on Sept 13, 1993, and the roadmap unveiled by President George Bush in 2003 forbade all settlement activity. Under the DoP, signed by Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin, Israel should have vacated the West Bank and Gaza Strip and a final settlement should have been in place by April 13, 1999. This was not to be, for Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Ehud Barak, — who succeeded Yitzhak Rabin as prime ministers — sabotaged the DoP. The peace process was finally laid to rest when Mr Ariel Sharon visited the Islamic holy sites in September 2000, touching off the second intifada. Mr Sharon then became prime minister and reoccupied the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and in that process demolished Arafat’s Ramallah headquarters and made him a prisoner. In April 2003 the Quartet — the US, EU, UN and Russia — crafted a new roadmap, which was accepted by both the Palestinian Authority and Israel. The roadmap envisaged a complete halt to all settlement activity and the dismantling of those built after Mr Sharon came to power. However, the number of settlements today is more than double the number that existed when the DoP was signed 12 years ago. Then President Bush and Mr Sharon between them scuttled the roadmap when they agreed that Israel would be allowed to retain some land in the West Bank even after the pullout had been completed. The roadmap was finally abandoned when President Bush announced that 2005 was an unrealistic date for a Palestinian state to emerge.
Today, Mr Sharon is trying to prove himself a peacemaker by carrying out his Gaza disengagement plan. This plan in no way promotes peace, because Israel’s real aim, under the cover of this “disengagement”, is to continue its occupation of the West Bank in some form. The separation barrier falls into a pattern whose aim has always been clear — to create new “facts”. These facts visualize continued existence of Jewish settlements, building highways going through Arab villages, farms and orchards, drawing water away from Palestinian villages, and felling citrus and olive trees so as to hurt the Arab population’s economic interests. The net result would be a West Bank where Palestinians would be condemned to live in ‘bantustans’. The decision to re-start work on the barrier is thus part of Israel’s continued quest for annexation so that even if an independent Palestinian state comes into being it will be a state only in name.
EDUCATION Minister Javed Ashraf Qazi’s proposal on Monday to the Senate Standing Committee on Education that the army be inducted to help to achieve 100 per cent literacy in the country is as baffling as it is questionable. He was discussing the Education for All (EFA) campaign whose main objective is to achieve complete literacy in the country by 2015, a task to which Pakistan committed itself a few years ago at an international conference in Dakar. But it is doubtful that the objective can be achieved. Despite formulating a clear-cut strategy in the national plan of action for 2001-15, very little progress has been made so far. Perhaps this is why Mr Qazi believes that the army is best suited to take up the job of educating the people because it has the necessary means to reach the remotest of places where civilians are not able or willing to go and work. If this move is passed by the Senate as a resolution, as seems likely, and is then approved by parliament, junior commissioned officers of the army will be given the task of setting up early and adult literacy centres in five selected areas near their cantonments. The idea is for the drive to reach every village in every province, including the Fata belt, until the 100 per cent literacy target is achieved by 2015.
There is no questioning the importance or urgency of a cent-per-cent literacy drive, but what is doubtful is whether the army is the right outfit to undertake the job: the long formed habit of looking to the army as the panacea for all ills must give way before a more realistic approach. One needs reminding that this was the very idea behind the induction of the army to reinvigorate KESC and Wapda several years ago. Both these public utilities are as sickly as they were then despite army management. The army has been entrenched in every aspect of administration and public institutions and has not fared too well in most cases. The Senate should take this into account before passing the resolution. Instead, the government should consider strengthening the education department whose job it is to provide sound education to all.
THE intended closure of over 12 refugee camps in North Waziristan for security reasons next month would leave about 30,000 Afghans with the difficult choice of either relocating to other camps inside Pakistan or returning to their home country where even basic living facilities are lacking. To be sure, Pakistan, which has hosted the refugees ever since their influx after the 1979 Soviet occupation of their country, is entitled to some reprieve. According to a recent census, about three million refugees remain in Pakistan despite the on-going repatriation process. Considering the fierce competition for land and other resources that has heightened tensions between the local population and the Afghans, it is only fair that the latter return to their country. However, the authorities should ensure that this process is carried out in as humane a manner as possible, and without violating the tenets of the Tripartite Agreement (signed by Pakistan, the UN refugee agency and Afghanistan) that calls for voluntary repatriation of the refugees.
Afghanistan and the international community will also have to do their bit. After pledging large amounts for the war-ravaged country’s reconstruction, foreign donors are now reneging on their commitments and appear reluctant to hand over the promised funds. Moreover, the Afghan government, whose authority has been largely confined to Kabul, has not been able to contain the lawlessness that prevails in the rest of the country. It is not surprising, therefore, that many refugees are unwilling to return with their families to a land where there is little security and where basic facilities and employment opportunities are missing. It is important for Pakistan and the UN to exert pressure on Afghanistan and international donors to improve local conditions to facilitate the return of the refugees so that the idea of repatriation to their home country is not as unpalatable to them as it is now.