| September 29, 2005 | Thursday | Sha'aban 24, 1426 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Ramazan price package
More on camel kids
Setting an agenda for the OIC summit
THE conference of the scholars and intellectuals representing different countries of the ummah called by Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Abdullah Ibn Abdul Aziz to examine the conditions of the Islamic ummah, and seek the most effective solutions to the challenges facing the Islamic world in the 21st century, closed its proceedings recently.
THERE is more to Pakistan-American relations than the nuclear question. The issue has acquired perhaps undue importance following Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the US in July. During the visit, President George Bush promised to the Indian prime minister to recommend to Congress a bill providing for cooperation between the two counties in nuclear technology. The remarks made in Islamabad on Tuesday by US National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley are significant. Addressing a press conference following his talks with President Pervez Musharraf and Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri, Mr Hadley said that the US needed to have a nuclear cooperation programme “tailored to Pakistan’s needs”. Enjoying the status of a major non-Nato ally, Pakistan has felt concerned over the US-India agreement. India already has a nuclear establishment much larger than Pakistan’s. The US-India agreement concerns the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. However, greater American help will enable India to divert its indigenous capability to military uses. Against this background, Mr Hadley’s remarks are significant and should lead to stepped-up nuclear cooperation between the two countries. Pakistan is not an oil-producing country, and the delay for political reasons in the utilization of its water resources for energy production has created a serious gap between demand and supply. Pakistan already has a nuclear cooperation agreement with China — Chashma II is under construction — and a similar deal with the US should help Pakistan meet some of its future energy requirements.
Mr Hadley also dwelt on the question of America’s over-all relationship with Pakistan and reiterated President Bush’s commitment to “broadening and deepening its strategic relationship with Pakistan over the long term”. As the history of US-Pakistan ties shows, absent all along has been a long-term relationship. Twice in the past, it was expediency that brought the two countries closer. In the fifties and sixties, it was Washington’s anti-communist crusade that saw Pakistan become America’s “most allied ally”. There was a cooling off following the 1965 war, but Pakistan became a “front-line state” when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979. This period saw a renewal of America’s economic and military aid and the use of Pakistan as a channel for the CIA for its overt and covert aid to the Afghan mujahideen. Once the Soviets withdrew, so did America from Pakistan. Thereafter, the Pressler amendment went into effect, the “certification” stopped and the US withheld the delivery of the F-16s that Pakistan had already paid for. The 9/11 trauma and America’s war on terror have again infused a new life into their relationship, but people wonder whether this too is a passing phase.
Perched on the meeting point of South Asia and south-west Asia and close to the Gulf, Pakistan’s strategic location is one of its major assets. A strong and prosperous Pakistan, thus, can be an asset to America provided their relationship has a long-term dimension not dependent on expediency. At the same time, Pakistan needs to set its own house in order. Periodic military interventions, lack of democratic traditions and religious extremism have given Pakistan a bad name. If we want it to acquire the position to which it is entitled by virtue of its size and location, we must fight extremism at home, consolidate democracy and give people a better life. Such a Pakistan can be America’s valuable ally in a region where Washington has vital economic and geopolitical stakes.
THE unveiling of a ‘Ramazan relief package’ by the federal minister for industries, production and special initiatives on Tuesday is a welcome step since it is intended to provide much-needed relief to consumers during the month of fasting. However, a strong caveat comes in when it comes to the actual availability of a five to 10 per cent price reduction affecting some 500 essential items being actually made available at the consumer’s end. In the past, each time with the advent of the holy month, governments have announced similar ‘Ramazan packages’ with much fanfare but to no avail. Even now, the Sindh government seems to be facing a hard time convincing butchers and milk-sellers in the province to reduce prices as Ramazan approaches. The federal government’s package is slightly different in that subsidized items will be sold through the Utility Stores Corporation’s own outlets, ‘mobile’ stores (which will travel to various areas), stalls and weekly bazars. Here, the coverage that such an arrangement will have will be crucial in determining the package’s success, especially since the utility stores are 400 in number and do not cover the whole country.
There is also the question of how effectively the government is able to ensure that the staff posted at the utility stores do not instead divert the stocks and sell them to other shops which may then charge a higher price, thus defeating the purpose of the relief package. The Utility Stores Corporation’s management will have to be alert this time to ensure that this does not happen, and will have to deal sternly with employees involved in such a practice. As for holding weekly bazars, these have become a regular feature in most cities and towns. However, the problem is that come Ramazan, the shopkeepers start raising prices substantially, often pleading a shortage. The real reason is profiteering by those who want to make a killing out of the demands of Ramazan. While this cannot be eliminated altogether, it can at least be curbed if the government uses persuasion to impress upon the shopkeepers of the need to stick to the reduced price structure at least during Ramazan.
WHAT began as a commendable effort to repatriate and rehabilitate youngsters working as camel jockeys in the Gulf states appears to have slowed down, and more than 1,800 children still remain in the Gulf awaiting return. It is important for the government not to rest on the laurels it won a few months ago when, along with the UAE government and Unicef, it launched a drive to bring home the young boys used in the dangerous sport of camel racing. Since then the government does not seem overly concerned over the issue. The minister of state for overseas Pakistanis said the other day that Unicef has allocated a sum of three million dollars for the repatriation and rehabilitation of the jockeys. What the government would do well to realize is that time is of the essence, and the rest of the children still stranded in the Gulf must be brought back soon so that the process of rehabilitating them and uniting them with their families can begin.
At the same time, our officials should think ahead and realize that the returnees are not likely to fare well in poverty-stricken conditions, especially since, with their return, their families will have lost a major source of livelihood. It is quite possible that these children will again be eyed by unscrupulous agents engaged in human smuggling, or will become labourers in some dangerous industry. One wonders what happened to all those poverty-alleviation measures that our senior officials keep harping on. Despite the robust growth rate cited by the government, there has been no visible change in the lives of the poor who have no option but to send their children to work. This is the main aspect of the problem the government needs to address if former jockeys, and others like them, are to have reasonable living conditions.
But no document or statement on the subject-matter of its discussions, which it decided to keep confidential according to the report put by OIC secretariat on its website, was issued.
The report of the conference will be submitted to the leaders of the Islamic ummah so that they may seek guidance from it at their extraordinary summit due to convene at Makkah Al-Mukarramah by the end of 2005, called at the initiative of King Abdullah Ibn Abdul Aziz, to explore ways and means to alleviate the despair and despondency that now prevails in the Islamic world.
Some details of the deliberations, however, have come out in the media which cover a broad range of issues such as education, governance, media, minorities, dialogue with other civilizations, Palestine issue, restructuring OIC, and the image of Islam.
It is a very welcome effort to engage intelligentsia and experts by eliciting their ideas and thoughts for setting the next OIC summit agenda, which takes place at a very critical juncture of our history. Today, there is no dearth of challenges facing the ummah. But, as the Chinese believe, every challenge also entails a hidden opportunity. It is therefore a moment of reflection for us to develop appropriate responses. Toynbee characterized human history as a progression and interplay of challenges and responses. Each challenge espouses a response which in turn becomes a basis for a new challenge.
History will be watching the response of Muslim ummah with great interest because the manner in which we respond will decide our fate and place in future. When the idea of this extraordinary OIC summit was put forward by King Abdullah Ibn Abdul Aziz, he was then the Crown Prince. But now history has put great responsibility on him by bringing his leadership to the forefront for defining the Muslim ummah’s response to the challenges it faces at this crucial juncture.
When we speak of developing a response, we must take into consideration three factors, which, if misjudged or overlooked can either undermine or misdirect the whole effort: understanding the context of the challenge, comprehending its nature, and assessing internal capabilities. For the right response, all three factors must be consistent with the proposed strategy. As far as the context is concerned, two important datelines have introduced new paradigms in world economy and politics. The first change was in the area of economy at the beginning of the 21st century five years ago, which heralded the dawn of a knowledge and information revolution era replacing the three hundred year-old Industrial Revolution era.
Knowledge and information have become new drivers of wealth creation, progress and security replacing muscle power of the industrial age with brain power and intellectual capital. With this shift, superior human resources, knowledge creation capabilities, and e-readiness have assumed critical significance in the development of nations forcing even the developed nations of today to radically re-engineer their socio-economic platforms. Such a change can’t be brought overnight and requires a medium to long-term commitment.
The second shift took place in world politics on 9/11, 2001, with an attack on the World Trade Centre, which touched off major shockwaves to force re-drawing of lines in diplomacy, international law, and global security. US President Bush initiated a global war against terrorism with two Muslim countries — Afghanistan and Iraq — becoming its first targets. The post-9/11 events have raised suspicion and fear among many circles about War of Civilizations and also caused great anxiety throughout the Muslim world.
International law is being redrafted by big powers, particularly the US, to assume rights of pre-emptive strikes against any perceived or potential enemy. The possibilities of US attack against Syria and Iran are still rife. Powerful section in the West is portraying Muslims as terrorists.
The “war on terror” challenge is likely to remain unpredictable at least through the tenure of Bush administration. Hence, any response by the Muslim Ummah to move forward must address these two significant challenges, which have brought a significant change in the context.
As far as our internal capabilities to cope with the challenges are concerned, Muslims are a population of 1.3 billion, which is 22 per cent of the world population and greater than the combined population of the US, Europe, and Japan, with 900 million living in 57 independent countries and about 400 million disposed in other countries.
Of its 1.3 billion people, about 522 million or nearly half are in the category of the absolute poor on the basis of one dollar a day income. More than half of the adults are illiterate and more than half of these illiterates are women. Some 276 million people have almost no access to any health facility and the majority of the population has to drink unsafe water, while 10 million people suffer from avoidable afflictions.
The nations with the world’s 22 per cent population have two per cent of the world’s GDP, 1.5 per cent of the world FDI, and 1.3 per cent of the world’s trade.
No Muslim country figures in the top bracket of Human Development Index. With 22 per cent of the world population, Muslim countries account for less than six per cent of world income. Growth rate of Muslim countries was 4.7 per cent in 2003 compared to 5.2 per cent of all developing countries. Likewise, they lag behind in all other economic indicators like savings rates, capital formation, etc. Despite declarations, the level of intra-OIC trade remains dismally poor.
In working out a response, the OIC must avoid rhetoric and bombasts, which have made people cynical. The response should be both at strategic and tactical levels with action. At strategic level, there is a need to articulate a knowledge-led vision 2020 for the OIC countries, enabling them to transform their societies and economies to meet the challenges of the new knowledge and information revolution era. This vision should articulate four goals; firstly the goal of developing best human resources; secondly, the goal of promoting good governance; thirdly, the goal of achieving best possible development, and lastly, the goal of creating best society.
Reforming our education systems and teaching methods, which are based on rote learning at the expense of problem solving, creativity, and imagination, is the biggest challenge we face in this area. Good governance should build effective and stable social, economic, governing and legal institutions that empower and serve the people by being responsive to their needs and aspirations in both local and global contexts to successfully steer their societies through the turbulence of change.
Experts should translate the goals of proposed OIC Vision 2020 into specific actionable programmes and targets to be achieved by the Ummah by 2020. However, the next OIC summit should also commit itself to some projects for demonstrating that it means business for realizing the OIC Vision 2020, such as selecting and funding at least 20 universities to be among the world’s top 100 universities by 2010, bringing computer to every high school by 2010, achieving universal primary enrolment by 2015, and creating a poverty fund.
To help the Ummah in this transformation, the present institutional set up should be strengthened by creating a new development institution “The Islamic States Development Programme (ISDP)”, besides Islamic Development Bank (IDB), Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO), Islamic States Broadcasting Organization (ISBO), and International Islamic News Agency (IINA), to help in capacity-building and knowledge networking in areas of knowledge-driven economy, trade and investments, ICT, quality and productivity, sustainable development, governance, and poverty alleviation.
The roles and charters of IDB, ISESCO, ISBO and IINA should also be revised to help in this transformation. When the world is experiencing unprecedented changes, there is no credible think tank working on the problems and issues of the Muslim Ummah from the Ummah’s perspective. Most of the academic work is being done by the US think tanks. It is important that an international think tank be established by engaging our best talent to work on present and future challenges. We must not forget that we are living through a battle of ideas, which must be won on the intellectual front.
The western leaders and intellectuals often claim that their civilization stands for values of freedom, liberty and democracy, which terrorists (Muslims) disagree with. OIC must agree on a definition of Islamic values, which can be presented as our view of world and society. In my opinion, Islam stands for knowledge, social justice, human dignity, harmony and trusteeship (accountability and responsibility of actions as Vicegerent of Allah).
A caravan of Islamic exhibition depicting Islam’s heritage and contribution to humanity should be planned, which should tour important world capitals of those countries should be invited to its events to project the true image of Islam. Today, over 70 per cent of Muslim population consists of youth.
The writer is a former deputy chairman, Planning Commission of Pakistan.
Email: betterpakistan@gmail.com