Saarc: action is primary

THE 13th Saarc summit has come and gone. We have had a week of extraordinary security, lots of meetings at various levels, and as expected, a declaration reaffirming various steps that are expected to lead towards greater South Asian unity. The fact that the twice postponed meeting could be convened at all tempts one to suggest that it was a success of sorts.

Twenty years have passed since the first Saarc summit declared that notwithstanding the misunderstandings of the past, “regional cooperation is necessary, desirable and mutually beneficial”. Two decades later, the Saarc leadership met again in Dhaka and tried to ascertain whether the Saarc process had been able to foster confidence and trust within the region.

The leaders also tried to assess whether the seven countries were looking at their problems in a regional as opposed to an individual or bilateral context. The Saarc leaders in their 53-point Dhaka Declaration agreed on the need to improve regional relations, to expand the group, to create a regional disaster management centre, to implement Safta and to reduce poverty over the coming decade. They also signed three major agreements for facilitating intra-regional trade. These include the Agreement on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Customs Matters, Limited Agreement on Avoidance of Double Taxation and Agreement on the Establishment of Saarc Arbitration Council.

On paper it appears that many pious intentions have been agreed upon. However, an analysis of the declaration indicates that while the leadership agreed to achieve certain objectives, it left the hard task of implementation to decisions to be undertaken in future meetings. Modalities and regulatory mechanisms pertaining to the implementation of summit decisions have not been clarified. This will only create delay. For example, a lot of effort has gone into identifying South Asian development goals and steps towards poverty alleviation. This has been done because a higher population growth rate juxtaposed with lack of education and healthcare has made the South Asian population more vulnerable. It has also been prompted by the realization that the lack of regional cooperation is directly contributing towards the slow pace in the reduction of poverty.

The leadership has agreed that the effective tackling of this complex phenomenon will require not only active engagement but also the creation of a suitable fund. Accordingly, they have decided to establish a Saarc Poverty Alleviation Fund (SPAF). Agreement on suitable operational modalities with regard to the fund has, however, been left to the finance/planning ministers, and that means further delay.

At present, we have a South Asian Development Fund (SADF) with six million dollars in its coffers. In the absence of clear guidelines, its activities have suffered. The SADF has so far financed a negligible number of feasibility studies of poverty reduction projects. They have also been unable to implement any of them because of resource constraints. This hesitation has similarly led to indecisiveness with regard to the use of 100 million dollars offered by India for undertaking poverty reduction measures in the six member states of Saarc other than India.

One hopes that this time round the responsible Saarc authorities will take meaningful steps to raise the capital and speedily launch the agreed Saarc Poverty Alleviation Fund. This fund could be mobilized through contributions from member states as well as individuals. Member states should consider taking advantage of Clause 3 of Article IX of the Saarc charter which states that “in case sufficient financial resources cannot be mobilized within the region for funding activities of the association, external financing from appropriate sources may be mobilized with the approval of or by the standing committee”. This would open up the possibility of acquiring additional funds, if so required, from international donor agencies like the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank.

It was also satisfying to see that the South Asian leadership understands that poverty reduction will require the creation of a more technically educated human resource base. It may be recalled that the Saarc Human Resource Development Centre (SHRDC) was established in Islamabad in 1999 with the objectives of undertaking research, imparting training and providing information on human resource development. Six years later, it has hardly made any progress.

In view of that, it was heartening to note the Indian prime minister’s proposal to set up a South Asian university. However, instead of starting another new institution, it might be advisable to undertake capacity building, expansion and strengthening of the existing facility. We already have excellent educational institutions that can transform SHRDC into an institution of excellence through indirect support. One hopes that the Saarc leadership will now address this important matter and take the necessary steps. This is vital, given the region’s need for focusing on agriculture and pisciculture and also on information technology.

I will now turn to meaningful cooperation not only with regard to the prevention of natural disasters but also in the tackling of the aftermath of disasters. South Asia in the last few years has had more than its share of floods and earthquakes. It has also had to bear the burnt of a devastating tsunami.

The recently concluded summit has seen agreement on the need for protecting the environment, controlling pollution and preparing for natural disasters. More than one leader reminded us of the need for forging closer ties and deriving benefits from the synergy of collective, well-planned and focused initiatives. It was also underlined that Saarc should evolve regional mechanisms for effective and timely cooperation pertaining to disaster relief and management and also to addressing health emergencies. It was also suggested that a Saarc Health Surveillance Centre needs to be established. These ideas look good on paper but what about their implementation?

It is not clear as to who will be responsible for getting these ideas off the ground and who will bear the related expenditure in what proportion. I express my anxiety in this regard because infrastructure building can easily be affected by mistrust and competing interests.

We have to understand that pious intentions and agreement on paper will be meaningless without concrete action. It would have been advisable if the Saarc leadership, instead of widening the agenda, had generated more dynamics with regard to past agreed programmes. That does not seem to have taken place.

A Saarc Plan of Action on Environment already exists. The Saarc summit this time round, could have focused more closely on this, and ascertained why this is not moving forward. For example, a decision could have been taken to create a task force for drafting a regional environment treaty. They could have also pledged funds and resources for this purpose. Nothing like that happened. There was also no agreement on the need for establishing a disaster management directorate within the Saarc secretariat.

I now turn to the question of facilitating trade within Saarc. The summit stressed on the importance of the entry into force of Safta. This reflected that despite general understanding on all sides about regional economic cooperation, differences remain. The existence of comparative advantage on similar products — textile materials and products, leather and leather products, agricultural products and fresh fish — within South Asia appear to be hampering progress.

The Safta agreement was signed during the 12th Saarc summit in January 2004 and was expected to enter into force in January 2006. That does not look likely at this moment. The committee entrusted with the task of completing negotiations on the four outstanding issues of sensitive lists, rules of origin, revenue loss compensation mechanism and technical assistance has not been able to finalize agreed formulas. They have whittled down differences on sensitive lists and rules of origin but disagreements still remain. Greater efforts are required to reduce all barriers to trade, not just tariffs. The same is true of the revenue compensation mechanism.

The complexities and mutual distrust can only be removed through the generation of political will. In this context, it will not be enough to leave the completion of national procedures to committees. To put matters into operation will require active intervention from the political leadership. Member states have to transcend immediate interests. Future economic integration demands that they overcome obstacles and iron out their differences.

Another area that needs greater attention is the effective containment of terrorism. The recently concluded summit, as expected, has reiterated the need for collective response to this hydra-headed monster. They have called for the early and effective implementation of the Additional Protocol to the Saarc Convention on Suppression of Terrorism but have refrained from any reference to the need for agreeing to a fast-track extradition procedure for criminals and terrorists who have sought sanctuary in one Saarc state after perpetrating criminal acts in another. This step is vital for any effective engagement. The European Union is already profiting from such a uniform measure. Our leadership should try to replicate this in South Asia.

Three observations must be made. Saarc members need to reconcile themselves with the fact that there have been changes in the international scene. They have taken the right decision to expand Saarc by including Afghanistan and agreeing to accord observer status to China and Japan. Ways and means must also be found to strengthen the Saarc secretariat by empowering and authorizing it to undertake meaningful dialogues with Asean, the EU and the UN. This will enhance the prestige of the secretariat and add to the importance of the South Asian institution in the international arena. The second relates to the need for the Saarc summit not only to convene their meetings annually, as scheduled, on a regular basis, but also to meet if possible, at least one more time within the year. They should also try to devolve the power of decision-making to the ministerial level, so that the secretariat can implement decisions without delay. Meetings also need to be more functional and less extravagant and ritualistic.

The last relates to the undertaking of a conscious effort to create a South Asian mindset among the peoples of the region and their leadership and remove the trust deficit. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz has aptly underlined the need to “move from conflict management to conflict resolutions through credible solutions and sharing of best practices”.

This will be the only way to firmly embed the footprint of Saarc in this region. The current Saarc chairperson has less than a year to prove this before the caretaker administration takes over. In the next 10 months we can either have effective leadership or several rounds of meaningless meetings.

The writer is a former ambassador of Bangladesh

Email: mzamir@dhaka.net

Scourge of child abuse

ONE of the most painful and soul-searing problems facing society in Pakistan is that of sexual abuse of children. It leaves child labour far behind, although even that was not easily accepted by our public as something degenerative, and many people thought it had a good side to it. Yes, you’ll be surprised. I’ll give you an example.

Here, in Islamabad, in the private school where my grandchildren study, boys and girls of class eight were prescribed the topic of child labour on which they were required to write their views and then read them out in a debate. More than half the children did not think it odd to write in favour of child labour and extol its benefits.

None of the teaching staff thought it wrong to suggest a topic that might tempt impressionable minds to express themselves in support of a pernicious practice. And this was in the capital’s most expensive and prestigious school. I hope they don’t choose sexual abuse of children for a debate next time and ask the children to write for or against it.

I have been drawn to this subject by a workshop held about national consultation for developing a policy and plan of action against sexual abuse and exploitation of children organized by the National Commission for Child & Women Development, and following it the publication of an excellent article by Dr Amin A. Gadit in Dawn with the frightening caption “Child abuse is rooted deeper than you think.” Both had affected me, but in different ways, when they took place some years ago. The provocation for writing on the topic today was provided by a couple of reports in newspapers a few days ago.

My scrapbook shows that the news of the workshop appeared in the dailies through a badly drafted story circulated by a news agency. Apart from the usual details about who said what (instead of more positive reporting) it quoted the then federal secretary for social welfare as saying, “The government is taking strict measures to check child sexual abuse” and “it is making each and every attempt to check the menace.”

I remembered how this had aroused my ire and indignation at that time, for it was symptomatic of what ministers and senior officers are trained to announce in public or tell the media in interviews of what the government is doing in respect of a nagging national problem.

Giving the government the benefit of doubt, and admitting that despite reading five daily newspapers every day I may have missed reports of action taken by it in pursuance of “each and every attempt to curb the menace,” I request readers of this column to please let me know if they have come across any of these each and every attempt anywhere in Pakistan. Actually it was praiseworthy of the government to take notice of this sensitive and dreadful problem, and it need not have indulged in dubious publicity in the workshop. But if drastic action has been taken somewhere and I am unaware of it and if it is pointed out to me by anyone I shall at once apologize to the social welfare ministry.

I again say that it was a public-spirited act of the government to invite experts to discuss this subject because it has almost been considered socially taboo to even mention it, although non-official organizations and social welfare bodies have been trying their best to draw public attention to it. I have thought over it for the last many days, and frankly, I am at my wits’ end as to what anyone can do to reduce the incidence of child abuse and connected exploitation.

You see, child abuse is for everybody to see. Even when work is taken from children behind closed doors there is someone or the other who is witness to it or to a social worker if he or she is so minded. But sexual abuse of little boys and girls is a secret act, indulged in furtively, with the victims threatened with dire consequences if they dare to tell anyone about it. Therefore, who can stop it?

According to a report issued by LHRLA, the Lawyers for Human Rights & Legal Aid, over 490 cases of child abuse were recorded during one year on the basis of newspaper stories. I would say the true position must be 10 times worse. And this is borne out by what Dr Gadit had to say in his article which painted a terrible picture of the actual state of affairs, although even that would not be the whole truth. As it is, I haven’t the heart to give the detailed breakdown, which also involves murder of little girls after gang-rape, contained in LHRLA’s report.

The trouble is that child sexual abuse is a worldwide phenomenon. How would one categorize the effects of modern civilization that permit the showing of actual images about this inhuman practice over the pornographic sections of Internet, that much-vaunted apex of scientific development? What kind of human intellectual development is this which cannot love the children of mankind and protect them from its lecherous and perverted members? Viewed in that context the problem in Pakistan may not be that grievous. But then, it has some aspects that may not be found in the more advanced countries of the world.

For instance, as Dr Gadit pointed out, in the rural areas of Sindh and Punjab boys are kept by some landlords as a so-called prestige symbol and treated as sex slaves. In Pir Wadhai, a suburb of both Rawalpindi and Islamabad devoted to road transport, runaway and kidnapped children are used by owners of petty hotels to provide sex service to their clients. And we all know what goes on in prisons, where teenage inmates are housed in the same place as hardened criminals, as also the sexual abuse offshoot of the child labour employed in motor workshops and the like.

What is to be done? All that one can suggest is exemplary and enhanced penalties for offenders, but that is no solution to the basic problem, apart from the fact that there are certain areas where the law cannot reach. How is society or religion or the law to purge the human mind of base obsessions, perverted tastes and dirty ideas? Frankly, I am left totally dismayed.

When women are worst sufferers

FOUR days after the devastating earthquake in Azad Kashmir and the NWFP, the UNFPA released its annual report, State of the World Population 2005, which focused on gender equality. The earthquake was a compelling pointer to the drastic implications of a high population growth rate for women and children.

More than half of the 76,000 killed or the several hundred thousands injured by the earthquake were children. As someone poignantly put it, a whole generation has been destroyed.

That is not the end of the story. The CNN reported some time ago that there are tens of thousands of pregnant women among the earthquake survivors who are expected to deliver their babies in the next month or so. The unborn would not have escaped the trauma their mothers suffered. It is only much later that we will know how the earthquake affected them.

According to the UNFPA’s report, Pakistan’s population stands at a robust 158 million and at the present rate it will shoot up to 304 million by the year 2050. This is not shocking if you remember that the average population growth rate in Pakistan is 2.1 per cent, which is more than the average for the less developed regions (1.4 per cent). This will plainly affect the country’s plan to reduce poverty by half by 2015 as envisaged by the millennium development goals (MDG). The MDGs seek universal primary education; reduction of child mortality by two-thirds; cutbacks in maternal mortality by three-quarters; the promotion of gender equality; ensuring environmental sustainability; the reversal of the spread of HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; and a global partnership for development between the rich and the poor.

This year’s report links success in achieving these goals with gender equality and reproductive health. The UNFPA is right in its assessment. After all, if nearly half the population in any country is to be denied equal rights and opportunities, it will be reflected in the level of prosperity and development in that society. Besides a very important factor in this situation is that a woman who is empowered by the removal of discriminatory burdens uses her gains not just for herself alone. She reinvests them in the welfare of her family and children.

That goes to show how important it is to provide equal opportunities for women to encourage them to join the national mainstream. Have we done that? The UNFPA report provides the answer. A country where only 38 per cent women are literate compared with 65 per cent men is, needless to say, treating its women rather shabbily. Since education for girls is perceived as being the key goal that propels a country towards the other seven MDGs, its significance should not be underestimated.

UNFPA’s report says, “Educational attainment increases women’s income-earning potential, reduces maternal and infant mortality and improves reproductive health overall. It is associated with lower rates of HIV.

Educated girls are more likely to delay marriage and childbearing, and instead acquire skills to improve economic prospects for themselves and their families. The benefits of girls’ education also lead to better health and education for the next generation.”

Another goal that is integrated with the others is that of providing reproductive health to women. This is a theme running through the MDGs because it has a direct bearing on all of them. But equally pertinent is the need for fertility reduction which intriguingly was not spelt out in the MDGs in clear terms. Werner Fornos, the outgoing chairman of the Population Institute of Washington, believes that this wasn’t a case of oversight. “The reasons were both religious and political — an effort to placate voodoo evangelists and rightwing politicians in the United States,” Fornos observes.

Pakistan looks unlikely to achieve the millennium goals. And it is not the earthquake that has caused a setback. It is the attitude of our society towards women that is hampering our progress towards these goals. The most shocking is our failure to lower fertility rates, which have a direct bearing on the quality of a woman’s life. The average number of children a woman is calculated to have in her reproductive years is four, when replacement level fertility rate envisages 2.1.

Although the government and the NGOs are making an all-out effort to give a boost to the population programme and spread the contraceptive services as far and wide as possible, it is not making the desired impact. The simple reason is that women still don’t enjoy the same esteem and status as men. Had it not been so, why would parents with two daughters still want a male offspring? Because he would be the bearer of the family name and would protect the landed estate.

Even before the natural disaster struck in October, the status of women in Pakistan was dismal. The earthquake has made it worse. In a chapter titled, “Women and Young People in Humanitarian Crises” the State of World Population , 2005 (that was incidentally written before October 8) it is observed that women survivors of natural disasters usually bear the heaviest burden of relief and reconstruction, since they are the primary caretakers for other survivors and their responsibilities are increased by the loss of husbands and livelihoods. Yet relief assistance doesn’t address gender specific needs.

The report captures the crisis in Pakistan when it states, “The vulnerability of girls and women to exploitation, trafficking and abuse has largely been ignored, as have their needs for pregnancy-related care, sanitary supplies and locally appropriate clothing. The distribution of emergency assistance has often been managed by and delivered to men without attention to whether women and their dependents will benefit.”

We hope that this aspect of the relief and reconstruction effort will be addressed with sensitivity. At present, this great tragedy seems to have made no difference to the male chauvinistic attitude vis-a-vis women. How else would you explain the angry reaction of a man when a physician touched his injured wife’s wrist to check her pulse. Then there is the case of the men who have let it be known that their women will continue to stay in their shattered houses and die of the cold rather than venture outside.

Risky funding

GIVEN the fuss that some people have lately raised about poor oversight of homeland security, you would think Congress would jump at a chance to alter funding formulas that give, per capita, a disproportionate amount of homeland-security money to states that are not thought to be at a high risk of terrorism. But think again: Senators disproportionately represent states that are not thought to be at a high risk of terrorism.

Many senators, it turns out, would rather grab as much money for their constituents as possible than allow the government to improve safety for the entire country as much as possible.

That’s the only conclusion that can be drawn from the latest skirmish in the homeland-security funding war, a battle that has pitted members of Congress from small states against members from large states and has also set the House against the Senate. Last week, Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., joined others to help kill an amendment to the Patriot Act reauthorization bill that would have dramatically changed the formula for spending homeland-security funds, making it significantly more risk-based. Collins said it should be under the jurisdiction of a different Senate committee.

Leahy, according to his spokesman, thought the measure was an attempt to “pit state against state” and to mask the real problem, which is the underfunding of homeland security.

They and others also felt the House hasn’t negotiated hard enough with them — Collins and Lieberman have put forward a less radical alternative — and they further point out that the formulas have already been improved by other congressional measures, which is true. But a lot more improvement is needed, and a lot faster. The House has voted three times to carry out this reform. Too bad senators have priorities that come before security.

The Washington Post