|
| January 20, 2006 | Friday | Zilhaj 19, 1426 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
NGOs on the chopping block
Decaying heritage
The dam controversy
US must apologize
IN any mature society, national issues are discussed in a rational manner, keeping in view the supreme interests of the country as a whole. Unfortunately, in our country, the building of a dam has been converted into an emotionally charged issue, full of sound and fury, with parochial and even secessionist overtones. There are accusations and counter-accusations; and some political parties are even threatening to break up the federation on the issue of building a dam.
NO country has been spared by the New York-based Human Rights Watch in its annual report for 2005 on human rights abuses across the globe. South Asia finds notable mention in the report, with Pakistan’s dismal record also coming under scrutiny. The report highlights the treatment of women and makes special mention of the Pakistan government’s mishandling of the Mukhtaran Mai and Dr Shazia Khalid cases and reprimands the government for its “dismissive attitude” to violence against women. Reports like these should jolt the authorities into seriously addressing the frequent and widespread violation of human rights and civil liberties in the country rather than dismissing these as being biased. Instead of facing up to the grim realities at home and doing the utmost to resolve them, the government usually defends itself by saying that women’s rights in other countries are much worse. It should be of no concern to Pakistan whether more women are raped in the US or that they are equally badly treated in India where dowry-related deaths remain a horrifying reality. It should be concerned as to how in Pakistan a panchayat can pass a decree whereby a woman can be gang-raped. The problem cannot be solved by denying its existence; it has to be tackled on both the legal and social fronts. The report also describes the military actions in Balochistan as involving “arbitrary detentions and limited access to prisoners” — which is also likely to irk the government but which cannot hide the reality.
The government must initiate a debate in the assemblies on the state of human rights and revise laws that work against the minorities, women, children and those who are victims of barbaric and outdated customs. There is a great deal of agreement in civil society that the Hudood laws, particularly the law of evidence and the qisas and diyat laws, as well as the blasphemy law, need to be reviewed. These laws have been frequently used to persecute innocent people. Thousands of women, and in many cases their children, are languishing in prison because of the Hudood laws, being unable to provide the four male witnesses needed to establish a rape. A clear-cut path to justice needs to be in place that guarantees men and women equal recourse to justice. This can only come about when discriminatory laws are either repealed or substantially amended to make them less offensive. The onus is now on parliamentarians who need to move beyond issuing pious statements and making a serious effort to make the changes needed. The number of cases involving women forced into customs like vani and swara, that are blindly adhered to, will only dwindle when all branches of the law support the victim. The Supreme Court has lately increased its activism and begun to take notice of injustices in various fields. This needs to be reinforced by civil society action, whose absence is most disappointing. Save a few organizations, notably the HRCP, not much effort has been made to enlighten or mobilize people. The country’s intelligentsia in particular has an important role to play and it must move out of its drawing-room sanctuaries and go out to the people if it is to wake up society from its somnolence. The more the average person learns to play an active role in pressuring the government into removing injustices, the better the chances for the country to move towards a more enlightened future.
THE Sindh government’s move to check the mushroom growth of NGOs will be viewed with mixed reactions. While it is generally admitted that some organizations exist only on paper, receiving funds and enjoying privileges for dubious purposes, it is also known that there are other NGOs and CBOs (community-based organizations) doing commendable work. The challenge is to sift the grain from the chaff. This is no easy task given that in the last 40 or so years the number of NGOs operating in Sindh has jumped from 353 to 6,151. But not all of them are superfluous or redundant and if the social welfare department were to indiscriminately clamp down on them, it could cause a lot of harm. Hence it must first of all draw up the rules and criteria to decide which NGO is to stay and which is to go.
It may be pointed out here that all NGOs do not operate in an identical fashion. How they function depends on the nature of their work and their goals. Thus, community-based organizations work at the grassroots level among the community and their visibility is quite high. There are others which are research-oriented and though they have to move around among the people to conduct surveys and investigations, they have no projects in hand to give them high visibility. Nonetheless their contribution is equally important. There are still others that act as pressure groups to protect the rights and interests of the people, such as human rights groups, labour bodies, women’s organizations and so on. Some NGOs are involved in the task of information, education and in mobilizing people about their own needs such as health and education. The social welfare department will have a difficult task deciding which is to stay and which is to go. It should be quite firm about closing down those NGOs that do not submit their audited accounts, as per rules, every year and are found to be involved in financial irregularities. It is clear that financial probity should be the foremost requirement and even the NGOs otherwise performing well but without a clean financial record should be held accountable.
THE report about the 14 stone sculptures recently discovered in Thar raises two questions. First, why did the Rangers’ personnel take away these valuable finds (apparently more than a thousand years old) from the excavation site, and secondly, why didn’t the archaeological authorities depute any staff at the venue to watch over the discoveries? In fact, as a law-enforcement body, one would have expected the Rangers to have prevented the villagers from making off with the finds or at least informed the appropriate authorities about it. Instead, they, too, took away some of the sculptures and initially refused to hand these over to the archaeological staff that was attempting to recover the artefacts from the villagers. As for the archaeology department, its apathy towards objects of historical significance and its failure to watch over diggings is largely responsible for some large-scale archaeological thefts by local and foreign excavation teams.
In all such cases, we are losing precious historical remains of bygone civilizations, many of which remain buried in the sand and are not likely to be excavated any time soon, which is perhaps just as well. That is unless both the public and the government realize the importance of such finds and are imbued with a sense of responsibility for their protection. Until that happens there can be no guarantee that any new sites will be preserved or watched over as national heritage, even if there are laws to safeguard them. It is a pity that most existing historical sites and artefacts — some of them discovered quite by chance as the recent find in Thar — remain in a decrepit state with many literally crumbling into oblivion. This situation is not likely to change unless there is a general realization that what we are losing, in effect, is a crucial part of what defines us as a nation.
In short, we have been making a sorry spectacle of ourselves. This can only give satisfaction to those sceptics who claim that Pakistan is a “failed” state; and to those antagonists in our neighbourhood and beyond who have always argued that a state based on the concept of a common religion cannot survive. Let those engaged in the current bitter debate in Pakistan on building dams ponder if this is the kind of message we want to send to the rest of the world.
Agriculture is the backbone of Pakistan’s economy. But our agriculture cannot survive and prosper without irrigation since almost 90 per cent of the country does not get sufficient rainfall. Fortunately, we have great rivers and level plains and have developed (thanks to the British colonial rule and our own efforts since independence) one of the most elaborate irrigation networks in the world.
However, in recent years, there has been a growing shortage of water for agriculture because of the growing population and the silting of the existing dams. Moreover, as much as 40 per cent of the total arable land in Pakistan remains uncultivated, mainly because of lack of irrigation. Hence, there is a consensus that the country needs to build up more water reservoirs. The issue really is as to how this objective is to be achieved.
There are several possible dams that could be built, namely, Kalabagh, Bhasha, Skardu-Katzarah, Akhori and Munda. President Musharraf said the other day that the Bhasha dam and be built first). Surprisingly, our experts are giving contradictory assessments about the respective pros and cons of these dams, including the cost of construction. It seems that the majority of experts are in favour of Kalabagh, whose construction can also be started straightaway.
All of these projects involve displacement of inhabitants currently living in the affected areas. Kalabagh would displace 120,000 people, Bhasha would displace 24,000 and Akhori 49,300 people. Skardu-Katzarah dam would displace 160,000 people and the city of Skardu would be submerged. That would produce a great deal of resentment.
The capacity of the Skardu-Katzarah dam would be more than the total capacity of all other dams. Its design life is estimated at 1,000 years compared to less than 100 years of every other proposed dam. According to the ex-chairman of IRSA, Skardu dam will generate 15,000 MW of power if 35 MAF is stored, which is possible. However, according to the Pieter Lieftinck Report by the World Bank, “the problem of accessibility (of Skardu) would be almost insuperable.” Similarly, Bhasha dam would require upgradation of 323-km of road from Havelian to the dam site and relocation of 140 km from Sazin to Raikot bridge.
The existing road (Karakorum Highway) links Pakistan with China and was completed in the 1970s by the two countries as an outstanding engineering feat. The new road would be even higher up in the mountains and will be extremely expensive to build. Moreover, Bhasha and Skardu-Katzarah are more exposed to seismic risk as compared to Kalabagh and Akhori.
According to the recent briefing given to our Senate, Kalabagh will have a water availability of 90 MAF, live storage of 6.1 MAF and will produce 3,600 MW of power and would have no logistic problem. Comparative figures for Bhasha will be 50 MAF, 7.34 MAF and 4,500 MW of electricity. Figures for Akhori will be 14 MAF, 7 MAF and 600 MW of electricity. Kalabagh would have no problem of power dispersal, while power generated at Bhasha (high up in the mountains) as also Skardu-Katzarah would be very difficult to disperse.
Hence, on a comparative basis, there is much to support the building of Kalabagh dam. President Pervez Musharraf was quite right in arguing in its favour. In fact, one must admire the president for going to the critics and opponents in all parts of Sindh to explain the case in favour of Kalabagh. No other Pakistani head of state ever showed such guts.
However, while the president’s sincerity should not be questioned, he has to be faulted for a lack of understanding of the current political realities. The fact is that most political circles in Sindh are against building the Kalabagh dam. It can be argued that they are being influenced by strong prejudices, bordering on paranoia, but their determination to oppose the Kalabagh dam is manifest.
Similarly, there is varying degree of opposition to the Kalabagh dam in the NWFP and Balochistan.
Under the circumstances, building Kalabagh would harm national unity. The president would be well advised to remember the saying from the old American West that “if catching a thief means burning down the whole city, then it is not worthwhile catching the thief.” The hard political reality is that national integrity and political stability is much more important than building a dam, whatever its benefits.
It is, of course, quite pathetic that Muslim League-N of Nawaz Sharif, which had always supported the building of Kalabagh dam, has remained a silent spectator while critics have been pillorying the whole project. In the past, Benazir’s Pakistan Peoples’ Party had also come out in favour of Kalabagh but it has now joined the project’s opponents. Political expediency has clearly influenced both of these parties. It seems that they would make common cause with any forces, if necessary, in order to get rid of Musharraf. One would have thought that, at least for the two major mainstream parties, the country’s welfare should be above considerations of political advantage. Of course, little good can be expected from the extremists.
Furthermore, one can only feel sad by the anti-Punjab sentiments that some circles in Sindh and NWFP are bent upon stirring. While over the years, Punjab has not been blameless in several instances, on the whole, it has shown magnanimity despite its larger size. For instance, in the last 58 years of Pakistan’s existence, Punjab has held the top political post only for about nine years (viz. by Prime Ministers Chaudhri Muhammad Ali and Feroz Khan Noon in the 1950s and by Mian Nawaz Sharif in the 1990s). On the other hand, Punjab was instrumental in bringing to power two Sindhi prime ministers viz. Z.A. Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto, and also supported Mohammad Khan Junejo. Together, they ruled Pakistan for nearly 14 years.
Moreover, Punjab has in the past even given its share of water to Sindh. The smaller provinces should also not forget that if the water requirements of Punjab are not met in the coming years, much of that province would lose its fertility, leading to an acute food shortage in the whole country. That would hurt, in particular, the food-deficit provinces of NWFP and Balochistan, as also Sindh.
Pakistan is already faced with a great many problems. It would be unwise to precipitate a crisis of national integration by rushing through the Kalabagh dam. Hence, the present government would be well advised at this time to think of alternatives to the Kalabagh dam. For instance, smaller dams could be given priority in the immediate future. The raising of Mangla and Tarbela Dams would also help. The de-silting of our existing dams should be given priority. More efficient use of the existing water resources should be explored. Seepage of canal water and its consequent wastage could be reduced by the lining of canals as also the water channels which link them to farms. Irrigation through water sprinkling system should be more widely practised. Crops like sugarcane consume too much water and could be replaced by more water-efficient crops.
The foregoing measures might still not be sufficient to remove the likelihood of serious water shortages in the next few years. But since Sindh is the most vociferous in opposing the building of Kalabagh dam, it must be prepared also to face the consequences of such opposition. Possibly, after facing water shortages and counting its losses due to non-construction of the Kalabagh dam, Sindh itself will, at some point of time, rethink the issue and come out in favour of this project. That would surely be a much more desirable scenario for building the Kalabagh dam.
PAKISTANI officials claim last week’s US bombing of a western village killed not the intended target, No. 2 Al Qaeda leader Ayman Zawahiri, but at least 17 others, including women and children. If so, relatives of the dead deserve an apology and reparations; Washington also needs to express regret to President Pervez Musharraf’s government.
The message can be delivered this week when Pakistan’s prime minister visits the US But at the same time, the prime minister should be reminded that if Islamabad actually tried to find Zawahiri and his boss, Osama bin Laden, instead of just pretending to do so, such attacks would not be repeated.
More than four years after Al Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks, Pakistan continues to play a dangerous game. The government does as little as possible to hunt Al Qaeda operatives, lest their Pakistani supporters become even more upset with Musharraf. Yet Islamabad continually assures Washington that it’s in vigorous pursuit, in order to keep the foreign aid flowing.
— Los Angeles Times