| July 29, 2006 | Saturday | Rajab 2, 1427 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
Puristan or Scam-istan?
Textile package and SMEs
FUU PhD programme
Bhutto’s prophecy
Frequent power failures
More jaw-jaw
Economist survey
Upgrading cotton research institute
A mother’s appeal
US officials were rushing a delivery of satellite-and laser guided bombs to Israel in response to an Israeli request (Dawn, July 22). Israel’s bombing of Lebanon’s roads, bridges, ports and airports, as well as Hezbollah targets, is its most destructive onslaught since its 1982 invasion to expel Palestinian forces.
Now, the US is contributing $30 million which include kits for 100,000 people, 20,000 blankets and plastic sheeting for the people of Lebanon. This act on the part of the United States is not a humanitarian act but a sham.
On the one hand the US is arming Israel with F16s and 155mm artillery shells that are wreaking havoc on the innocent and defenceless people of Lebanon who are being needlessly punished for letting Hezbollah guerrillas operate from their territory.
On July 15 an Israeli missile incinerated a van in south Lebanon killing 20 civilians, including 15 children, who were fleeing their village after Israeli warnings to vacate their homes.
Elsewhere raids on petrol stations in north, south and east Lebanon have killed another 12 people and wounded 32, in all 99 people were killed in four days of bombardment. And all but three of the dead were civilians.
Yet the United States refuses to broker a ceasefire that will put an end to the misery of the Lebanese people. Instead it is supplying precision-guided bombs to Israel while sending blankets to Lebanese victims thus adding insult to injury.
SYLVESTER CONCEPTION
Karachi
ISRAEL’s response to the kidnapping of its two soldiers by Hezbollah has been disproportionate and excessive. Does the kidnapping of two soldiers give it the right to dismantle the infrastructure of a defenceless country?
If the great powers of the world are unwilling or unable to put an end to this mindless and arrogant plunder of a sovereign nation, then the Arab and Muslim states ought to act. But this may be asking for too much. Little has been heard from our governments in the way of condemnation. So what hope can there be of action?
The problem, of course, is the timidity of our governments. But let’s assume in the unlikely event that our leaders can overcome their fear of the ‘sole superpower’, what could they do? Arab and Muslim governments have spent, not tens, but hundreds of billions of dollars over the past decades on defence spending.
Their armies teem with some of the most modern defence systems on the planet. Countries in the region have the ability (but, alas, not the will) to declare Lebanese airspace a no-go area for Israeli warplanes. And they have what would be needed to enforce such an exclusion zone.
But such an action requires backbone, and that is clearly not within the capacity of our leaders. So let’s turn to something a little more passive and hence possibly more palatable to modern Salahuddins: economic measures. We can target companies that do any kind of business with Israel. Shipping lines that call on Israeli ports would not be allowed to use the Suez canal, and would not be welcome in any Muslim port. Similar sanctions would apply to airlines.
Muslim countries would close their airspace and airports to all airlines that land in Israel. Companies that do any business at all with Israel would be subject to a water-tight boycott by all Arab and Muslim countries.
These measures are not extreme but they are effective, and would bring, if applied properly, Israel to its senses. They can be and should be adopted without delay. But doing so requires, more than anything else, courage. And sadly this is a quality which all our leaders no longer possess.
NADEEM QURESHI
Karachi
I WOULD like to refer to Mr Ayaz Amir’s column ‘Puristan or Scam-istan?’ (July 14) in which he has dealt at length with the averments of former head of the SECP, Dr Tariq Hasan, before a standing committee of the National Assembly. These averments focus on the Karachi Stock Exchange crash of March 2005 and lay a claim that the country’s finance high-ups had been protecting leading insider stock-traders, and that he, as head of the SECP, was under pressure from even the prime minister to keep close contact with these stock-traders.
The former head of the SECP held the said stock-traders responsible for the Karachi Stock Exchange crash of 2005, and the multi-billion dollar falls in share values as caused by their manipulations.
In concurring with him, Mr Amir overlooks an important aspect of the periodic falls in stock values on the stock exchange. These falls are called by stock-traders as technical correction. They are not the doing of solely the stock-traders.
The government of a country must see to it that the parity of its currency stays fairly constant. High inflation is considered a bane of it, as it affects parity adversely. It is seen that whenever a rise in inflation occurs, the government resorts to mopping up excess money in circulation.
This is done by auction of treasury bonds at varying rates of interest. There are other methods also of doing it but the handiest is manipulation of stock values downwards. By this method a devaluation of the currency is avoided, which could not fail to cause a harmful hue and cry in the country, besides raising/mounting the burden of foreign loans.
Another advantage of this method is it reduces money supply without involving the government in any interest payment as is the case in auctioning of treasury bonds. In addition, in the case of treasury bonds issued, the liability to return the principal is very much there.
It is, therefore, obvious the government has to keep inflation in check by manipulation of the stock prices rather than by any other method which cannot be as inexpensive.
The story of the March 2005 stock exchange crash is simply this: the government first reduced the rate of return on all its savings schemes which led people to seek investment in stocks; when this had gone far, stock values were suddenly brought down. The government was in a position to do so through operations of the NIT, etc.
ABDUL WAHAB
Karachi
ON July 15, the ECC under the chairmanship of the prime minister announced a Rs25 billion textile package that was much awaited by textile industrialists who were optimistic about its incentives since it was prepared by a committee of their representatives who were nominated by the textile minister.
First, would Textile Minister Mushtaq Cheema clarify one important point? According to news reports, the committee is called Zubair Motiwala Committee, headed by former KCCI president Zubair Motiwala. He has been giving interviews on TV that his committee prepared the package and he presented it to the prime minister in Islamabad.
On the other hand, former SITE Association chairman Ikhtiar Baig in his TV interviews stated that he prepared the package and presented it to the prime minister. He said that he also made the presentation at the NCCC meeting at SBP and on his personal recommendations the financial part of the package was announced.
Some press reports also call the committee that formulated the textile package as the Baig Committee. Who is telling the truth or were there two committees working on the same subject?
The textile package has now been rejected by PRGMEA and PHMA as well as by commercial exporters. In fact, the incentives outlined in the package are primarily for the benefit of the big textile barons who took massive loans for BMR when the rates were very low and now they had to repay at much higher rates. They have now been bailed out.
Subsidy will now be given to export of fabrics too. This will boost the exports of grey cloth and to some extent dyed/printed fabrics, much to the disenchantment of the garments/knits sectors.
No mention was made of subsidy for travel, subsidy for gas, subsidy for employing women, subsidy for payments to EOBI, social security and other worker levies, etc.
The net result of the textile package would be windfall profits for the textile barons, closure of small and medium garment and knitting industries, and rise in exports of yarn, grey cloth, and processed fabrics.
The commercial exporters of textiles will not be able to compete in international markets because they will not be able to take advantage of the subsidies offered. Whether it was the Motiwala Committee or the Baig Committee, the sad truth is that the textile barons have hoodwinked them in convincing the government to come out with a package that is a big joke played on SMEs and workers in these industries.
MIAN MAQSOOD MAGOON
Karachi
THE federal government through an ordinance extended university status to the Federal Urdu University three years ago. Dr Peerzada Qasim, a renowned scientist and scholar, was appointed the first vice-chancellor of the university. Dr Qasim initiated the much needed PhD programme in the university and engaged more than 100 teachers in research work.
Considering the acute shortage of PhD scholars in the university, the (then) management allowed PhD scholars of other universities (as visiting professors) to guide the newly-enrolled PhD students. (A common practice being followed at other universities as well).
As a result, research activities got momentum in the University, especially at its Abdul Haq (Arts) Campus where teachers enthusiastically started their research work, consulting various sources such as libraries (mainly of Karachi and Lahore) and Islamabad archives.
Surprisingly, the university management and the Higher Education Commission did not provide any (financial) aid to these research scholars. And now to one’s chagrin, when most of these scholars (teachers) are about to finish their research work, the HEC unilaterally has blacklisted the university’s research programme citing that the university has no adequate faculty and research facilities to run a PhD programme.
The Federal Urdu University is basically a public sector university and the responsibility of the development of its infrastructure is on nobody but the HEC itself. The HEC’s fiscal aid for the university has remained unchanged since the time it was a college.
Now, according to newspapers, the federal government is cutting down the fiscal aid of the HEC. So the hopes for the Federal Urdu University of getting an adequate financial assistance are sinking before they could go any further. Thus, the aim of the university that was established to promote vernacular of the country would remain abortive.
The HEC officials, before issuing the verdict (blacklisting the PhD programme of the university) did not realise that the same PhD practice is being followed at almost all the universities of the country.
I request the HEC chairman to take away the restrictions against the PhD programme and provide sufficient funds for the development of the university.
NASIR KHAN
Secretary-general,
Anjuman-i-Asateza,
Abdul Haq Campus
Karachi
THIS refers to the letter ‘Bhutto’s prophecy’ (July 19). I use the word ‘prophecies’ instead of ‘a prophecy’ about the Constitution and its feared fate, made clear in ZAB’s book If I am assassinated. The fact is that the very mention of his possible assassination was not less than a prophecy about himself, perceived by him alone, at variance with the opinion of his lawyer Yahya Bakhtiar, from the scheme of things ushered in, officially, with hysteric haste.
Mr Bhutto, while in jail, also could see, with amazing far-sightedness, horrendous consequences of issues of external nature. For instance, he had warned against our government’s involvement in Afghanistan and Egyptian President Sadat’s hobnob in relations with Israel, blindly following American line and ignoring long Arab experience.
Now, both situations are before us. How dangerously we have drifted away from Pakistan’s path of national security is anybody’s guess. And, as regards the Arab problem, it has continuously complicated, weakening the traditional joint kind of approach, with America’s added undue appeasement of Israel, in view of Egypt’s flawed policy, cautious only of the US annoyance on what might look to them as the former’s soft leanings to the Palestinian cause.
Bhutto had, undoubtedly, emerged on the international stage as intelligent, fearless, truthful and capable Asian leader, with an eye on the interests and rights of the poor and exploited states of this continent. This definition automatically included African nations also.
The slogan of the Third World was propounded by him to steer clear of allegations of being a parochial Muslim as the term took care of Muslim states for their poverty, backwardness and exploitation.
To Arabs, Mr Bhutto advised to use oil as a weapon and join with other Muslim nations, for pooling their resources of men, material and money to produce all that was essential for our stay on the external scene, with honour and dignity.
This was the main reason why international conspiracies were hatched and Bhutto fell victim after Saudi King Faisal who had fully cooperated in organising Islamic conference in Lahore in 1974.
Internally, the late prime minister, the first truly elected representative of the people with huge majority, after the founder of the country, the Quaid-i-Azam, was denied the role he planned to play. Even then, his performance has remained praiseworthy, besides the constitution-making on which all the political parties are united for its total restoration.
Mr Bhutto was behind the strategy of our nuclear capability that today guarantees our existence. Mr Bhutto implemented his manifesto slogan of “power lies with the people”. People’s strength and empowerment, despite poverty, is manifest from the fact that today no wadera, khan, sardar or chaudhry regards it as his inheritance to be elected from his area, as he could do in the past. This alone was a great achievement to Bhutto’s credit, in our feudal setting.
DR AZIZUR RAHMAN BUGHIO
Islamabad
POWER breakdowns are the daily routine in Lahore. They help to remind us of how our forefathers lived before the advent of electrical energy. Instead of anger and frustration, I have welcomed this discomfort, because our president has stated that the breakdowns are caused by the rapid development which is taking place.
As a student of economics this was a difficult message to digest, because I have never come across such an argument by any economist of repute. I am sure President Musharraf must have been briefed by his advisers before he addressed the nation. We need to understand that escalation in prices of sugar, pulses, wheat, mutton, ghee, etc., are also indicators for economic development. After all people buy them, otherwise hundreds of thousands should have died of starvation. Magazines like The Economist must be banned for publishing a detailed survey of Pakistan which does not see the development that has taken place in the past seven years. Look at the millions of poor people standing in line buying air conditioners, mobiles, cars and televisions. The biased reporters must be blind.
There is peace and tranquillity in Pakistan. Law and order prevails. Justice is provided to everyone. The privatisation process has never been so transparent. In just over 30 minutes, the nation’s steel mills were sold by the federal minister in charge of privatisation. The KESC is working so smoothly, reminding its clients at least seven times a day of the immense progress taking place. What more can we ask for?
AYESHA M.
Lahore
IN your issue of July 22 Kuldip Nayar commented on the Bombay blasts. He censures the Pakistani and Indian media by saying: “In neither country has the media been able to overcome prejudice.” This sounds good, balanced and fair.
Unfortunately, he goes on to add: “There is probably something in the allegation about the complicity of the Pakistani military junta.” Clearly the writer is no longer even-handed. And thus his article is more of the same from the other side.
JAWEED NIAZ
New Jersey, USA
A SURVEY of Pakistan by the Economist is designed, wittingly or unwittingly, to destabilise, demoralise and degrade Pakistan. The survey concludes: “Pakistan needs judicious support”. Thank you, the Economist, for your “judicious support”.
A.M. HAIDERMOTA
Karachi
ACCORDING to a report in a section of the press daily, Federal Minister of Food, Agriculture and Livestock Sikander Hayat Boson has said: “To strengthen the research systems of Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC), an additional fund of Rs2.8 billion will be provided and the Central Cotton Research Institute (CCRI), Multan, will also be upgraded to the level of an international centre of excellence in cotton research”.
The amount will come from the next year’s PSDP allocations. The news is most welcome as our agricultural research needs to be boosted to come up to the expectations of some of our critics of agricultural research and the users of research in the country.
It is, however, not understood that on the one hand the minister is keen to raise the PCCC’s CCRI, Multan, to the level of an international centre and, on the other hand, he, despite being the president of the Pakistan Central Cotton Committee to which the CCRI, Multan, belongs, was a silent spectator when the PCCC headquarters, which housed PICPT on M.T. Khan Road, Karachi, was recently pulled down to give 27 acres of its land for relocation of the US consulate in its place.
The PCCC had to sacrifice its historical building, which was considered one of Karachi’s heritage. It was like ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’.
Second, the CRI, Sakrand (Nawabshah), Sindh, an offspring of the PCCC like the CCRI, Multan, also expects to be fully equipped and staffed on modern lines to qualify itself at least to be a national cotton research institute in Sindh.
Will the minister extend his generosity to the CRI, Sakrand, as well?
M. SHAFIQUE AHMED
Karachi
I AM an old and sick widow. I need someone to take care of me. My son, Ali Muhammad, a lower division clerk, is posted at the Kamra Cantonment Board for the last three years. It would be of great help to me if he is posted at Hyderabad because there is no other person in my family to look after me.
I had appealed to the president and the prime minister in this regard (reference letter No. 12153/2006 / P-I dated 13th May, 2006 and PM’s Sectt. U.O. No.F.2(1)MSPM/GR-III/06 dated 13th May, 2006, respectively) but have so far not received any encouraging news about the transfer of my son to Hyderabad.
I would request the authorities to look into my plight.
A WIDOWED MOTHER
Hyderabad
You can also send letters to the Editor
Just send your message to the following address: letters@dawn.com
Make sure you include your full name, postal address, e-mail address, and in the case of Pakistan your day-time telephone number.