|
| November 14, 2006 | Tuesday | Shawwal 21, 1427 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
The wrong approach
Polio is still here
Musharraf’s magnum opus
PRESIDENT Musharraf’s magnum opus In the Line of Fire is essentially an exercise in megalomania: he projects himself as the greatest soldier, politician, administrator and, in fact, the best thing that has ever happened to Pakistan. This may be justified on the grounds that everyone is free to hold any opinion and on the need for President Musharraf to impress the Americans with his ability and indispensability. But his countrymen and those who know better will find the book full of unsustainable claims and assertions.
THE pressure for a withdrawal now seems to have only added to the confusion in the Bush administration’s Iraq policy. All that President George Bush said after firing Mr Donald Rumsfeld was that the new defence secretary would be “an agent of change” and that a shift in his Iraq policy was “in the works”. But he made it clear that he was not going to give a withdrawal timetable. On Sunday, the White House spokesman said the Bush administration would not be “receptive” to the idea of a withdrawal timetable and averred that America’s objective was “victory in Iraq”. What constitutes victory in Iraq is not clear. In his weekly radio broadcast, President Bush said that Iraq was “the central front” in the war on terror and acknowledged that the situation had contributed to the Republican reverses in the mid-term polls earlier this month. But beyond saying that he was open to ideas by Democrats he gave no indication of how precisely he plans to achieve victory before ordering a pullout.
Today, more than three years after the end of the Baathist regime, the US-led forces have failed to give Iraq peace and democracy which was the purported aim of the March 2003 invasion. Such is the level of violence and so heavy is the daily death toll that the Iraqi authorities and international agencies have no idea of the total number of civilians killed. Last week, the Iraqi health minister put the number at 150,000, while an American think-tank estimated that the civilian death toll could be as high as 600,000. The militants, who are utterly merciless and do not care how many innocent people they kill, have made one point emphatically clear: the US-backed government of Mr Nuri al-Maliki is a mute spectator to the slaughter that is going on and does not enjoy the confidence of the Iraqi people, even though it is an elected government. A continuation of the status quo will merely mean prolonging the agony of the Iraqi people, and increasing the American casualty toll, which is nearing 3,000 dead.
Now the Democrats want a withdrawal within months. Welcome as this idea is, it is not workable. A quick withdrawal by the US-led forces will mean a quick collapse of the Maliki government. This in turn will create a vacuum which no party or group in Iraq is capable of filling, and the result would be, as the White House spokesman said, “a true disaster for the Iraqi people”. What then is the way out? The Bush administration has to blame itself if it finds its Iraq policy in a cul-de-sac. If it quickly withdraws, the result will be “a true disaster”; if it prolongs its stay, the anarchy will continue and more Americans will die, further reducing the Republican presidential candidate’s chances in 2008. It is a difficult, self-created problem, and perhaps Washington could consider associating the UN with the Iraqi situation in a way that a phased withdrawal of American troops coincides with the induction of UN peacekeepers. Even this is a doubtful proposition, for the militants have discovered their strength, and it is highly unlikely that they will cooperate. All this confronts Iraq with an uncertain future, full of violence and the possible dismemberment of the country. The invasion has achieved nothing, and it has divided America as never before since the Vietnam war.
THE opposition’s decision to boycott the meeting of the parliamentary subcommittee on Balochistan dealing with the issue of provincial autonomy points to a confrontationist approach. It will only make matters more difficult to resolve if solutions to problems cannot be found through a dialogue. The opposition’s contention that the government is “playing politics” and was never serious about the parliamentary committees it has set up is quite valid. The Wasim Sajjad subcommittee that was set up in 2004 to look into the autonomy issue met on Saturday after more than a year. The other subcommittee on Balochistan headed by Mushahid Husain managed to produce a report but it was never laid before the house and its recommendations have not been implemented. But all said and done, it is undeniable that a dialogue through parliamentary processes is the only option available to the opposition to get the government to resolve some of the tricky problems facing the country today.
The fact is that Balochistan would not have emerged as a key problem had the parties representing various sides of the political spectrum managed to reach a consensus on provincial autonomy earlier. Of course, the initiative was for the government to take. But without a dialogue with various provinces, the centre could at best impose a solution of its own choosing. That would hardly be a solution for in such matters a national consensus is essential for it to be acceptable. The formula that the Wasim Sajjad subcommittee is working on has not been disclosed. One member did hold out the assurance that it would transfer maximum financial, taxation and administrative powers to the provinces. But without an input from the opposition, the formula that may emerge will be quite one-sided. Besides, boycott as a form of protest defeats the cause of the opposition because it forfeits the opportunity it has to make its point of view known and influence the course of this debate. The issue of provincial autonomy has been hanging fire for decades. Now that the government has been compelled to look into it because of the troubles in Balochistan, the opposition must have the wisdom to know where to draw the line in pursuing a confrontationist strategy.
THE addition of four new cases of polio to the existing tally shows that health authorities in the country are once again slipping up. True, the incidence of the crippling disease has been drastically reduced over the years, thanks to comprehensive efforts to vaccinate every child in the country. But it is also a fact that Pakistan, along with Nigeria, India and Afghanistan, has missed the 2005 WHO deadline for full eradication. There is a need to investigate why, despite numerous anti-polio rounds, new cases of the disease keep cropping up. While there may be several factors responsible for this, one of the more significant ones is poor accessibility to remote areas. According to a recent WHO report, more than 60 localities in the NWFP and Fata were not covered by a routine anti-polio drive in September. Considering that polio is an easily transmissible disease, such a lapse cannot be overlooked. The other factors relate to poor storage conditions for the vaccine, the reluctance of parents to allow their children to be vaccinated and other illnesses in them that can render the vaccine ineffective.
At this point, the national health authorities would do well to undertake a comprehensive study examining why the current anti-polio strategy is not yielding the results that it has in several other countries that have been declared polio-free. Corrective measures can only be taken when the problems have been properly identified. As of now, there is no clear picture of why polio has not been fully eradicated. While the government should actively keep up its anti-polio awareness drive through the media, it would also do well to engage village elders in its campaign in order to convince families in remote areas that immunisation is the best protection from the disease.
For instance, page 60: “Bhutto ventured into his first election... The ballot was grossly rigged.” In 1977, only 15 to 20 cases of rigging took place in the whole country where some rigging takes place in every election. Anyhow Bhutto conceded the demand for fresh elections, but he was nevertheless ousted from power and hanged. In contrast, four elections have been held by President Musharraf all of which have been so heavily and defiantly rigged that even President George Bush, during his very surreptitious visit to Pakistan, had to caution that the next elections must be free and fair. Not only that, but President Musharraf has publicly admitted and now recorded in his book (page 168) that this referendum was rigged. He, however, did not have a fresh referendum and remains in power while no one was hanged.
Page 65: “First, whenever the army gets involved with martial law it gets distracted from its vital military duties... Second, when we superimpose martial law and place the military over the civilian government the latter ceases functioning. When martial law is later lifted the civilian functionaries remain ineffective.”
If so, why then is he, with his takeover and seven-year rule in uniform, distracting the military and destroying the machinery and structure of the state? It is no good saying there is no martial law because when a general violates the Constitution by imposing himself as head of the state and when military officers predominate not only in the civil service but also in the government, the law of the land becomes martial law.
Page 136: “Pakistan was built as a refuge and a homeland for Muslims of India” This is not correct. There is no provision for refugees in the concept of Pakistan. In fact, there is the Liaquat-Nehru Pact of 1950, which specifically bans immigration from both sides. It cannot be denied that Pakistan was created for and by the Sindhis, Baloch, Pashtuns, Punjabis and Bengalis who contributed their wealth, rights and powers, people, and, above all, their lands, without which the country could not come into existence.
Page 149: “I set myself a seven-point agenda......1. Rebuild national confidence and morale. 2. Strengthen the federation, remove interprovincial disharmony. 3. Revive the economy and restore investors’ confidence. 4. Ensure law and order and dispense speedy justice. 5. Depoliticise state institutions. 6. Devolve power to the grassroots. 7. Ensure swift accountability across the board.”
This agenda was clearly abandoned soon after its announcement and replaced by a scheme just to stay on in power as long as possible by any means. Never before has the national confidence and morale sunk so low and the people felt so abandoned and victimised. The federation is at is weakest and provincial disharmony at its strongest, as now admitted by the president in his TV interview on October 22, 2006. So much so that the government is compelled to accept the demand for conceding more power to the provinces. Such a bill moved by the PPP in the National Assembly is being fully sponsored by the government which cannot treat this demand as treason and sedition any more.
The revival of the economy remains an empty boast with poverty, unemployment, and prices at their highest, a $12 billion trade deficit, an even larger current account imbalance and a foreign debt that at $37 billion is at its peak. There is no foreign investment except through the purchase of nationalised industries.
Lawlessness is totally out of control and no one is safe, not even the president, the prime minister or the corps commanders. The law enforcement apparatus has become useless and only a means of torture for the helpless citizens. This is not surprising as notorious criminals occupy high governmental posts. The promise of speedy justice has gone into reverse gear and the complainant regrets the day he was born while the defendant ignores the proceedings.
There is no justice and cases go on forever. State institutions have been destroyed through extreme politicisation in order to appease government supporters. In Sindh, districts have been converted into constituencies for MQM and PML (Q) candidates regardless of their geographical and administrative unsuitability. Devolution is a total fraud in which powers of the provincial governments have been taken away and given to district governments. These are now directly linked to the centre thereby increasing its powers. It is not devolution unless it starts from Islamabad.
Accountability is the cruellest joke of all. Corruption is now a part of our culture. How could it be less when those serving prison sentences for corruption, or under trial or absconding from such cases, have been made ministers? In the TV interview cited above, the president shockingly declared that anti-corruption measures harmed the economy and therefore they had to be curbed. In such reckoning you cannot have a strong economy without massive corruption.
This is an insult to countries like Switzerland and Sweden which have booming economies and no corruption. The Steel Mill and oil price scandals, directly implicating the prime minister, are an international disgrace and no help to the economy.
Page 151: “I needed an organisation — a think tank — to research and recommend reforms ... I felt that Lt General Tanvir Naqvi (retired) filled the bill eminently. He wrote the Local Government Ordinance... It is to General Naqvi’s credit that he produced a new Police Ordinance 2002.”
These two reforms are the only concrete and tangible steps taken by this government in seven years and both are an absolute disaster. As a result, not only are corruption and incompetence more rampant but the infrastructure of development, repair and maintenance has collapsed. Cities, towns and villages have become dirty water pools and garbage dumps, where municipal services are practically non-existent. This is so despite the fact that the district administration has been expanded at double the cost.
There is also much bickering and conflict between bureaucrats and nazims who are not only after money but unfit for the job, being the product of completely rigged elections. The only thing that has been gained is paid support for the government at the district level. Parallel police branches to deal with the same offence, set up under the new ordinance, have apart from increasing corruption, incompetence and costs, reduced crime detection to almost zero. These two reforms, instead of meeting the urgent need to streamline and simplify procedures, have complicated them to such an extent that no solutions are forthcoming for the already harassed citizens.
Page 334-4: “If you want democracy then you must also be responsible enough to vote for the right people. If you don’t, then don’t bellyache about the poor quality of parliamentarians and ministers.” The bellyache is in fact about the people’s vote not being decisive. It is superseded by the cheating that goes on in preparation for and during the polls.
Apart from the confession of rigging by the president, there is the prime minister’s election from the darkest constituency — Thar desert and remote Attock — where no one knew of his existence, and even tried to blow him up. Nevertheless, he polled far more votes than the sons of the soil who vacated their seats for him. This is testimony to massive rigging which cannot be concealed. It is not the people who elect but the SHOs, polling officers, presiding officers and returning officers, who select government candidates.
Shortage of space prevents a more detailed analysis of the 174 pages that are taken up in the book by the claim that the terrorist presence and activities in Pakistan have been severely curtailed and that Al Qaeda and the Taliban have been crushed. No one accepts this while our immediate neighbours, India and Afghanistan — and even the Americans — continue to accuse us of harbouring terrorists. On Oct 21, 2006, explosions in Peshawar killed seven and injured 41 people while, despite the truce in Waziristan, a military outpost has been attacked and two soldiers lost their lives.
As if all this were not enough, a madressah in Bajaur has been targeted by bombs killing 80 students. The government boasts of performing this misdeed, although it is generally believed to have been done by the Americans. It is also reported that the Taliban have now set up their own government in Waziristan, while killing and sabotage are daily occurrences in Balochistan. The truth is that by launching a crusade against Muslims George Bush has not only placed his own country in jeopardy but destroyed the peace and tranquillity of the world. The Pakistan government by joining this conflict has turned its own country into a battlefield.
Similarly, President Musharraf has been at pains, throughout his book, to tell the world how he has made rivers of milk and honey flow in this land, but on the very last page he gives a long list of all the major problems that still remain to be solved despite his seven-year rule. Thus almost every claim made in the preceding 334 pages stands trashed by his own testimony.
The writer is chairman, Sindh National Front.