Sole responsibility?

PRESSURES on Pakistan’s Afghan policy seem to be building up. The gratuitous, “do more” advice continues unabated, while Kabul’s tone has become vitriolic. In fact, President Pervez Musharraf’s press talk on Friday is a fair indication of what the world expects Pakistan to do, what the government is doing, not doing or is not in a position to do. The president’s rather angry talk comes in the wake of American intelligence chief John Negroponte’s remarks about the situation in Afghanistan and the law on the anvil in Congress to link aid to Pakistan to a presidential certificate. The president’s press conference constituted both a defence of his government’s Afghan policy and an admission of “some failures” in guarding and monitoring the 2,400-kilometre-long border used both ways daily by thousands of people, all of whom are not militants. He defended the selective fencing of the border, and perhaps for the first time pointed out the security problems caused by the presence of Afghan refugees in Pakistan.

Two crucial questions emerged from President Musharraf’s press talk. First, Afghan refugees in Pakistan and the monitoring of the Durand Line are not Islamabad’s sole responsibility. Since the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistan has played host to millions of refugees, some of whom went back home after the Soviet Union had pulled out. But the post-Soviet civil war, the harsh nature of Taliban rule, the US attack on Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11, the resurgence of Taliban insurgency and the consequent suffering of the civilian population have led to a continued influx of Afghans into Pakistan. Precisely at this time, there are about three million of them in this country. Must Pakistan alone look after them and, instead of getting thanks, be demonised if some of these camps turn into a safe haven for Afghan-based Taliban? Second, the two-way movement of terrorists cannot be checked by Pakistan alone, and the president was right when he blamed the US-led Nato forces in Afghanistan for having failed to do their part of the job. Nato does not have its heart in the fighting. Under American pressure, Nato governments have slightly increased the troop level, but it is far below the requirement and is in sharp contrast to the 80,000 troops Pakistan has deployed on this side of the border. If, therefore, illegal movement across the Durand Line is to be checked, then those across the border must also do their job. Nato troops, it is very obvious, want to fight and win a war without suffering casualties. Thus, blaming Pakistan is not going to help matters, especially when President Hamid Karzai has admitted that official corruption and the narcotics trade help the Taliban.

From a larger perspective, one is forced to ask whether or not American engagement in Iraq has been a factor in prolonging Afghanistan’s agony. America has already wasted 300 billion dollars on the Iraqi war, and shortly the total of American troops there will reach nearly 150,000 — with no results to show for it. Wouldn’t the insurgency be long over if Washington had spent half that much effort and money on Afghanistan? Pakistan has no doubt made mistakes in tackling the Taliban issue, but does the solution lie in others evading their responsibility and blaming Islamabad for their own failures? Good sense lies in moving away from mud-slinging — which until now had been one-sided — devising a realistic strategy, and developing mechanisms of cooperation between Pakistan and whosoever is in charge of Afghanistan.

Another train accident

PAKISTAN Railways has done it again. PR demonstrated the fallacy of its approach when the Sialkot-bound Allama Iqbal Express derailed near Hyderabad on Friday, leaving 15 passengers injured and bringing 14 train services to a halt on account of blocked tracks. This is the second accident in a week. Last Sunday, 15 people travelling on the roof of the Quetta Express were killed when an electric cable fell on them near Shikarpur. Such accidents have become a routine feature of PR, with 125 train accidents recorded in 2006 (up from 113 in 2005). Of these, derailments are the most common, confirming the wrong approach adopted by policymakers in practically every project in the public sector. The emphasis is on adopting new and glamorous schemes while neglecting the maintenance of the infrastructure which is important for human safety and comfort.

In the last year or so, Pakistan Railways has introduced a number of fast trains, the latest being the Jinnah Express inaugurated in January. In March, yet another product will be introduced. Described as a luxury service — with beauty parlours, dining cars, et al — it is expected to attract more passengers. There is no disputing the government’s plan to encourage railway travel and enhance its revenue earnings. But these fast, luxury services should not be at the cost of human safety. The basic fact that needs to be understood is that the railways infrastructure is badly in need of an overhaul. With the tracks not routinely maintained, the policy of introducing a growing number of fast trains is proving to be dangerous. Last year alone, 80 derailments occurred (26 more than the previous year).

The railways became the Cinderella of the government’s transport policy in 1979 when the NLC was established. Ever since then the practice of negligence has led to a drop in passenger traffic from 143 million in 1979 to 78 million now. Freight has dropped from 11 million tonnes to six million in the same period. A public utility that was once a good revenue earner has been in the red for several years. The government’s effort to revitalise Pakistan Railways is welcome. But rather than using it as a publicity stunt, the railways minister would be better advised to attend to the basics of safety and comfort first.

Horrific honour crimes

ACCORDING to the Aurat Foundation, 38 women were murdered in Sindh last month, out of which 17 were killed in ‘honour’ crimes. This is an appalling disclosure which demands the government’s urgent attention, especially since it has passed legislation that should have curbed the practice of honour-related crimes. It seems that the law has had no impact — partly for lack of its enforcement, or how else does one explain such horrifying crimes taking place with such regularity? If women are not killed for dishonouring their families, they are often raped or gang-raped or they commit suicide because they are being forced into marrying against their will, or they are victims of domestic violence, unemployment or family disputes. The report further states that 12 women were living in shelters out of fear for their lives from their families. Around 26 women had been arrested on various allegations or, worse, in place of their male relatives whom the police could not arrest. Despite a law banning jirgas in the province, there were 15 such tribal meetings held on women-related issues and the verdicts passed were not favourable to women — four women, including young girls, were handed over as compensation to settle conflicts.

These are all abhorrent crimes that society cannot ignore any longer. Community activism must be encouraged, as it is in India, where grassroots leaders are actively involved in galvanising public opinion against social evils. Laws alone cannot bring about the desired change though their strict implementation is crucial. For too long have men got away with committing heinous crimes against women because they know there is nothing to prevent them. Non-governmental organisations have played a vital role in raising awareness but that has not yet had the desired impact as these disturbing figures prove. Society must undergo a change in its attitude towards women if it wants to bring to an end these horrific crimes.

Glamour and glitz for BJP

NO prizes for guessing which of these two questions is more relevant: How silly is Hema Malini? How clever is the BJP? Hema Malini, whose cheeks were once idealised by Laloo Yadav as the ultimate metaphor for the perfect surface, was not made a member of parliament by the BJP because of her exceptional IQ.

Since we are in the market for small mercies, let us merely note with approval that Hema Malini has not fallen into the trap, inhabited by a few of her ilk, of hiding her intellectual insecurity by arranging a doctorate so that she could write Dr Hema Malini on her visiting card. Hema was a successful actor, if not a good one; it is possible that if she had been a good one, she might not have been successful. Bollywood has its own laws of demand and supply.

I have no problem whatsoever with film stars joining politics. Politics is a church of democracy in which everyone must be welcome. But the right to membership does not qualify you to be pastor. Some former actors make good pastors. M.G. Ramachandran in Tamil Nadu and N.T. Rama Rao in Andhra Pradesh were outstanding, indeed far better in public life than on the public screen.

The great veteran M. Karunanidhi has worked closely with the industry, and of course his bete noire Jayalalitha has also proved that you can be a competent leader of your state after a career in films. I suspect that if Shatrughan Sinha ever sees his dream turn into reality and becomes chief minister of Bihar, he won't be that bad either.

Amitabh Bachchan is a remarkably mature and intelligent person, without fusspot sentimentality and with genuine concern for the deprived; with his communication skills he would have been a magnetic leader if he had remained in politics. However, I cannot see Hema Malini as a future Ahalyabai, and her husband Dharmendra might not quite make the grade as another Rana of Mewar. As for someone like Govinda, he still doesn't look as if he quite knows what he is doing.Hema Malini is in the Rajya Sabha because Indian democracy wants its “Page 3”. The main political parties, including Congress and BJP, have decided that they could do with a few cheerleaders whose primary role is that of a magnet. Their function is to draw crowds since regular politicians can't raise more than a yawn. I suppose there is nothing more dispiriting for a candidate than to bellow into thin air. With Hema Malini around, the candidate can be certain that there will be a few people around to check the quality of face or perhaps surface.

While therefore it may be sensible to put a Hema Malini on display at election time, it is not so wise to let her open her mouth. There has traditionally been a place, at rallies, for entertainers, including poets, who are hired to ease the restlessness of crowds waiting for a leader to arrive. I suppose it would be too much to ask Hema Malini to do the bharatnatyam at every political rally, but someone could put together an inoffensive standard patter-page. The temptation to go off and say something honest is best resisted.

That of course is the only problem with Hema Malini's now famous advice to "outsiders" that if they can't succeed in Mumbai they should return to their villages. She was honest where a more practised political professional might have dissimulated, using the craft of phraseology to suggest to his audience that while his heart lay in thinly-veiled racism, his lips would remain sealed because there were nasty reporters lurking around. Hema Malini has only repeated what the Shiv Sena has been saying since it became a force in Maharashtra.

The irony of course is lost on Hema Malini. Shiv Sena started life by telling South Indians that they were not sons of Mumbai's soil. Hema probably did not pay attention then; she was busy listening to a carefree Rajesh Khanna wonder what tomorrow would bring: "Zindagi ik safar hai suhana, yahan kal kya ho kisne jaana". Tomorrow has arrived, and look what it's brought, a place on the Shiv Sena-BJP dais.

By her own yardstick, Hema and her husband Dharmendra, native of Punjab, are safe. They succeeded so they don't have to return to their village. It's all those slumdinger Bhaiyyas and Biharis, the Olivers who keep asking for more, who need a return ticket.

A couple of weeks ago a few gunmen from a group called ULFA persuaded Biharis in Assam to find their way to railway platforms, but I have it on the best authority that Hema Malini has no wish to be that insistent.

Fog-lifters have to clear up what cheerleaders leave in their wake. A clarification has been issued which, in the classic tradition of all clarifications, begins by blaming that serpent in democracy's garden of Eden, the media. All those reporters, it is actually they who should be sent home first.

Poor, innocent, sinless Hema was at some function where reporters, instead of being good little boys and girls and watching the show, kept pestering her with questions. Moreover, she was unable to hear the questions clearly, but being the fabulous sport that she is, went ahead and answered questions that she could not hear. "I replied in a humorous way," she explained through her personal fog-lifter, a certain M.A. Mehta, "merely to keep them away".

That's it, then. She did not want to keep North Indians away from Mumbai, she wanted to keep reporters away from Hema Malini. That is a far more honourable objective. If an election were held on that issue, I daresay the North Indians of Mumbai would give Hema their unanimous support, particularly since she noted that she had the highest respect for North Indians. Evidence? She had acted in a Bhojpuri film once! And just the other day she danced at the Kumbh Mela in Allahabad. What more could a reasonable Bhaiyya want from a Rajya Sabha member?

Ms Malini may of course have been thinking of success as the criterion for eligibility in Mumbai, rather than race. In which case, she has understood her city wrong. Mumbai is a city of aspiration, not success. In Ms Malini's old profession, I doubt if even one per cent succeed. That does not prevent the other 99 per cent plus from aspiring.

The success of Mumbai lies precisely in the fact that it is full of failures. You can only fail if you try, and everyone comes to Mumbai only to give his and her destiny a chance. There is no other city in India with the range of opportunity that Mumbai provides, which is why so many hearts break on its hard, perhaps even harsh, pavements. Mumbai makes fortunes with as little sentiment as it says no. It is easier to keep Mumbai away from the rest of India, Hemaji, than to keep the rest of India away from Mumbai.

There was one sentence of genuine clarity in the statement issued in Hema Malini's name: she had no authority to advise North Indians to leave Mumbai, she said. Spot on. India is a free country of free people, and the Indian's right to seek one's future in any part of his country is an unambiguous right. Hema Malini could do us all a very important service if she could persuade everyone on the Shiv Sena-BJP platform to accept this.

The BJP, which sent the actress to parliament, claims to be a national party and acts like a regional one. When it makes up its mind, it should send a circular to those on its “Page 3” long-list.

The writer is editor-in-chief of The Asian Age, New Delhi.

Inheritance tax

AMERICA’S estate duty was once seen as a tax on the lucky children of the rich. Yet when conservatives rebranded it a penalty on dying, they profoundly altered attitudes, and -- despite the best efforts of more enlightened plutocrats, such as Warren Buffett -- the tax has now been repealed. The same trick is being tried in Britain.

A new report on inheritance tax has led to headlines decrying the "death tax trap". The levy's £3.6bn take, though, is not small beans that could be readily recouped: it is enough, for instance, to pay for the fire brigade with a billion to spare. The burden it imposes can be overstated, as it certainly was in the press. The reality is that fewer than one in 10 deaths generate any tax bill at all. The metropolitan elite forgets too quickly that in most of Britain family homes do not fetch what they can in London, and that many people own no house at all. Even for most of those who do pay, the £285,000 allowance exempts the bulk of the estate, so the typical total charge is less than half the headline 40 per cent.

But the tax is more than useful and affordable -- it serves a crucial principle, by claiming for the community a share of fortune that is enjoyed only by fluke of birth. When the wealth gap has widened to a chasm, this task is more, not less, essential. Sure, big money can squeeze through the loopholes, and the levy can hit big families hard. Yet such quibbles mean not that inheritance tax should be ditched, but that it should be reformed so its essential job can be more effectively done.

— The Guardian, London