Bridge collapse & more

IT would be a mistake to see Saturday’s collapse of the Shershah bridge on the Northern Bypass in Karachi just as a tragic event which killed nine people. The collapse brings to light many issues that need to be addressed, from accountability to corruption to the need for a city to have a master plan. The National Highway Authority supervised the project that was conducted by the National Logistics Cell (whose sudden foray into development work is hard to understand) and a private foreign firm did some consultancy work. Everyone is keen to punish the responsible but no one is eager to take responsibility for it. The communications minister on Saturday said that his ministry detected a fault in the bridge’s design, reported it and was assured that the matter had been handled. Meanwhile the chairman of the National Disaster Management Cell on Sunday seemed to place the blame on the private consultancy firm. The NHA said that the bridge had been cleared for traffic after being carefully observed. Everyone involved in the project bears varying degrees of responsibility for the incident — but the buck has to stop somewhere. Who will decide where?

So far, an inquiry has been ordered, a few people at NHA suspended and a few names even placed on the ECL. This shows a desire to ascertain the truth but will it be followed through? The key lies in appointing a truly impartial inquiry committee which consists of engineers and other technically qualified people as well as town planners and administrators. Only those detached from the issue can produce an objective analysis of what went wrong and hold those responsible for it. And it is crucial that the accountable are identified and held accountable for their gross errors of judgment and negligence.

It is perplexing why bridges built decades ago still stand strong today while a bridge on the Northern Bypass could not survive a few months. This raises the question, why are organisations being awarded projects they may not be cut out for? It is also a reminder of the futility of carrying out development projects without having a master plan in place. It is criminal that a city like Karachi still doesn’t have a master plan yet roads and expressways are being dug up left, right and centre with no consideration given to the impact they will have on citizens or the environment. It is time to step back, take stock of the situation and avert further disasters from taking place.

Provoking US… to what end?

ONE does not quite know what to make of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s boast that an important nuclear target had been met and that Iran has now put into operation 3,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium. What makes his claim questionable is the recent report of the International Atomic Energy Agency that indicates that Iran is far from this goal. If this is the case, his words simply underscore his desire to maintain a defiant posture vis-à-vis the US and use a strategy of brinkmanship. Unfortunately, Mr Ahmadinejad has yet to realise that the consequences of such words, and indeed actions if his claim on the number of centrifuges is true, will only pose more problems for his isolated country. Iran is already under UN sanctions and the Security Council wants more penalties if Tehran does not halt uranium enrichment. It would also be unwise to discount the threat of a strike against Iran’s nuclear assets by the US (or Israel), which has lately beefed up its military presence in the Gulf. President Ahmadinejad may be a deeply devout individual who believes that Iran is invincible against US designs because of divine protection for “those who walk in the path of righteousness”. But his religious musings will fail to cut ice with even the more orthodox Muslim governments, especially when accompanied by his conviction of the impossibility of a US attack based on his ‘engineering calculations and tabulations’. This kind of talk reflects a very uninformed and naïve view.

Practical considerations must be taken into account. Iran stands to lose clout in Iraq, after the suspension of the Mahdi militia’s activities by its leader, and may be

in danger of losing its political trump card. Moreover, Russia, that is building the Bushehr reactor in Iran, has indicated that it wants more reassurances from Iran on its atomic programme. The US, that had previously toned down its rhetoric on a possible strike against Iran, is once again focusing on Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and warning of a “nuclear holocaust”. In fact, reports claim that US plans are in the making not merely to eliminate atomic targets inside Iran but to destroy the entire military structure. There is no doubt that under the NPT, Iran has every right to work on generating civilian nuclear energy. But given the current atmosphere of hostility, it might be better to go slow on these attempts and, instead, take measures to allay the suspicions of far more powerful countries on an issue of extreme sensitivity.

Against all odds

THE recent kidnapping of South Korean aid workers in Afghanistan highlights the enormous risks faced by those delivering humanitarian assistance in a strife-torn and increasingly polarised world. Although 21 abductees were released unharmed — at least physically — two were shot dead early on in the hostage crisis which began on July 19. The South Korean mission was doubly at risk in a country that is highly dangerous by any standard, for foreigners as well as locals. Since Seoul has some 200 troops stationed in Afghanistan, civilians from South Korea are identified with the enemy by the Taliban and their supporters. Moreover, the group comprised aid workers from a South Korean church, leading to accusations that it was on a proselytising mission in an Islamic country. Though the charge remains unsubstantiated, it underscores a growing problem confronting aid workers in conflict zones across the world. According to a Reuters report, many are accused of bias and of pursuing a hidden agenda in the garb of charity. In Ethiopia, Sudan and Sri Lanka, governments believe they are siding with insurgents. Meanwhile in Afghanistan and Iraq, where few relief organisations now dare to venture, western aid workers are seen as symbols of the US-led coalition forces. It is estimated that at least 85 aid workers were killed worldwide in 2006. While this loss of life is tragic, the biggest losers are the millions who desperately need help but remain cut off because aid workers have either been ordered out or are afraid to travel to insecure areas.

Pakistan too is no stranger to violence against welfare organisations. On July 10, as the Lal Masjid showdown reached its climax, armed villagers attacked the offices of the French Red Cross and Care International in Battagram in the NWFP. No aid worker was hurt as the premises had been vacated as a precaution, but the tented French Red Cross facility was completely gutted and relief supplies were looted. Both organisations had been assisting the survivors of the October 2005 earthquake. Not for the first time, those who were selflessly helping the needy became the target of ill-defined ‘anti-West’ sentiment. Local NGOs working in the Frontier have also been threatened and sometimes attacked on the grounds that they are propagating ‘western’ values, such as family planning, education for girls and self-employment opportunities for women. Sadly there is little room for optimism. Things are only becoming worse, not better, and no protection is forthcoming from the authorities.

Clues in candlelight

THE decisive moment in Indian politics comes not when leaders believe that they have convinced the electorate but when they are certain that they have convinced themselves. The system is then informed: members of parliament, party officials, and whatever is left of the structure down the scale.

If you want to know when a general election is likely to be announced, check the faces inside parliament. If the leaders look buoyant and the MPs glum, you know an election cannot be too far away.

Any half-decent Sherlock Holmes could have offered a reasonable guess on the date of the next general election. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has strewn his public utterances with clues. It is obvious that, although a man of laconic demeanour, he cannot resist a riposte.

When CPI-M general secretary Prakash Karat indulged in the metaphor of a nuclear winter, Dr Singh asked whether spring could be far behind. It seems that a spring general election is about to be sprung.

While Pranab Mukherjee was defending the “mechanism” set up to calm nuclear nerves between the Congress and the Left, and implicitly purchase amity for another year, Priya Ranjan Das Munshi, who as information minister is also reasonably well-informed, sabotaged peace prospects by saying that talks with IAEA and the Nuclear Suppliers Group had not been cancelled. It only remained for the dates to be finalised.

This date, doubtless, will be finalised the moment the present session of parliament gets over on Sept 14. An Indian team will be in Vienna as part of routine discussions with IAEA. They might not be required to return to India, and could take up discussions on the Indo-US nuclear deal. The Left would then be welcome to do what it liked. Or didn’t like.Here is an even more revealing clue. Minorities minister A.R. Antulay was pulled out from the woodwork this week to announce a “follow-up” to the Sachar Committee recommendations for Muslims. When Congress throws sops in the general direction of Muslims, can elections be far behind?

Sometimes I feel that the ruling class must consider Muslims to be the biggest idiots in India. In 2006, Dr Manmohan Singh, possibly moved by the Sachar Committee report on the abject plight of Indian Muslims, promised something of an extraordinary multiple rise in the budgetary expenditure for their welfare.

When his budget appeared in 2007, the allocation for minorities had actually been slashed. The finance minister apparently forgot to read the prime minister’s instructions. The prime minister of course forgot to do anything about it. Now Antulay, who was given a ministry without an office, has announced a few more committees.

They must also believe that every Muslim is illiterate, and does not know the difference between a guideline and a law or an order. The government has sent “guidelines” that Muslims should be given more jobs in the bureaucracy. These are not orders, just guidelines. I can visualise every secretary of every ministry, his visage flush with the excitement of a new purpose, getting into office on Monday and ordering the immediate hiring of millions of unemployed Muslim youth. It is one thing if they cannot give jobs; why twist the knife with jokes? Why does Shelley’s line about the desire of a moth for the flame keep coming back to me?

India is in the throes of a violent fever. You can see it shivering everywhere. There is a bus accident in Agra and the young turn to stones and arson. A Dalit dies in Haryana, and the community is out on the streets. Caste wars surface only sometimes, but the turbulence is a permanent stream just under the surface. Muslims are restless and angry, imbued with a sense of betrayal as yet another government they helped elect has given them committee reports rather than justice.

The poor, of all regions, faiths, castes, economic denominations, want economic and social justice; they want life and sustenance, and if they do not get it they will make their voice heard, and their anger evident. Whenever they ask a question, they are told by the government to wait till 2020 for an answer. They are not looking at 2020. They are looking at deprivation and death. There is no 2020 for the farmers who have committed suicide. There is no 2020 for vegetable vendors and the egg suppliers who see their only form of income being swallowed by a retail giant.

A policy for 2020 can work only if sustained by immediate programmes for those who are being dispossessed on the way to El Dorado. A limited dole is not a policy, particularly when it is punctured by corruption.

The nuclear deal with the United States will be an issue in the next general elections, but it will not be the only debate. Campaign season is question time, so the questions that have not yet been articulated will rise to the top of the debate.

One can understand, for instance, the family silver being hocked to protect or expand India’s military nuclear programme, but why get into an embrace as demanding, one-sided and restrictive as that detailed in the Hyde Act for civilian nuclear energy? We have enough fuel for our military purposes. This nuclear deal was not part of the Congress manifesto in the last elections.

When the last civilian energy policy of the country was announced, a document which was the sum of collective effort, there was no hint that nuclear power was to become so crucial to India’s energy requirements. From which bottle did this genie suddenly materialise?

America doesn’t need either the Hyde Act, or anyone else’s technology to do so. As this column has argued before, it would be a very foolish country that would prefer hostility with America, but the fundamental requirement of friendship is equality.

Subservience is not an equitable or sustainable long-term relationship. How cost-effective is nuclear energy? There is never a direct, or even an indirect, answer from the government to this question. Can those at the bottom of the pile afford this energy, or do they need more hydro power? Water is one natural resource that is not going to disappear, for if it does there will be nothing left to protect.

The basic question before the nation is actually a fairly simple one: is the future of India linked to every Indian? Or is Dream India the destiny of only some Indians? Has Jawaharlal Nehru’s tryst with destiny been converted from a national challenge into a self-satisfied statistic?

Shelley’s flame drew the fluttering moth. Ghalib’s flame, methinks, defines the vote. Shama har rang main jalti hai sahar hone tak. The flame sparkles in every colour until dawn. What comes at dawn when another multi-dimensional electoral candle is exhausted? The clarity of sunlight, I hope.

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

Turkey’s democratic choice

THE election of Abdullah Gul, an observant Muslim, to the Turkish presidency is a victory for democracy. The military, which has a habit of defending Turkish secularism at the expense of Turkish democracy, tried to block his candidacy last spring. Rather than bow to the generals, the government took the issue to the people, who delivered Gul’s party a mandate in July’s parliamentary elections, smoothing the way for lawmakers to overwhelmingly approve Gul for the presidency.

Though nearly all of Turkey’s 70 million people identify themselves as Muslim, the Turkish constitution calls for strict secularity in public life. Over time, however, it led to the entrenchment of a secular ruling elite and the exclusion of more openly devout Muslims. In recent years, that observant group, which also accounts for much of the Turkish middle class, has fought back at the ballot box and scored some impressive victories.

Secular Turks have been understandably anxious about the ascendancy of Gul’s Justice and Development Party, which has Islamist roots. The party now holds all the top offices in government. Gul himself has attracted a great deal of attention because his wife wears the Muslim headscarf, a visceral affront to some secularists.

They fear that religion may creep into government and then into their own lives, encroaching on precious freedoms such as women’s rights. Gul and his party have pledged to maintain a secular government, and their five-year record in power so far under Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a period of economic growth and legal reforms that have brought Turkey closer to joining the European Union, suggests that they will keep their word. — (Aug 31)

Brutal Kremlin

Russia’s implementation of the 2006 legislation on non-governmental organisations is a threat to fundamental freedoms and is forcing the closure of numerous civil society organisations. President Vladimir Putin is methodical. The regime he has installed — known sometimes as “controlled democracy” or “dictatorship of law” — is being used systematically to implement his strategy of absolute control of the government. To ensure that only NGOs that depend on the government survive, the Russian president is using an age-old formula: presenting Russia as a nation besieged by enemies.

Mr Putin is convinced that if they are not put under surveillance, NGOs would benefit from funds provided by foreign secret service agencies whose sole objective is to weaken Russia and to meddle in the country’s internal affairs. This tightening of the screws is taking place as Mr Putin heads for the end of his mandate, set for March 2008.

The tougher approach to NGOs is taking place at a time when the official investigation into the assassination of Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaïa, killed in Moscow almost a year ago, has resulted in an outcome apparently aimed at clearing the Russian authorities of any suspicion.

Nicolas Sarkozy criticised Russia in his speech on August 27 by accusing the country of being “slightly brutal” in using its oil and gas reserves to make a mark on the international stage. After the softer approach taken by Jacques Chirac, this certainly heralds a tougher French attitude towards Mr Putin. Perhaps it is no coincidence that Mr Sarkozy’s criticism coincides with Moscow’s decision to present its own candidate as head of the International Monetary Fund instead of backing Frenchman Dominique Strauss-Kahn. — (Sept 1)—Selected and edited by Shadaba Islam