|
| September 09, 2007 | Sunday | Sha'aban 26, 1428 |
A sorry spectacle
Show Shoaib the door
Isolation of Northern Cyprus
The issue of Musharraf’s two offices
How much the common man’s life is made miserable
CYPRUS’S 265,000 Turkish Cypriots in the island’s north face a unique predicament. The Greek Cypriot administration (‘Republic of Cyprus’) in the south is, unfortunately, treated by the international community as if it represents the entire island. With this muscle, it ensures the isolation of what is known as the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) which exercises full control in the north of the island.The isolation is retarding the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot people. The Greek Cypriots, by virtue of their clout in the United Nations and the European Union, have prevented the world community, with the exception of Turkey, from recognising TRNC. International air and shipping lines are prevented by the Greek Cypriots from using TRNC sea and air ports for trade, commerce and passenger traffic.It goes to the credit of TRNC that it has six full-fledged universities giving quality education to 40,000 students, 90 per cent of whom are foreigners. This is probably the highest ratio of university education to population anywhere in the world; yet the Greek Cypriots are trying to prevent the affiliation between universities in the West and those in the TRNC, though they have not always been successful in their attempt.An example of the extreme isolation imposed on the Turkish Cypriot people by the Greek Cypriot dispensation is seen in the case of an English football team about to play a match against a Turkish Cypriot team in Lefkosa, with the president of the Republic watching the match. Minutes before the kick-off, the Greek Cypriots persuaded the International Football Federation to threaten the English team with expulsion if it played the TRNC team (which had been refused affiliation).
THE beheading of two women accused of ‘immoral’ activities in Bannu has shocked us beyond belief. Apart from the implications this episode has for the safety and esteem of women in our society it also has a frightening dimension — in respect of the war on terror. With Islamic militancy gathering strength in the tribal areas and beyond, the kidnapping and execution of security officials and ‘informers’ by the Taliban no longer shocks people as such incidents previously did. Be it the outcome of faulty government policies, the shaky morale of the armed forces or even the zeal of the militants, such incidents are taken as the natural corollary of a conflict between government forces and armed men wedded to an extremist ideology. But the case of the two women shows that the religious extremists are actively expanding the arena of war to arrogate to themselves the custodianship of public morality as perceived by them. Beside the horror and savagery of the deed itself, one feels rage and revulsion fuelled by frustration.
Unfortunately, the question — ‘how dare they?’ — can only be answered upon close introspection of ourselves as a society that wears religion on its sleeve, regards women as inferior beings and whose ideas of “right” and “wrong” stem not from the basic fundamentals of humanity but from sanctimonious notions of individual and collective morality. Notwithstanding all the talk about democracy that one hears nowadays, it is a pity that there is no expression of public outrage when such horrendous actions come to light. Clothed in the mantle of faith, our leaders have chosen to discard the universal principles of liberty and justice. Instead they have been swamped by orthodox interpretations of faith, used as an instrument of fear and political repression by the religious lobby. It is no wonder that those reared, nurtured — and brutalised — by the champions of a society based on religious injunctions have taken on the role of judge and jury, perceiving with contempt all those who do not share their views.
What is disturbing is that in this bizarre situation the institutions of state have abrogated their responsibilities vis-à-vis the citizens. Even a large section of society which holds women in contempt, has shown no anger. Where are our politicians? Will they shake off their misogynist moorings and chastise those who show utter lack of tolerance or will they act as apologists for the criminals, calling into question the issue of the victims’ ‘morality’? Will any of them condemn the act as a grave violation of the right to life and liberty or will they maintain a stony silence as the public and media debate the trivial question of whether or not the two women were indulging in ‘immoral’ activities? Will the Supreme Court, in keeping with its newfound trend of taking suo motu notice, take note of the crime? Unfortunately, when we talk of creeping Talibanisation in the country, we do not recognise that it is our lack of courage to take a holistic and humanistic view of reality that is leading us into a blind alley, while providing a fertile ground for the seeds of extremism. In other words, we have only ourselves to blame.
IT WAS a very embarrassing, if not mortifying, spectacle to see the Saudi monarch’s special envoy, Prince Maqran bin Abdel Aziz, and the Lebanese leader, Saad Hariri, addressing a televised press conference in Islamabad to enlighten Pakistanis on the legal and moral aspects of the undertaking signed between the Musharraf government and the Sharif brothers in December 2000. What we now have are, on the one hand, the innocuous Supreme Court judgment emphasising the Sharifs’ “inalienable right” to return; and on the other hand, the deal which the Saudi envoy waved at the newsmen. The press conference was obviously held on the urging of a government that seems desperate to pre-empt the Sharifs’ return to Pakistan. The Saudi envoy showed respect for the Supreme Court’s judgment of Aug 23 but at the same time he expected “His Excellency Nawaz Sharif” to honour the undertaking — a point also emphasised by Mr Hariri — because it involved the “Guardian of the Two Holy Places”. The law is on the Sharifs’ side, but there is no doubt their moral position has been undermined. The two Arab envoys left no doubt about how they view the agreement: it is binding on the Sharif family.
This episode places not just the Sharifs but also the country in an embarrassing position. Considering the events of the last few days, Mr Nawaz Sharif will commit political hara-kiri if he now chooses not to return. The Saudi and Lebanese intervention serves to highlight the abject failure of our leaders — whether in government or in opposition — to manage the country’s political problems the way a self-respecting, mature nation does. It seems to have become a pattern of politics in Pakistan to call our foreign friends to pull our chestnuts out of our political fires. Foreign powers are also involved in the government’s other deal — that with Benazir Bhutto. If we had a democratic system in place we would not have needed the services of so many “saviours” to help us tide over our difficulties. We have, to say the least, made a laughing stock of ourselves.
CATS have fewer lives than the chances offered to Shoaib Akhtar to make amends for his indiscretions. His sheer pace and charisma were once an asset to Pakistan cricket, and his individuality a refreshing aberration in a team bogged down in overbearing religiosity. But even his warmest admirers, if he has any left, must now feel that enough is enough. There are no two ways about it: Shoaib Akhtar has to be shown the door — permanently. Irrespective of the provocation, hitting a team member (with a bat no less) is simply inexcusable. It is now abundantly clear that Shoaib comes equipped with a self-destruct button that is always within reach and could be pressed at a moment’s notice. For him to think is to act and the consequences be damned. Regrets expressed on the morning after hold no water whatsoever, for a refusal to grow up is not a valid excuse in any profession. Mohammad Asif, the victim of Shoaib’s assault, is a cocksure individual who can easily rub people the wrong way. Indeed, Asif may well have been baiting him deliberately in connivance with others. But to fall for it and respond with extreme violence was sheer stupidity on Shoaib’s part. He must now pay the price and live with the knowledge — never easy for those who suffer from a sense of persecution — that the ‘enemy’ has won. After the event, Shoaib apologised for his behaviour and insisted that “I am not a bad human being, it’s just that I get angry more often than others.” In that case he should be attending anger-management courses instead of representing his country on the playing field. Pakistan’s loss will probably be the Indian Cricket League’s gain, but so be it. Despite everything, Shoaib Akhtar will be missed. All that talent simply thrown away.
Bitterness between the Greek and Turkish Cypriots has roots in history. In 1878, Britain assumed control of Cyprus to defend the Ottoman Empire in the event of a Russian attack. In 1923, the island was declared a British colony. In 1960, Cyprus became an independent republic with Britain, Greece and Turkey as guarantor states.The 1960 constitution reflected the idea that the will of the state could only occur on a combination of the wills of the two distinct communities i.e. Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot. The constitution was based on the Zurich and London Agreements reached between the two peoples and the guarantor powers, which safeguarded the political equality of both communities. The 1960 constitution specifically provided in clear language that its basic structure could not be amended whether by way of variation, addition or repeal, by either community.Interestingly, Pakistan’s constitutional history played a baneful role in the history of the island. Our infamous decision in the Dosso case based on the doctrine of state necessity was invoked after communal clashes in 1963 and the Turkish Cypriot people were forced to retreat into enclaves covering three per cent of the island. A coup d’etat against Archbishop Makarios instigated by the military junta ruling Greece in 1974 tested Turkey’s patience. The Turkish army intervened to protect the Turkish Cypriot people from 11 years of Greek Cypriot oppression.In 1975, the two parties reached the Third Vienna Agreement on Voluntary Exchange of Population, according to which the Turkish Cypriots in the south moved north and the Greek Cypriots moved south. A de facto partition of the island occurred along a ‘green line’ with the Turkish Cypriots now in control of 37 per cent of the land mass in the north of the island.The difference between the Dosso and Ibrahim cases is that the former legitimised a coup d’etat of a military ruler whereas the latter shattered the basic structure of the constitution, thus reducing the Turkish Cypriots to the status of a minority to be ruled by the Greek Cypriots. However, the Greek high court omitted to note that Dosso had been overturned in 1972 by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the Asma Jilani case.The tragedy of the Turkish Cypriots has lessons for us. Minority opinion in Pakistan extols the confederal scheme of 1946 for British India. Here is an analogy that irrespective of what guarantees are given on a piece of paper, unless there is a spirit of tolerance, the might of the numerically superior community will ultimately swamp the rights of the others.In 1983, the Turkish Cypriots declared the TRNC, which has since then struggled to gain international recognition. It has failed thus far because the EU invited the Greek Cypriots to join in December 2002. An accession treaty was signed in April 2003. This placed the trump card in Greek Cypriot hands to scuttle all attempts towards conflict resolution.Commencing in 2002, a sustained effort was made by then UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to find a solution. The comprehensive Annan Plan was released in November 2002. It was revised five times to meet the objections of both sides. At the final stage, Annan stepped in as arbitrator and in March 2004 presented to both sides a final settlement plan to be placed before the two peoples in a referendum in April 2004. The plan proposed bi-zonality and once again gave the Turkish Cypriots constitutional power in a United Cyprus Republic with a new flag.The plan envisaged give-and-take by both sides. But, the Greek Cypriots, having acquired the seal of legitimacy from the EU and already occupying the seat of the republic in the UN, were in no mood for any ‘give’; the Turkish Cypriots approved the Annan plan by a 65 per cent favourable vote, the Greek Cypriot community rejected it by 76 per cent.What is the solution? The key lies currently with the EU. A fairer and more balanced approach is expected from it. It acted in haste by granting full membership to the Greek Cypriots before a settlement was achieved. Had the EU blocked membership until a settlement was achieved, a more flexible attitude might have been displayed.It is time that the world community and especially the OIC member-states appreciated that unification is no longer possible. The Turkish Cypriots in Cyprus cannot be deprived of their legitimate rights in the community of nations for much longer.Pakistan should activate the question of recognition for the Turkish Cypriots’ right to be represented effectively in institutions and obtain full membership of the OIC. A resolution should be passed urging all member-states to recognise the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.
The writer is a member of the National Assembly.
murbr@isb.paknet.com.pk
Tameer-i-Sindh
THE Election Commission is to announce the date of the presidential election as President Gen Pervez Musharraf’s term draws to a close. The apex court is seized of this contentious issue as well after having admitted Jamaat-i-Islami chief Qazi Hussain Ahmed’s petition for regular hearing. It asked the president’s counsel to advise when the president’s term will come to an end. While legal discussion is adjourned, controversy outside the court is picking up.Pending the court verdict, manoeuvring for the president’s re-election is in its final stages as his allies are poised to get him re-elected in uniform from the existing parliament, although his chances are getting slim. Perhaps that is why the government’s talks with Benazir Bhutto continue against the backdrop of the efforts to get Musharraf re-elected, though without his uniform.Besides political activities at home, countries like the US and the UK, which are spearheading the war on terror, are keen to have Musharraf re-elected for another term in their own interest.A constitutional and legal stratagem can only make Musharraf eligible to hold the office of the president for the second term while remaining the army chief. Some fundamental questions call for an answer. Does the Constitution allow Musharraf to continue for another term or not? If so, then will he have to doff his uniform? As a government employee, he can neither indulge in politics two years before his retirement nor can he contest presidential elections. Since no government employee constitutionally can become president, he, too, can’t hold two offices.Constitutionally, the EC is bound to follow the process for the presidential election after the presidential election has been announced. Any deviation from the Constitution would cast doubts on the process... — (Sept 6)
Awami Awaz
THANKS to the artificial wheat shortage created by the traders, the threat of a price hike looms large over the common man. Before the advent of the holy month of Ramazan the prices of edibles have registered an increase. Analysts hint at more wheat shortages that would see a further surge in prices. Apparently, the traders and the hoarders had the government’s backing which remains a silent spectator.The government itself seems to be instrumental in increasing the price of petrol, electricity and gas that has led to a rise in transport fares and the cost of production. Reports suggest that the government is contemplating a further rise in the tariffs of electricity, gas and petrol.Traders have already increased the sugar prices, and any review of the rates of flour and other commodities by the government would break the back of the common man.The government’s role in the market economy is that of a regulatory body to ensure a balance between supply and demand. What have we had in the last five years of the present regime? The people have raised a hue and cry against the price as the government’s poli-cies have only led to further deprivation of the masses. It is the price hike that is mainly contributing to social decay in the shape of unemployment and poverty in our society. Besides, rising crime, violence and an upward tendency in suicides is also largely due to inflation.Contrary to the ground realities discussed above, the present rulers continue to make claims that they will emerge victorious in the forthcoming general elections on the basis of their performance...— (Sept 6)
––Selected and translated by Sohail Sangi