Gender inequality in education

THE ILO’s finding that the illiteracy rate among adult Pakistani women is over 25 percentage points higher than that of the adult male population is not really surprising. Statistics show that gender inequality in Pakistan is a given fact — be it in health, education, employment or any other area of national life. Unfortunately, this has been known for a long time, but no concerted efforts have been made to address this concern. Primarily because ours is a patriarchal society, there is an ingrained perception of women being naturally inferior in status to men. To be sure, gender-sensitive policies are officially claimed to be the guiding principle — they are enshrined in the millennium development goals which the government has signed. But moves to enhance women’s reproductive health facilities, ensure their political empowerment in the assemblies, and to increase the enrolment of girls in schools do not go far enough. They have helped only in a small way to decrease the socio-economic gap between the two sexes.

As long as women and girls are not accepted as individuals in their own right, and are seen merely as wives, mothers and daughters, and as long as laws and traditions continue to discriminate against them, there is little chance of their catching up with the men. It is this non-acceptance of women as equal beings that has permeated all walks of life, as in the case of education. However, in this sector, things could be looking up slightly for the female population, not so much because there is greater awareness of its right to be part of the mainstream as the need to harness its economic potential that can be augmented by proper schooling. For instance, parents in many rural areas today are no longer averse to sending their daughters to school. Many years ago this would have been unthinkable for cultural constraints. Now that attitudes are changing, it is a pity that the government has not capitalised on that. Quite often girls are not being educated due to the inaccessibility of schools. Which parent would want to send their daughter to a remote school exposing her to the dangers that lurk in the way? In other cases, poor toilet facilities at school keep the girls from attending.

Unfortunately, these drawbacks have not led parents to demand strongly enough that better educational facilities nearer their homes be provided to their children. This betrays a general lack of awareness of education being the basic right of every child. Moreover, despite the growing realisation of the obvious advantages of education, pockets of deep conservatism still exist around the country, more specifically in the NWFP and Balochistan. In the latter case, the stronghold of the feudal system, with all its attendant evils, has made education a pipedream — especially so for women. In this province, the literacy rate of the female population is a mere 19 per cent, much below the national average. It is keeping this picture in mind that the government must set about improving educational facilities for girls. However, such an action would only be cosmetic unless accompanied by a strong effort to change existing mindsets that currently see women as unequal to men.

The cynic and the critic

THE relationship between a government and the media is a fair indication of the state of freedom available to the citizens of a given country. The ties between this administration and the media reached its nadir in March during the lawyers’ protest against the anti-CJ reference when the police vandalised some media offices. Later came the Pemra Amendment Ordinance that sought to impose some checks on the electronic media. Since then the situation has improved, but one must guard again a relapse. Laying the foundation stone of the National Press Club in Islamabad on Thursday, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz said the media in Pakistan enjoyed unprecedented freedom. Mr Aziz is right, but the credit for this does not go to a government, a party or an individual; it goes first and foremost to those Pakistani journalists who have struggled ceaselessly for press freedom. The Press and Publications Ordinance, enacted during the Ayub regime, was repealed decades later when the Federal Shariat Court found it to be un-Islamic, but not before the journalists made sacrifices that ranged from arrests, “disappearances” and joblessness to whipping during the Zia regime, besides the forced closure of countless newspapers and journals. If at all there is a man who can be credited with making the first moves toward restoring the freedom of the press, it was the late Mohammad Khan Junejo.

Once the genie was out of the bottle, it was difficult for the subsequent governments to put it back, even though all regimes, including this one, continued to apply pressures in various forms. By criticising government policies, the media not only serves the nation, it helps the rulers correct themselves. The rulers must welcome this rather than resent the cynics among the critics. However, an honest appraisal of the situation around him will enable the prime minister to come to the awkward conclusion that cynics are not the media’s monopoly alone and that there is no dearth of them among the brains that run this country. Notice, for instance, a chief minister’s declaration that Gen Pervez Musharraf could be the president in uniform for life, or the gem of a thought by another chief minister that a woman’s rule was a curse. That, of course, does not give the media the freedom to cross “the line”, as observed by Mr Aziz. But neither should the government do that, we submit. It is a two-way relationship that must be based on trust and goodwill.

Why be his mouthpiece?

OSAMA bin Laden is at it again. The latest video tape released by Al Qaeda before the US marks the sixth anniversary of the September 11 attacks tomorrow has nothing newsworthy about it. In his response to the mad man’s ranting, George W Bush, too, has predictably repeated what he has been saying all along since 9/11: that it is “a reminder of the dangerous world in which we live”. The rhetoric goes hand in hand to strengthen Islam phobia and the idea of an imminent clash of civilisations, the unholy twins born of a mediaeval mindset no less menacing than Al Qaeda’s worldview. Here are two of the world’s most powerful and dangerous men today, flashing their dirty linen on TV screens across the world. Thus, the earnestness with which the international media has jumped at the latest bin Laden video and Bush’s response to it is sickening. One man has gone all out to preach hatred and lead young men to embark on suicide missions in order to set up a mediaeval kingdom of God, as it were, and the other has taken on himself to perpetuate Islam phobia across the world. Neither has anything new to offer but divide the world even further.

Granted the US president will get the media attention he seeks, but why should bin Laden get it too when he asks for it? Why are the media becoming his mouthpiece, repeating ad nauseum his messages of hate and intolerance? In the environment of the Islam phobia gripping the West today, it does not help matters to perpetrate a mindset bent on dubbing the war against terrorism as a clash of civilisations. The unnecessary media coverage given to bin Laden’s sickly preaching will only strengthen the extremist views on both sides. It’s time the media acted more responsibly.

An ungovernable Pakistan

IF WE were to prepare a world index in terms of violence and ungovernability, where would we place Pakistan? Somalia, Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan will no doubt top the list, but then these countries are the victims of imperialist designs and superpower intrigues.

Nigeria and Pakistan, also at the top of the list, are in a different league altogether. They started off well, but have gradually become ungovernable because of the greed, lust for power and ineptitude of the ruling elite.

Defenders of the present regime can argue that during the last eight years, Pakistan has made strides in economic development and signs of prosperity can be seen everywhere. But this article is not about macro-economic stabilisation, or the lack of it. This is about governability. People are worried that this country, which was peaceful and well-managed 30 years ago, is fast becoming ungovernable. Signs of deterioration can be seen everywhere, from the civic services to the maintenance of law and order.

In order to gauge, where we stand on the governability index, let us take two basic areas in terms of law and order and peace. There are other issues of concern as well, but they will be taken up later in another article:

a. situation on our western frontiers and Balochistan,

b. internal security.

First, let us take the situation on our western frontiers and try to understand how these areas have gradually become ungovernable. It is well known that our tribesmen are fiercely independent and have long defied the writ of law along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, but the political administration’s skilful use of carrot and stick had kept them under control until the “war on terror” was thrust upon us.

For the first time in the history of Pakistan, over 80,000 troops were deployed on our western frontier with the dual purpose of fighting against terrorists and defending local tribes against a possible assault from Afghanistan. But what is the result, and where do we stand today?

Initially, the tribesmen showed their concern at the uncustomary presence of troops in their areas. When the government ignored their protestations, they started to react violently. Since then they have been on the warpath against the country’s own security forces, which is something that had never happened before. At first, they attacked check posts and then started targeting moving convoys and army training camps.

At this stage, the government started having second thoughts and signed agreements with the militant tribes as if they were a foreign power. But perhaps it was too late. The writ of the government became weaker by the day to the extent that the movement of troops in the area has become difficult.

Where do things stand today? For the first time after the 1971 debacle, we hear that close to 300 troops, including half a dozen officers with all their armament, equipment and vehicles have been “seized” by the militants.

Initially, the ISPR spokesman denied the incident altogether, but when the militants claimed responsibility, he had no choice but to come out with the facts. What he failed to explain, however, was how a contingent of 300 troops could be “stopped, disarmed, and made to surrender” without a single shot being fired? Was it a willing surrender? Are the Pakistani troops so demoralised now that they do not want to put up a fight? If true, nothing could be more chilling.

In Balochistan, a low-level insurgency has been continuing for the last three to four years. Even before Akbar Khan Bugti was killed in cold blood, bridges were blown up, railway tracks and sensitive installations damaged, and a number of important persons killed in target shootings. Now no one seems to be safe even in the most protected areas of Quetta. So much for the war on terror.

Next, let us have a look at internal security. How safe are the people and what is their perception regarding law and order? Without going into the polemics and crime statistics (a happy pastime for police high-ups), would it be wrong to say, that no one feels safe at least in the urban areas? People living in the rural areas face another type of lawlessness.The feeling of insecurity is heightened by the fact that during the last five years the president, prime minister, interior minister and the corps commander have all come under attack at different points of time. That they survived was a miracle. All of these incidents took place in “sensitive” areas which are perpetually either on “high alert” or “red alert”. In such circumstances, how can an ordinary Pakistani feel safe?

People fear that anything can happen anywhere. Mosques, schools, churches, bus stands, commercials areas, graveyards, even the nerve centre of the security establishment in Rawalpindi, are not safe. Apart from bomb blasts and suicide attacks, crimes against property are rampant. Car thefts, phone snatchings and armed robberies are so common that people have almost become insensitive to them.

Starting from 2001, billions of rupees have been spent by the government in the name of police reforms. When the devolution process started, it was promised that the police would be free from political interference; officers would have a secure tenure of three years; investigation of cases would be done along scientific lines; recruitment of police personnel would be on merit, and people could go to an independent body if they had any complaint against the police.

But what happened? Police stations remain the same dreaded places where the SHO reigns supreme. Political interference in transfers and postings is at an all-time high. City and provincial officers, whose responsibility it is to maintain law and order, can’t even post an SHO of their choice. This newspaper reported recently that police stations continue to be auctioned to the highest bidder just as before.

The district and provincial police safety commissions, which were supposed to be notified years ago, are nowhere to be seen. Nor do we hear anything about the police complaint authority. Although the functions of operations and investigations have been separated, there is no visible improvement in the conviction rate.

With all the money spent on the higher echelons, the working conditions of the police force remain as bad as before. Police Lines, where some lucky ones find accommodation, are worse than katchi abadis. There are thousands of vacancies in Sindh, but recruitment cannot be carried out because of infighting amongst the coalition partners. They want a share in the spoils.

These examples signify just the tip of the iceberg. You can make your own list of areas where the government is failing. I shall take up disaster management and the social sector in my next article.

Because of these failures Pakistan’s ungovernability is increasing at all levels, and it is not the lack of resources which is causing major problems. It is wrong strategies and the incorrect use of resources that have led to this breakdown in peace and security. How can a country be governed and how can it prosper if its people fear for their lives all the time?

Water under the bridge

The Hindustan Times

WHILE the promise of ‘Bijli, Sadak, Pani’ has become a catchy election slogan, the availability of clean drinking water in urban as well as rural India remains a mirage. A Bihar government study on groundwater says that 12 districts have an arsenic contamination problem… The study added that the average arsenic content in groundwater in the 12 districts is 550 parts per billion (ppb). The World Health Organisation guidelines states 10 ppb of arsenic in potable water is the permissible limit while health authorities have put it at 50 ppb keeping in view the climatic conditions and resistance level…According to the Water Resources Ministry, out of 28 states, 19 suffer from salinity, iron, fluoride and arsenic contamination.

It is an alarming situation because 85 per cent of the rural and 60 per cent of urban India depend on groundwater to meet their potable water needs…Though the Bureau of Indian Standards fixes water quality standards, implementation and checking are lax because we have little manpower qualified to test water quality and very few laboratories…

The government’s multi-crore drinking water projects…have failed to redress the situation. Safe drinking water will never be a reality unless and until we replenish our aquifers, rationalise water use, decentralise our water management systems and make users stakeholders in the process… people should be encouraged to harvest rainwater and recharge groundwater…In Dwarka, Gujarat…a rain-deficient area, 98 per cent of houses have rainwater-harvesting systems… this has solved their drinking water problem. On the other hand, we have Cherapunjee: the highest annual rainfall in India is recorded here, yet it suffers from an acute shortage of drinking water because it lets rainwater drain away….—(Sept 6)

King unwanted

The Tribune

ANY vestigial hope about the survival of constitutional monarchy, which Nepal’s King Gyanendra and the royalists may have entertained, has been dashed to the ground. The … Nepali Congress…has fallen in step with the popular mood by ending its support for the monarchy and calling for a federal democratic republic. Historically the NC has favoured a constitutional monarchy, although it has never compromised in striving to establish multiparty democracy.

Given this background, Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala taking the plunge to formally cast his party’s lot with a republic is a historic break with its 60-year policy.

The NC has been divided on the issue with a vocal section of dissidents insisting that the Maoists should not be allowed to run away with the republican agenda. Pitted against this faction was a larger section that wanted to retain a king at least as a figurehead.

In the event, Mr Koirala, who has ably steered the eight-party coalition which includes the Maoists, has enhanced the leverage of the NC as Nepal prepares for the November 22 general election.

The Maoists can no longer make a grievance of the NC’s position on constitutional monarchy as a stumbling block to their participation in the November election…Their threat to quit the coalition if Nepal is not declared a republic by September 18 is of a piece with their characteristic distrust of democratic elections. While the NC and other parties, which are no less committed to a republic, want the new parliament to make this declaration, the Maoists insist that this should be done before the elections. It remains to be seen how this obstructive ploy unravels in the weeks preceding the election. — (Sept 8)