|
| December 02, 2007 | Sunday | Ziqa’ad 21, 1428 |
Combating Aids
The bank heist
New garments: old traits?
OTHER VOICES – Indian Press
THE live telecasts on the morning of Nov 28 on the ceremonious farewell to the out-going chief of army staff and on Nov 29 on the oath-taking of a new civilian president symbolised the bizarre contrasts that continue to mark our history. At this very time the unceremoniously, illegally removed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court along with other judges remains under house arrest.
WITH just five weeks to go to election, there are few signs of the opposition parties reaching a consensus on whether to take part in the polls or not. Ms Bhutto’s assertion that her party is open to the boycott option, provided the opposition agrees on a common goal, is but an argument in favour of contesting the polls. The two JUI chiefs of their respective factions have been more direct in dismissing the idea of the boycott, and so has been the ANP which does not wish to hand over the Frontier to the religious parties without a contest. It is also clear that while both the PPP and the JUI want an independent judiciary, neither is insisting on the reinstatement of the judges sacked under the Nov 3 PCO. This leaves the Jamaat-i-Islami, the PML-N, the Tehrik-i-Insaaf and a few others that make up the APDM as the only ones who will remain out of the fray if they insist on boycotting the polls. Nonetheless, what credibility, if any, the election will have in the event is the question begging for an answer. However, Ms Bhutto has hit the nail on the head by asking the APDM what goal the alliance wishes to achieve by boycotting the election. If the idea is to deny credibility to the process, the second question is: what next? The APDM is far from being clear on what lies beyond the boycott.
Looking at the composition of the current caretaker setup and of the election commission, the opposition is justified in casting doubts on the fairness of the polls. But the opposition will also have to share the blame for the current mess in view of its failure to forge a united stance vis-à-vis the dictatorship in Islamabad whose strength is, among others, based on the disunity of its adversaries. The way things stand at the moment, the key to resolving the issue lies with President Musharraf. Ms Bhutto has already accused the current administration of partiality. For the PML-N, the rejection of Shahbaz Sharif’s nomination papers by the election commission is ample proof of its bias against the party. The only way to set aside all such worries on the part of those willing to contest the election and convince the boycotters to join the fray is for the president to convene a multi-party meeting to iron out all such differences, and to make certain changes to avoid aspersions being cast on the election process.
After hanging up his military uniform President Musharraf, too, is showing signs of strain — perhaps understandably so. For instance, in a recent interview with an American TV network, he said that even after lifting the emergency, he would not ‘allow’ any agitation politics; then he hinted that if he did not ‘like’ what he saw, he might just step down. The first was assertion of power by someone in control of the situation, the second an admission that he is losing it. The point is: if he can rein in his authoritarian streak and show the inclination to sit down to talk, with an open mind, to those opposing him, he may still not have to step down. He can scotch agitation politics by allaying the opposition’s concerns. The time to do so is now.
THE UN has reason to be dissatisfied with Pakistan’s performance in the fight against Aids. As pointed out by it, despite considerable help from international organisations, the number of Aids cases in the country has risen. There is a draft law aimed at preventing and treating this life-threatening condition. But one does not know how long it will be before the next parliament takes action on it. A policy has also been formulated for a more concerted effort to limit the spread of the disease by creating awareness and debate in a conservative social milieu. One can only hope that it is actively pursued, because it has some sound prescriptions, which, if applied, could give people a much clearer idea of Aids and its implications than they have at the moment. A key aspect in this regard is the co-opting of the services of religious leaders and opinion moulders. Given their ability to influence large sections of society, they can play a key role in informing people about the relationship between Aids and promiscuity and the need for safe sexual practices. Since Aids also means stigma and social ostracism, it is important to encourage compassion for the victims, who, apart from commercial sex workers and their male clientele, include unsuspecting wives, children and drug addicts using shared needles. Stigma leads to the isolation of HIV/Aids patients that results in many cases going undiagnosed as people hesitate to report their symptoms and refuse to undergo tests. This promotes the spread of the disease.
Luckily, the situation in Pakistan is still nowhere close to the Aids problem in neighbouring India and China. Pakistan estimates the number of cases to be around 85,000 although only a fraction of this figure has been confirmed. But things could turn critical if preventive action is not taken. This does not only entail refraining from unsafe sex that can lead to Aids but also calls for facing the problem squarely. An ostrich-like approach will not help. Educating the people through the media, and, equally important, sensitising schoolchildren to the issue, is perhaps the best form of defence. It is also a precondition to removing misconceptions about the disease and to giving victims the kind of support that will encourage others not to hide their ailment, so that the actual prevalence of the disease is known and a comprehensive strategy prepared accordingly.
THE daylight bank robbery and multiple murders in the Malir area on Friday should serve to alert the law-enforcement agencies as to what is in store for Karachi as we head towards the general election. In many respects, the crime stands out from the ‘normal’ robberies because of the criminals’ modus operandi. In what looked like a piece from a Hollywood thriller, the gangsters, some of them in police uniform, executed their crime with clockwork precision. Two of the gangsters went inside the bank, shot the security guard in cold blood, fired in the air to terrorise the staff and in that process killed a client. While they did this, others of their gang waited in the cars to cover them. Another car had been kept well camouflaged, and the robbers inside it opened fire, killing one of the policemen who were going to the bank on hearing the shots. Finally, they managed to get away with five million rupees. Normally, robbers kill on resistance. But here the security guard was murdered for no reason. The use of police uniform, the brand new cars and the GP car plate on one of the vehicles suggest the work of well-trained and motivated men from the politicised underworld.
It is time the LEAs got their priorities right. It would be a pity if they were to focus all their energy on pre-empting violence of a political nature. The state of emergency and the spectre of terrorism have, no doubt, made demands on the security agencies. But they should not forget that their first duty is to combat crime and give a sense of security to the citizens. Friday’s crime has sent shockwaves through the city. It is time the police bosses gave their force a citizen-oriented outlook.
The US and some other countries predictably exaggerate the importance of this change. They use it to justify their continued support to a president who they regard as a trusted ally in their ‘war on terror’ because he has now fulfilled a promise — to become even more trustworthy! All he has done is do what he should have done in 2001, or in 2004, as publicly committed by him. Ceasing to be an army chief six years later than mandated, cannot be seen as a favour bestowed on the nation.
Even after the All Parties Democratic Movement’s (APDM) boycott call, and even after the promise to lift the Emergency and withdraw the PCO on Dec 16, the possibility of most, or some political parties contesting elections under a dispensation headed by Mr. Musharraf, dilutes the credibility of the position taken by the political parties. A boycott will be a tragedy. Participation without the pre-Nov 3 judiciary will be a catastrophe.
If Mr. Musharraf remains president with all the attendant structures of power from the district level up to the federal level favouring his favourites, and even if all parties participate in the elections, free and fair elections will be impossible. Assuming that, nevertheless, a new government is formed — be it coalitions led by PML-Q or PPP or PML-N — there will be conflict and tension with a president who carries with him from the past strong pre-conceptions about policies.
We wish for the best. But should be prepared for storms ahead.When, after giving himself two extensions, a person retires from the post of army chief and then becomes a civilian president through a non-competitive election contested while wearing his uniform, with the poll boycotted by the opposition, the change is more a cause for concern than for celebration.
While the uniform may be discarded for the first time in 43 years of service and after nine years as chief, the attributes of the person, particularly those that have become evident since Mar 9, are transferred intact, probably un-changed, into the civilian presidency. Can new garments change old traits?
An irony saddens. As army chief and as head of government the just-retired officer did render some valuable services to the country. These include the unprecedented representation given on reserved seats to women in district, provincial and national legislatures; facilitation in the development of independent electronic media; support to liberal cultural activity and in promoting macro-economic growth. But, with one stroke on Mar 9, and then with a second blow on Nov 3, almost this entire legacy has been sullied.
If he had remained a professional soldier unexpectedly called to political office and had retired as due in October 2001 he could rightly have been credited with a notable career in the service of his country and for outstanding self-restraint. He chose to do otherwise.
What should have happened in September-October 2001 was that if the army chief was really sincere about placing national interest over his own individual ambition, he could have immediately restored the supremacy of the civil, political and democratic process to enable all critical decisions to be taken on a nationally participative basis. No heavens would have fallen. No hell would have exploded. Sooner or later, 160 million people are quite capable of producing alternative leaders.
To expect the recently-retired army chief to have willingly retired earlier in October 2001, as per what duty, rules and norms required him to do, is to expect ideal behaviour in an ideal world. Neither of these exists fully in reality. But both are sometimes possible to achieve.
All human conduct must always be judged against ideals, however wide the gap. All the codes by which virtually all societies and states are governed embody ideal levels of behaviour. Every oath of office is an example of how high human conduct is expected to be, even as actions by some soon after the oath is taken reach abysmally low levels.
But by October 2001, when his first and original term of appointment came to an end, the army chief and (previously) chief executive had already indicated the direction in which he was headed.
The duly, competitively-elected president (Rafiq Tarar) was forcibly removed from office in mid-2001, about three months before 9/11.
So there was little, if any chance, of a newly self-appointed president voluntarily quitting when 9/11 created entirely new dynamics — and new opportunities. The bogus referendum of April 2002 was used to tighten the grip over the presidency.
There is excessive focus on the loss of power and authority as an individual goes from being both president and army chief to being only president. There is an obvious change of direct command. Yet this is also a change in which the army reinforces its relationship with a presidency empowered by the 17th Amendment. This particular new ‘civilian’ president ensures the perpetuation of a disturbing, abiding linkage between the military and politics.
Are we required to applaud the announcement about Dec 16? What does the reversal indicate about the quality of judgment and intent behind the decision taken to impose the emergency? The obvious single aim was to oust an over-assertive Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
The spectacle of crudely maltreated, non-violent, non-terrorist arrested lawyers and senior judges confined to their homes in the name of emergency has outraged opinion at home and worldwide. And the ‘war on terror’ certainly did not require an emergency. Even one Mr. George W. Bush, a good friend of Mr. Musharraf, agrees. As one who used to be a friend of Mr. Musharraf before Mr. George W. Bush got to know him, I wonder: whatever happened to the fine gentleman I knew once upon a time?
Even as the new, well-regarded army chief begins his tenure, the finest service he can render Pakistan is to ensure three years from now that he retires on completion of his first term without indulging in any political activity and by withdrawing the army’s intelligence wings from political affairs.
When one calls for a new election for an entirely new, truly civilian president one is aware that there are no civil, political angels waiting in the wings. There will be conflict and corruption in the civil, political, democratic process in the years ahead.
Democracy is like a foul-tasting medicine whose flavour and odour are often insufferable. Yet full-blooded, undiluted democracy, an independent, fully-restored judiciary, truly free, unfettered, responsible media, a vigilant, activist citizenry and a non-politicalised military alone are the most indispensable cures for the ailing, beloved body politic of Pakistan.
The writer is a former federal minister and Senator.
Sarkozy on test
THE street is a very important part of the French political system. ...Nicolas Sarkozy…will certainly be keenly alert to the rage accruing on the street… France’s public transport unions have been trying to bring the country to a standstill…to protest at the government’s move to reform their absolutely anachronistic benefits. More worrying for Sarkozy, fresh rioting in Paris’s suburbs shows that discontent amongst immigrants, mostly of North African origin, remains as easily combustible as it was two years ago…
For Sarkozy, the violence in the suburbs comes as a particularly individual challenge. Rioting began…after the death of two teenagers of African origin in a crash with a police vehicle. Two years ago, as interior minister at the time, he had controversially referred to the need to ‘clean up’ urban neighbourhoods.
He has already begun re-establishing France as a responsible stakeholder in international decision-making. Sarkozy knows the standoff with the transport strikers goes beyond the simple matter of their pension benefits: it will prove whether he has the resolve to energise France’s pampered public sector and reform the labour sector to tackle unemployment. He must grab the challenge because France can never be a country conducive to Sarkozy’s promises if immigrants are kept on edge by a sense of acute alienation. — (Nov 28)
The Indian Express
Return of Nawaz Sharif
THE twists and turns in Pakistan politics are obviously controlled abroad. The US played a major role. At one stage, it seemed that President George Bush was willing to dump Pervez Musharraf and back Benazir Bhutto all the way. But US Deputy Secretary of State Negroponte’s visit changed all that. The Bush administration again decided to place all its bets on President Musharraf…
Musharraf had to prove his credentials as a believer in democracy. He politely yielded to international pressure for the holding of democratic elections…And now he has allowed Nawaz Sharif to return…
Obviously, Saudi Arabia pulled the strings behind the scenes. It has been a major force in directing Pakistan’s politics for the past three decades. Nawaz Sharif is more acceptable to the Islamic world than a liberal like Benazir Bhutto…
Nawaz Sharif…denies having made a deal with Musharraf… With his return, Pakistan politics has entered a new phase. Sharif also had corruption charges against him. The question is whether he can break into the ruling Pakistan Muslim League and whether he can play along with the military.
Musharraf may back Sharif also for his hold on the Islamic forces and the business community in the country. All said and done, it is a naked power game, which pays only lip service to democracy.
— (Nov 29)
The Shillong Times