| January 28, 2008 | Monday | Muharram 18, 1429 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
How real are the claims?
Baitullah warns govt
Rescuing bomb blast victims
Two disputes, two standards
State duty
The blame game
Eliminating child labour
PAF plane crash
Belittling democracy
CSS exams
Readers are requested to restrict their comments to a maximum of 400 words. We reserve the right to edit letters for reasons of clarity and space. Letters, including those by e-mail, should carry the complete postal address of the sender. The views expressed in these columns do not necessarily reflect the views of the newspaper.—Editor
ONE agrees absolutely with the views of Ahmad Sultan Baloch expressed in his letter, ‘Security of nuclear weapons’ (Jan 23). He has noted that Pakistan’s nukes are the warranty card of our safety and the nation had rightly and bravely borne the sanctions imposed in the aftermath of our nuclear tests of 1998.
Also, that the anti-Pakistan forces working on the covert agenda of reversing its atomic programme are being supported by hostile states, and “involvement of India and Israel cannot be ruled out”. Mr Baloch further observes that unfortunately some political forces from within Pakistan have joined hands with these entities.
One wishes to emphasise that the involvement of a country like Israel is not just possible but has actually been taking place since around 1980. This was reported by the Hindustan Times by quoting a new book titled Deception, authored by Adrian Levy and Catharine Scott-Clark (Dawn, Nov 29, 2007).
According to the report, Israel’s intelligence agency, Mossad, ran a highly secretive bombing campaign directed at individuals in Europe helping Dr A.Q. Khan build a nuclear weapon. The first victim was Heinz Mebus, a close friend of Dr Khan who had helped build Pakistan’s fluoride and uranium conversion plants in 1979.
“A letter bomb exploded inside Mebus’s home in Erlangen, West Germany. He was out at work, but his dog died in the attack”, says the book. European investigators linked this bombing to another one in Berne, Switzerland, in February 1981, outside the home of Eduard German, the MD of a company that supplied a gasification and solidification unit to Pakistan.
They also found out that equally untraceable groups had carried out similar attacks. “Then on 18 May 1981, another bomb exploded … in the southern German town of Markdof outside a company that had been supplying Pakistan since 1976.” The report said that clearly efforts to close down Dr Khan’s nuclear business, finally accomplished by the US in 2003-4, had begun back in 1981.
Therefore, we must not have any illusions about the intentions of Israel or other countries, which are all trying feverishly to destroy our strategic programme because any Muslim country cannot be allowed to have it.
One would earnestly appeal to all the Pakistani politicians, writers and intellectuals who tend to drag Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan into controversies to please desist from doing so. There is nothing to be achieved by maligning this hero of ours. He should be allowed to pass his days in comfort and peace, notwithstanding the allegations against him.
KHALID CHAUDHRY
Karachi
IN recent days President Pervez Musharraf has made some claims that wouldn’t stand scrutiny. First, that the reconstitution of the election commission is not possible because doing so would violate the Constitution.
Second, during his weekly interactive programme ‘Aiwan-i-Sadr Sey’ he said that there was no need for the people to get worried about the country because it is a nuclear and missile power, with a strong army and a robust economy (Jan 18). Third, that Pakistan is not ready for democracy or granting of human rights at par with western standards.
Regarding his first claim, he violates the Constitution when he pleases but says it is inviolable when that suits him. Was his action of imposing emergency while still the COAS a constitutional act? Besides, even in the worst of banana republics, one has never heard of two-thirds of the superior judiciary getting fired. It is something that should have embarrassed any leader with the slightest amount of democratic spirit, but he did it unblushingly.
The Senate hasn’t met for the required duration and there have been many other unlawful acts, such as contesting presidential elections before completing two years of retirement from government service. As long as the Pakistanis perceived him to be acting correctly, e.g. in the Agra Summit, he was their hero, but his subservience to the US and the resulting policies have angered them. The worsening of the situation in Pakistan shows the people weren’t wrong, but he is. Now he is denouncing the same compatriots.
His second contention is belied by his own statements given on Nov 3 while proclaiming emergency, which had made it appear that the nation was on the verge of collapse. In any case how will the nukes or the missiles help against the growing violence and bombings and food scarcity that are upsetting the people and making them feel very insecure?
As far as the third claim is concerned, Mr Jinnah, who, in the first place, created Pakistan in the most democratic way, never cast aspersions on his followers’ fitness for democracy. On the contrary, right from the start he had the foresight to warn against military interventions.
Besides, the elections in 1970 were fair and transparent, while the nation largely rejected the rigged one in 1977 during Z. A. Bhutto’s time. Again, the 1988 polls after Gen Zia’s death were a manifestation of the people’s desire, and the maturity of Pakistanis has been very visible by their support for Justice Chaudhry and the rule of law witnessed after March 9, 2007.
Mr Musharraf’s claims are self-serving and smack of double standards.
QAMAR
Karachi
DAWN’s front-page story, ‘Baitullah Mehsud warns government against entering his area’ (Jan 22), is reiterating yet again his old rhetoric. It may be recalled that Baitullah had threatened the government of serious consequences if it violated ‘our area’ by moving its security forces into South Waziristan (Aug 19, 2007). The death of his one-legged brother, Abdullah Mehsud, on July 24, 2007 in North Waziristan had taken the wind out of his sails.
This time he has warned of serious repercussions if the military operations were not stopped in ‘his area’. He seems to be greatly disturbed by the arrest of his close aide, Younus Mehsud, in Sohrab Goth, Karachi, on Jan 21. A question or two need answers.
What is meant by ‘our area’ or ‘his area?’ Is it a different country? Has he separated South Waziristan from Pakistan? Is the Pakistan army an enemy force? He may be fighting it — still it is not an enemy force.
So long as Waziristan is a part of Pakistan, it is not an enemy army. He may have differences with the government; who does not have some? But you don’t pick up the gun — as he has. He has been misguided by the enemies of Pakistan.
The leniency shown by the government in the form of Agreement of Feb 5, 2007 with Abdullah and Baitullah Mehsud, reached through the efforts of a special jirga, and the general amnesty to all militants sent a wrong signal, which they thought was its weakness.
They became even more arrogant. They were banking on the government’s inability to move regular army to fight them. They are also relying on the supply of money, arms, ammunition, intelligence and training facilities from secret agencies like RAW, Mossad, KGB, KHAD and a host of others operating in Afghanistan.
Pakistan has to stop this. The military axioms: ‘to cut the enemy supply lines’ and ‘to know the weapons the enemy is using, is half the war won’ can be used here too. Would we see the barrier erected across Pakistan-Afghan border to thwart those supplies? It will break the Taliban’s back.
M. K. NAQVI
Karachi
IN view of the recent suicidal bombings taking place across the country, it is very important to train doctors and other paramedics to handle emergencies properly. Timely action and better management with good know-how about how to deal with bomb blast victims is a major issue nowadays. As it is not a part of our practical training, it is necessary to train both the undergraduates and postgraduates to cover all aspects of these emergencies.
Blast experts from the army can help in this regard to produce more experts. Army medical professionals get training of both theoretical and practical handling of blast and war injuries. Army medical experts can teach or share their experience with doctors posted at the accident and emergency rooms.
So many people have lost their lives and many more will, because many of our doctors cannot manage bomb blast victims according to the set guidelines. Therefore, training sessions as continued medical education should be arranged to provide all latest information and international recommendations to doctors.
From the administrative point of view, it is also very important to pre-plan hospitals to deal with these emergencies effectively where influx of blast victims increases many times all of a sudden. To cover the medico-legal aspect is another lacking field for which doctors should follow existing legal procedures and laws.
Postgraduates getting training in surgery should get proper training on how to treat badly affected blast victims. Main area of focus should be to treat shock due to excessive blood loss, blood transfusion, amputation, etc.
DR ALFRED CHARLES
Karachi
IT was most amusing and also painful to read Kuldip Nayar’s column, ‘Bordering on progress’ (Jan 18). This is because the arguments given in it regarding India’s stand on the border dispute are just the opposite of what he, the Indian government and India’s intelligentsia advance about the Kashmir issue.
Some examples from Mr Nayar’s article will elucidate my point.
— “The litmus test is how far China has given in on the border dispute. Here the score is zero. In fact, China has resiled from the earlier understanding given to India.”
Ironically, India has not lived up to its commitments to the Kashmiris., Pakistan and the international community on the Kashmir dispute.
— “New Delhi will be committing ... mistake by minimising the dispute (with China) for the sake of good relations.” For many years, New Delhi has been expecting Islamabad to minimise the Kashmir issue.
— “The unending rounds of talks between the officials of the two countries have not made China withdraw even an inch from the Indian territories it nibbled away at during the 1950s and occupied after the 1962 war.”
Has India withdrawn even an inch from held Kashmir since 1947 or Siachen, which it overran much later in 1984?
— “China has not responded even to the Colombo proposals which the six non-aligned countries led by Sri Lanka had formulated in December 1962...” Mr Nayar conveniently forgets how India did not respond to the many resolutions of the incomparably bigger and more powerful United Nations that aimed to resolve the Indo Pakistan dispute.
— “As the days went by, India accepted the status quo on the border and took steps to have economic and trade contacts with China. Incidentally, the same kind of arrangement was offered to Pakistan which it rejected .... (saying) that unless the Kashmir issue was settled, there was no question of having business relations with India.” In spite of all this, India wants us to commit the same mistake.
— “I concede that all Indian claims cannot be justified .... Yet the aggression (by China) should be ‘a permanent piece of education’, as Nehru said, lest emotions should make us one day write off the occupation of Indian territories.”
So, shouldn’t India’s aggression in Kashmir be ‘a permanent piece of education’ for us in Pakistan?
— The columnist has further quoted Nehru as saying that the problem with China was more than a dispute over some territory. It was a test of whether any one of the two countries would have a more dominating position than the other on the border and in Asia itself. India desires to live peacefully with other countries provided they do not interfere or commit aggression.
The trouble is that India has always tried to dominate all its neighbours in South Asia and interfere in their affairs and, therefore, it has had many disputes with them and is resented by them. But, its inability to do the same with China due to the latter’s power bothers it so much reminds me of Bertrand Russell’s observation about India’s double standards vis-a-vis the Kashmir and Nagaland problems cited by a correspondent (Jan 22). Mr Russell said that several decades back. Unfortunately, it still applies to India, as mentioned above.
KHALID NAQSHBANDI
Karachi
I. A. REHMAN aptly says (Jan 10): “A thief or a murderer is only partly responsible for his crime; society, especially the managers of its affairs, must accept a portion of the blame.”
In the time when traditional groups of people have been broken down into powerless individuals, state is equipped with increased power to kill, and translation of people’s views and needs are largely muted in the present so-called democratic set-up, responsibility of the administration is accordingly enhanced — the responsibility of state for protecting life, honour and material possession of the people.
Hazrat Umar, the second caliph, forbade the penalty of chopping hand of thieves in the time of food shortage.
We need today leaders who are provided with vision, clarity of mind and a concern like that of our forerunners.
TARIQ MAHMOOD HASAN GARHI
Peshawar
ACCORDING to your correspondent’s report (Jan 22), during a conference in Brussels addressed by President Musharraf, although no query was raised about the judiciary, he still lashed out against the ousted chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry.
He denounced the latter as an ‘inept and corrupt’ man who was working to ‘incapacitate’ the government and the parliament. In her column in (Dawn Magazine) a couple of months back, Anjum Niaz had quoted Gen (r) Naseerullah Babar, who had been an interior minister during Benazir Bhutto’s first term as prime minister. The gentleman had been senior to Mr Musharraf in the army and said he had watched him closely during the early years of the latter’s service.
Interestingly, Gen Babar had levelled similar, if not greater, charges against him. Therefore, it is a moot point as to whose criticism is correct. If President Musharraf wishes to be fair, then he should remove all restrictions on Justice Chaudhry and allow him full freedom to defend himself, perhaps in a television debate joined in by Gen Babar as well.
It is, after all, unbecoming of a commando to attack somebody whose hands he has tied. As far as the people of Pakistan are concerned, a survey by the International Republican Institute had found out some months back that Mr Chaudhry was (if memory serves) the third most popular person, after Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. From his memoirs it appears that Mr Musharraf is in the habit of finding faults with popular personalities, such as Dr A.Q. Khan and the leading politicians.
A CITIZEN
Karachi
THIS is apropos of Hafizur Rahman’s column, ‘Eliminating child labour’ (Jan 16). The writer forgets that he was once a part of the government that developed policies to control child labour, now he wants to eliminate it and says it is the political parties’ job to control and eliminate it.
I am amazed at his ability to remember the ILO Conventions numbers 182 and 321 that he refers. All I would say is: Bhai aap sara kuch kha ga’ay, gharib ko kon puchta hai. All the civil bureaucracy did was enhance corruption and bribery.
It is a shame that the rulers, including civilian and military, could not provide a mere light bulb and clean drinking water to all the people in Pakistan, let alone eliminate child labour. The mess Pakistan is in right now is the result of misrule, corruption and bribery havocked by civilian and military juntas. It is sad.
ZAHID AHMED
USA
I WAS overwhelmed with grief as I read the news item, ‘PAF plane crashes in GIK Institute premises’ (Jan 23). The wreckage of the T-37 jet trainer shown in the adjoining photograph made the news all the more poignant. The aircraft, engulfed in flames, reportedly crashed just a few yards away from the Habib Bank campus branch, close to the faculty of mechanical engineering.
The pilot, Raja Jehanzeb, mindful of the technical fault of the plane, managed to steer the plane away from the buildings, putting his own life at stake and saving many others. He could have safely ejected from the plane had he deemed so but, encumbered by the consideration of damage this could have caused, he sacrificed his own life for the good of others.
The students of the institute ought to pay homage to this great man and the authorities should consider erecting a monument after Raja Jehanzeb Shaheed at the crash site. Such men of character and integrity, so rarely found in today’s egocentric society, deserve all the laurels.
The PAF should reward this courageous man with the honour he rightfully deserves, apart from monetary help to the grieved family he left behind. His sacrifice should not go in vain, but should serve as an example for all existing and aspiring fliers.
MUHAMMAD JALAL AWAN
UET, Lahore
THIS is apropos of President Musharraf's remarks about the West's 'obssession' with human rights and democracy and your opinion of his remarks entitled 'Belittling democracy' (Jan 23).
I agree with your opinion but wish to add that Mr Musharraf has not only belittled democracy but also the Pakistani nation by implying that we are uneducated inferior beings who have not reached the stage of development or understanding to have a democratic system. Indeed this is what he means by ground realities.
I wish and hope that we as a nation should refute and reject such assumptions by such people who are not capable of doing any job correctly. The president disarms any critical or moral thought in totality.
Since March 7, it emerges that the president is misinformed and is willing to give up or do anything just to stay in power. He does not seem to understand that his posturing in the West as a military commander or as a political actor was being tolerated because in the American, British, Israeli and Indian context he has already conceded his people’s aspirations regarding Kashmir and Pakistan's sovereignty. Indeed he has already committed to destroy the unity of the country.
DR TARIQ RIAZ.
Newcastle upon Tyne
UK
THIS is to request to President Musharraf and the chief justice of Pakistan, on behalf of the CSS candidates, to postpone the examinations for one month.
Reasons: recent disturbances and riots, as well as the gas and power outages, have affected the study of the candidates very seriously. They need some more time to make up for the lost hours. I also request the SPSC chief to take notice of the situation.
NUMAIR MALIK
Via email
You can also send letters to the Editor
Just send your message to the following address: letters@dawn.com
Make sure you include your full name, postal address, e-mail address, and in the case of Pakistan your day-time telephone number.