| March 10, 2008 | Monday | Rabi-ul-Awwal 1, 1429 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
Bitter harvest
Safta talks
Ulema’s role
Deciding the nation’s fate
Sinking surroundings
Oil subsidy and pricing
Perks in perpetuity
Ridiculing tourism
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
EVERY conscientious and concerned Pakistani would be alarmed at the recent increase in suicide bombings aimed at high government officials and personnel of law-enforcement agencies, wherein innocent civilians become unwilling victim.
This state of indiscriminate and wholesale brutality on the part of terrorists has made an ordinary citizen suspicious about the government’s will and ability to provide him security of person and property. In this regard, the government’s policies, specially those related to the so-called war on terror, have continuously been grilled by the intelligentsia.
Tuesday’s bomb blasts – which the authorities have hurriedly called a suicide attack — at the Pakistan Navy War College, Lahore; the successful suicide attack on the surgeon-general of the Pakistan Army; the carnage seen at the funeral of a deputy superintendent of police, who himself was a victim of one such attack; the gruesome butchery of the policemen deployed to ‘guard’ the lawyers’ rally in Lahore; and several other gory incidents of the similar nature testify to the fact that the so-called war on terror being fought by Pakistan has become increasingly unpopular, especially in the Frontier region, which ‘hosts’ this war, and from where most of these suicide bombers purportedly hail.
The government may be hinting at the involvement of a foreign hand with particular reference to India, but all evidence, empirical as well as nominal, support the theory that the terrorism being faced by Pakistan is home-grown. Besides rampant poverty and illiteracy, it’s the desperation after a dear one is brutally killed by a ‘brother’ soldier that forces these suicide bombers to indiscriminately blow up the fellow citizens.
Had President Musharraf declined to join this war, Pakistan would not have been facing such macabre consequences which threaten to tear its very fabric apart. In any case, the threat to “bomb Pakistan to the Stone Age”, which was only meant to bring Pakistan into compliance, would definitely not have materialised, given, inter alia, the nuclear deterrence we possess.
However, what the Americans would have found difficult to achieve, the unabated suicidal bombings and the resulting lawlessness, which are direct the consequence of the war we are fighting for the Americans, would definitely be able to accomplish. That is to say that if necessary measures are not taken forthwith to curtail these terrorist acts, Pakistan would definitely be going towards bombing itself to the ‘Stone Age’. The government, therefore, should reconsider its role in the ‘war on terror’, in which Pakistan’s services have not even been acknowledged as day in and day out our ‘allies’ in the West repeat the mantra of ‘to do more’. The only solution to the current crisis is pulling the Army out of the estranged Frontier regions, without which the so-far unsuccessful political dialogue is not possible.
I do not buy the idea of trying both the stick and the carrot at the same time; to try the carrots one must put the stick in the cupboard.
In this ‘fight’ between the terrorists and the government, an ordinary citizen of Pakistan is the victim. Like the political uncertainty surrounding the country for the last one or so year, this continuing sense of insecurity along with the lack of availability of basic amenities of life brought the patience of the masses to the brim, as they gave their verdict in the general election against the Musharraf regime.
Now the ball is in the court of the new government, which should better take cognizance of the aspiration of the ordinary citizens or else be prepared to be consigned to the dustbin of history.
NAUMAN QAISER
Lahore
FORMER CIA chief George Tenet confirmed in his book that “Pakistan was bullied” to follow the American line. Two days after 9/11, Richard Armitage, former US deputy secretary of state, invited ambassador Maleeha Lodi and the then ISI chief Gen Mahmood Ahmed, who happened to be in Washington D.C., to his office “and dropped the hammer on them,” but he did not “threaten to bomb Pakistan back to the stone age.”
Mr Armitage had demanded “Pakistan begin stopping Al Qaeda agents at its border, grant the US blanket overflight and landing rights . . . provide territorial access to American and allied intelligence agencies, and cut off all fuel shipments to the Taliban.”
The Pakistan government decided to side with Washington and abandon its support for the Taliban regime in Afghanistan which was accused of harbouring Osama bin Laden. Apparently, there was no choice. President Bush had said, “You are with us or against us.” One is reminded of the American arrogance when Henry Kissinger told Z. A. Bhutto that America would make ‘a horrible example’ of him if he didn’t relent on his nuclear programme and his pro-Third World politics (editorial, Sept 23, 2006).
Many have suspected the American active intervention in our national territory. In Kalosha area of South Waziristan eight suspected militants, four of them Arabs and two from Central Asian states, were killed and three wounded in a missile attack on the house last month. Residents of the area said that the house was blown up by a missile fired from a drone. In the last week of January a senior Al Qaeda commander, Abu Laith Al Libi, was reported to have been killed in similar circumstances.
When all is said and done, we seem to be at the receiving end. Sixty suicide bombings, that is, about one-fourth of such attacks in Iraq, took place in Pakistan in 2007 leaving at least 770 people dead and nearly 1600 injured. Iraq is an occupied land and perhaps we are too in a way taking directions from the US.
American support for Israel, the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and increasing tensions with Iran are taken as proof that the US is following an anti-Islamic agenda.
Before Musharraf dragged Pakistan into America’s war on terror, there were no suicide bombers. Terrorism indeed is proving to be an effective means to advance the religious extremism.
PROF (DR) P. NASIR
Gujrat
YOUR editorial has wisely pointed out that the trade in the region is awfully lower than two per cent and has urged a new Kashmir policy without sacrificing the Safta trade benefit (The Safta talks, March 5).
While there are several political and economic differences between nations in every region, including the India-China territorial dispute, it is unfortunate that Safta is not making progress because of the fact that Pakistan’s trade policy is hostage to its Kashmir policy.
However, it is worth noting that the new PPP leader, Asif Ali Zardari, has recently issued a courageous statement as regards the Kashmir issue -- a statement that can change the course of history of the South Asia subcontinent. However, to counteract his statement to get some political mileage, there are a few who have voiced for the UNO-sponsored plebiscite in Kashmir, ignoring the fact that even the former UNO secretary-general Kofi Annan did not entertain such an idea.
There are people on both sides who are prisoners of the old partition theory based on religion while the demography has changed a lot since 1947. The separatists want it for a parochial, selfish motive of power. They call militants to close shops, schools, and transportation to show their power, but they damage the economy and peace. They should know that Kashmir is a Muslim-dominated area but Jammu and Ladakh are not and will never side with the militants.
Only nine million Muslims live in the Valley, but more that 150 million Muslims, as much as in Pakistan, live in India. They should ensure Muslims’ welfare in broader interest and prosperity through Safta.
It is useful to have borderless states with free trade, tourism, transportation, joint water and power projects with autonomy to both Kashmir states to let Safta as successful as Nafta.
NIRODE MOHANTY
California
APROPOS of the letter, ‘Suicide attacks and ulema’s role’ (March 8), I would like to ask Islamist parties and their leaders, why are they acting like a silent spectator and not reaching out to the masses, especially in the tribal areas where they command a relevant following?
Instead of marching and protesting for petty issues, why don’t they start an organised campaign to enlighten the people who have drifted due to non-Islamic teachings of a few people having their own vested interest, pitching one Muslim against his another Muslim brother? Why?
We protest against the publishing of caricatures of Prophet Muhammad, and rightly so, but have we ever realised why is this happening? Why are people in the West ridiculing Islam and our Prophet? It is we and not they who are at fault! We are the ones to be blamed for all these issues.
By virtue of committing insane activities against our brother Muslims, we are making ourselves, as a Muslim, a laughing stock in the world besides deviating from the teaching of our religion.
The media is playing its part in highlighting and condemning these activities and so are others, but where are the ulema and maulanas? Why don’t they ask the local administration to take action against the people who routinely set up a camp outside their mosques and ask for donations for jihad? What kind of jihad are they talking about?
In my view, by acting as a silent spectator they are maligning Islam and by turning a blind eye promoting such activities.
We as a nation very conveniently pass the buck of every mishap on the US but it’s time we realised our own mistakes and worked towards its rectification.
It’s very easy to blame the US for every single thing that goes wrong in Pakistan but we should do some soul-searching ourselves.
Instead of campaigning and blocking roads for non-issues, I would request all religious leaders, scholars and Islamic political parties to campaign and protest against the main issue, i.e. suicide bombings.
WASYM SAMAD
Karachi
ASIF Ali Zardari finds himself all of a sudden confronted with the responsibility of deciding the nation’s fate single-handedly.
This is besides what he said the PPP high-ups would make the decisions. Now all are looking up to him alone.
Agreed he has many issues to consider. The party position vis-a-vis the MQM in Sindh, the party position in Punjab and the promises he might have made with the people in and outside the country. Whatever the case be, he has very little time at his disposal. Slight delay may make a major damage. At this stage his friends and opponents will accept his decision but may not any later.
Mr Zardari has also the responsibility of guiding other parties in the coalition with the PPP in making their choices. These choices matter.
TARIQ MAHMOOD
Hassan Garhi,
Peshawar
THIS is apropos of Rashid Khattak’s report, ‘The doomsday clock’ (March 4). I would like to enlighten your readers on the phenomenon of sinking buildings. The most famous example we have of a sinking town in the US is New Orleans. What the press did not report during the recent Katrina disaster was the fact that while the government was lax in responding to the tragedy, little can be done to prevent it again because of the geology.
New Orleans was settled by French settlers in the 18th century who built their town on a hill (above sea level) near the River Mississippi. This is what is called the ‘French Quarter’ today — which survived without a problem.
The low-lying areas were destroyed that were built around the French Quarter later on. The low-lying areas were built on lands that were below sea level and the US corps of engineers designed a system of dikes, levees, and sea walls to keep the water out.
But while the dikes keep the water out, they could not stop the low-lying areas from getting ‘filled up’ with rainwater, because this was like a big bowl. When there were no dikes, nature would take care of draining the water out into the Mississippi delta system. But once the dikes were built, the water would collect and drown the city. So they built a massive pumping system to drain the rainwater out.
Now here is where the situation starts resembling Akbarpura.
When the US corps of engineers devised and built the system of dikes and pumps to save from drowning New Orleans, it was hailed as a marvel of human engineering. But they had upset one of those marvellous, delicate balances in nature – the water table.
Millions of years before they created the ‘dry bowl’ of low-lying New Orleans, in which some rainwater would sink into the ground and the rest would flow into the river. Once the rainwater stopped flowing into the ground because of the pumps, the water table began to drop. Once the water table drops, the ground starts to sink. This is why New Orleans is so famous for buildings that sink within a few years.
This is also why the foundations of structures in New Orleans suddenly become ‘airborne’. And the most macabre phenomenon of all that New Orleans is famous for — coffins that were buried suddenly resurface because the ground around them has sunk.
The disaster of Katrina was that many problems happened at the same time. First there was a tremendous storm that brought in huge quantities of water which was already overwhelming the pumping system. The sinking foundations in parts of the dike system could not resist the increased pressure of the river and failed.
The combination of huge amounts of rain and the river flooding was too much for the pumps, and that is what drowned the poorer parts of the city in the low-lying areas.
Politics plays an important role in all of this as well. This is not the first time that New Orleans has faced the tragedy of the dikes failing. Yet they keep rebuilding where nature clearly intended no one to live.
Akbarpura and thousands of other such places where people built against the rules of nature have faced this problem. The great city of Riyadh in Saudi Arabia runs on deep aquifers that are not being replenished and salinity is increasing. In Indian Gujarat, the overexploitation of the water table caused thousands of acres to go saline because the sea water seeped in where sweet water used be.
In a way the residents of Akbarpura are right — it is doomsday when structures sink like this. But it is not the doomsday caused by God as in ‘Qayamat’, but doomsday caused by man’s lack of respect for nature’s laws.
B. K. VASAN
Chicago
IN view of the oil price hike, M. Khaleeq Kiani in his report (‘Oil subsidy, pricing and profits’, Feb 26) describes two scenarios of impending predicament looming before the newly-elected government. Either it has to take an unpopular step and increase oil prices at the first available opportunity or allow subsidy to widen the budget deficit to erode macro-economic stability the way previous government and the caretakers did.
Although increase in oil prices is inevitable but while going for such an unpopular decision the government must consider the havoc played by oil refineries, illegally accumulating profits by misusing indefinitely the 10 per cent surcharge without enhancing their storage capacity and improving quality of their products.
These fabulous but illegal profits, for instance in the case of PARCO alone, rose from Rs1.3 billion in 2000-01 to Rs10.6 billion in 2007, which comes to 726 per cent in six years. In the case of remaining refineries, the position of illegitimate gain is not different as reported by Mr Kiani.
This is brazen plunder that has to be stopped before shifting the burden of cost to the unfortunate consumer. I agree with the suggestion of Badar Jatoi given in his letter, ‘Taken for a ride’ (Feb 18), that not only 10 per cent levy should be stopped forthwith but the oil refineries having failed to honour the commitment should be penalised and the money recovered compulsorily from the consumers should be recovered and adjusted against the increase in cost.
This is a test case decision for a new government. If taken in right earnest, it will, on the one hand, enhance its credibility in the eyes of the masses and, on the other hand, will reduce the burden on national exchequer to a considerable extent.
DR. ALI AKBAR M. DHAKAN
Karachi
NOT at all unexpected, Dawn of March 3 carried two pieces regarding the subject cited above – one by none less than our celebrated pro bono publico, Ardeshir Cowasjee, and the other by Mansoor Ul Haque Solangi.
In his regular Sunday column on the leading page titled, ‘No shaming the shameless’, Mr Cowasjee dubs it ‘shamelessness’.
On the other hand, in the letters’ columns, Mr Solangi poses four pertinent questions which need to be answered by Mohammedmian Soomro but, as an impartial and non-political senior citizen of Pakistan, an attempt is made to answer these correctly hereunder:
a. Q: Whether a person can be a judge in his cause … at the cost of the national exchequer?
A: No, certainly not – provided there is the rule of good law.
b. Q: It is a mandate of a caretaker … with parliament in the offing ?
A: No, certainly not – subject to the proviso as above.
c. Q: Can a resource-starved country afford this luxury?
A: No, certainly not – more especially inasmuch as it would constitute a precedent and when the tribe of ex-chairmen expands, the liability will run into billions upon billions of dollars.
d. Q: Has he done anything for the people of Sindh?
A: No, certainly nothing – inasmuch as he is a problem, not a solution. (I happened to discuss him with a notable in Islamabad, who volunteered the remark that he is best known for not having attended to anyone at all, except his own kith and kin).
SCORCHED SON OF THE SOIL
Karachi
RECENTLY, I read PIA’s in-flight travel magazine, that I am sure aims at promoting tourism in Pakistan. There was one article on beaches in Pakistan where the writer mentioned the names of various beaches in Sindh worth visiting. Apart from that, he also mentioned some of the beaches that are destroyed due to lack of proper maintenance.
I would like to say that this was the first article on tourism where I found the writer ridiculing the sight he is promoting readers to visit.
I would like to request the editor that if a particular place is not worth visiting, there is no need to mention it, rather than ridicule it. There are foreign travellers also who read the magazine and if you write such articles, you are actually demolishing the whole point of your article.
MARIA AAMIR
Dubai
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.