|
| March 26, 2008 | Wednesday | Rabi-ul-Awwal 17, 1429 |
Poor aid for Afghanistan
Why we are still not polio-free
Seizing the moment
OTHER VOICES - Indian Press
AT one of his initial post-election press conferences, Asif Ali Zardari had spoken of his party’s concern with ‘governance’ as compared to ‘government’. Though he focused, with due pertinence, on the need for provincial autonomy, one wonders if the co-chairperson of the PPP was aware of just how loaded his earlier statement actually was.
MONDAY in Islamabad was a day of euphoria, first at the National Assembly where the House elected its new leader by a thumping majority and shortly thereafter at the capital’s Judges’ Colony, which had remained out of bounds for all and sundry since the Nov 3 imposition of emergency rule by Gen Musharraf. It took only a verbal order by the prime minister-elect for the capital police to remove the barricades and set the confined judges free in their own homes. The absence from the prime minister’s oath-taking ceremony at the presidency on Tuesday of the People’s Party co-chairman and other ruling coalition leaders continued to reflect the winds of change sweeping Islamabad.
Amidst all this excitement, Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry struck a sober note by advising his supporters who had come to cheer him at his residence to move cautiously in their pursuit of reinstatement of the judiciary. In Lahore, Justice Khalil Ramday, too, spoke wise words. The judiciary’s case now rests with the elected and a fairly representative parliament. The ruling coalition parties have made their disparate positions clear on the issue of the judges’ restoration to their pre-Nov 3 positions. The PPP and the PML-N have, under the Bhurban Declaration, committed themselves to work on the matter through parliament. The presidency, for once, has also resisted the temptation to show a hurried reaction to the move. All these are sobering thoughts, which must continue to inform the interim period, pending the legislature’s formal take-up of the matter.
In spite, nay rather because, of its multi-party formation, the emerging government presents a rare opportunity to legislate on national issues in a way that goes beyond the immediate setting of the record straight. Let parliament decide the future of the sacked judges through a consensus among all stakeholders, by all means; but let it also not miss the bigger picture, and put in place a democratically agreed upon mechanism to ensure the appointment and independence of the judges henceforth. It is imperative that a deliberation-based, and not a majority-vote bulldozing of legislation, approach is applied to the various amendments made to the Constitution at the behest of a president in military uniform. It is hoped, now that President Musharraf has donned the civilian mantle and held fairly credible elections whose results have been accepted by all, he will gracefully accept and live with the consequences of the many choices he has had the opportunity to make since taking power in a military coup in 1999. The prerogative to make all such choices must now revert to parliament as the sovereign body reflecting the will of the people and the spirit behind the 1973 Constitution as the basic law.
ONE of the major reasons behind the continued insurgency in Afghanistan is the lack of development which has resulted in economic hardship for most of its population. Insufficient funds, the misuse of the available amount and poor planning and coordination have contributed to this situation. In this context, a report by Acbar, an umbrella organisation for various NGOs working towards the rehabilitation of the war-scarred Afghans, has pinned much of the blame on donor agencies, for the most part from western countries. Since the Bonn conference of 2001, most of them have failed to deliver on their combined monetary pledge of around $25bn for reconstruction in Afghanistan. The result, according to Acbar, is a shortfall of $10bn dollars. Only $15bn has been delivered so far and even this amount is controversial considering that six billion dollars have returned to the donors in the form of profits and consultancy fees. Instead of having local consultants and services, they have preferred their own for the job.
However, it would be unfair to hold only the donors — and the stringent conditions attached to their aid — responsible for the slow rate of progress in Afghanistan today. Corruption and inefficiency are the hallmark of many government departments in Kabul — an observation that is bolstered by the fact that the Afghan government is unable to account for the spending of five billion dollars in aid. Given this image of inadequacy, it is no wonder that most of the aid is not under the government’s direct control. In all this, the people have suffered. Poor coordination and communication between the donors and the government have worsened the position of the vast majority, especially those living under harsh conditions in the rural areas which are neglected in comparison to the cities.
Only the most altruistic of donors gives aid without strings attached. So, it is not surprising that the aid pledged to Afghanistan has come in the wake of 9/11 and the rising wave of militancy targeting the West. Most of it, totalling around $25bn, has been spent on security assistance with a view to routing the Taliban. Strangely, the donors do not seem to have realised that poor socio-economic conditions often lead people towards militancy. This trend can only grow, especially as Afghan refugees return to their country to find no means of sustaining themselves and consequently turn to dubious forms of livelihood including the narco trade. The Acbar report should serve as an eye-opener for the donors and Kabul, and urge the two to identify their lapses and to undertake to rectify these. Otherwise, peace in Afghanistan will remain elusive.
ONE serious consequence of the ongoing conflict in the northern areas is that it has obstructed the Expanded Programme on Immunisation that aims at making the country polio-free. As noted by an EPI review meeting in Karachi the other day, the wave of militancy is making it impossible for immunisation and surveillance teams to conduct meaningful activities in the NWFP, which is at a much higher risk of transmission of the virus from Afghanistan. Given the massive southwards migration — both of internal and Afghan refugees — to major cities in the country, especially to Karachi, the chain of transmission from Afghanistan is now running across Pakistan. Being the monitoring agency, WHO ensures the dispensation of vaccine at the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and at refugee camps. But once the refugees move out of the camps, there is no way to keep track of their movement.
Now the various agencies meeting in Karachi have rightly stressed the need to somehow track the high-risk nomadic population to make the EPI campaign more successful and sustainable. In this regard, the authorities in Sindh seem to be moving in the right direction by trying to do a progressive profiling of refugee communities in Karachi and elsewhere. Also, the location of yet another case in the province — third in the last three months — though unfortunate, does indicate a surveillance system stronger than in the rest of the country. The proverbial room for improvement is always there, but the EPI outreach is not to be denied. After all, it has brought down the prevalence from several thousands to a mere handful in about a decade-and-a-half. The problem apparently lies in there being too many agencies involved at several tiers to allow one decisive final push against polio. With the global agencies taking refuge behind their ‘advisory’ role, the national EPI managers calling it a provincial subject, and the provincial EPI complaining of interference from all sides, it is not a mystery anymore why the polio-free status has to date remained elusive.
Whatever the case, it opened up a whole range of crucial national issues — from the minimalist style of governance to the ponderously statist.
Alternatively the issues range from the distribution of powers to the question of the very governability of the country. And of course it was no bad thing that this sort of public soul-searching was seen to emanate from the head of the senior partner in the ruling coalition. It was at least a sign that crass authoritarian certitude was on the wane and democratic openness on the way.
Criticism in certain quarters notwithstanding, a twilight period between the elections and the forming of a credible government would seem to have been unavoidable. There were bound to be preliminary hiccups before a transition from one order to another could be effected, especially when the earlier one in this case proved to be as disastrously gung-ho and unabashedly experimental as it clearly was.
Besides having to overcome certain radical differences — relating in particular to the restoration of the pre-Nov 3 judiciary and power-sharing — the two main parties, the PPP and PML-N had no option but to defuse tensions that had arisen between them since the signing of the Charter of Democracy.
Asif Ali Zardari had additionally inherited a party formed in the image of his iconic wife Benazir Bhutto and was in the unenviable position of having to keep it intact in the teeth of the void left behind by her. This was no mean task, given the slight amorphousness and autonomy that had inevitably crept into the upper echelons of the PPP in the protracted absence of Benazir.
The apparent dithering over the choice of a prime minister has quite obviously been linked to this rather curious phenomenon.
Analysts were of the view that too much was being made of the prime ministerial issue. However, they failed to recognise that for the PPP itself the issue was of key significance. Indeed, it was one which involved its very lifeline. And it was precisely for this reason that the party’s leadership had been hedging its bets over the question with the PML-N providing its own empathetic input.
In the fraught situation in which both parties found themselves where the transition to democracy still had to take place this was perfectly understandable.
The roadmap to democracy may have been endorsed by the respective signatories of the Murree accord but in a country like ours the democratic goal was liable to prove elusive if precautions were not taken in advance.
If some of the angst pervading our society with regard to our future has filtered through to our top political leaders, so much the better. With the shadow of authoritarianism still looming large if in isolated splendour, we should feel gratified rather than alarmed.
The issue that is weighing more on the minds of thinking people is the fact that sycophants in the PPP are doing all they can to convince Asif Ali Zardari of the wisdom of assuming the prime ministerial mantle after a provisional stint by a stopgap incumbent.
And it is reported that serious consideration is being given to their advice by the PPP co-chairperson.
This is disturbing for many outside the party. There is no doubt that Asif Ali Zardari has shown his mettle in a very short span of time and under the most exacting of circumstances. Besides keeping the party effectively together, he has proven a skilled negotiator, a suave media performer and a man with a vision that is no mere facsimile of that of the late Benazir Bhutto.
Clearly, these are qualities that would befit any future prime minister of the country. But that does not make the job a categorical imperative.
On the contrary, it ought rightly to be shunned by a man who has so much to offer in the transcendent position in which he has been providentially placed, one that provides him with three huge political advantages: distance, objectivity and, above all, a potentiality that in terms of sheer power surpasses any necessarily limited — and limiting — government post.
Instead of egging him on to aspire to trappings that in view of the enormous difficulties the country is today facing may in days to come turn out to be an inescapable trap, Asif Ali Zardari’s team of advisers should be persuading him to work in concert with the party’s prime minister elect.
A buffer of this kind would allow him, while earning possible kudos, to avoid probable flak and use his distinctive hands-on approach to help overcome the many economic, social, political and, indeed, systemic ills that beset the country.
He will prove the bigger leader for doing so. If, in spite of all this, he still wants to pursue what, under the looking glass of Pakistan’s history, seems a relatively hollow dream, then he should at least wait to let his political persona get absorbed by the national psyche.
For the moment, though, both the PPP co-chairperson and the head of the PML-N should be looking to the veritable tsunami that is on hold at the heart of civil society in the shape of the issue of the restoration of the pre-Nov 3 judiciary. The position taken by both leaders in the Murree accord was doubtless testimony to a sincerity of intent on their part in this regard. It was also in keeping with popular expectation.
Consequently, any wavering or backsliding over this issue will merely be a recipe for disaster. The problem is one that cannot be deferred or wished away. It constitutes a radical contradiction between political and civil society, one that Mian Nawaz Sharif had the wit to recognise from the start on his return to the country from exile.
The PPP would do well to heed his sage advice in this regard. Even the most hard-boiled politician of Pakistan will grant that there can come a time in history when statecraft is simply obliged to accommodate principle. It is self-evident that this is just such a moment.
Test message
The Hindustan Times
… THE figures are alarming … [T]he official figure of 5,857 suicides in 2006 from exam-related stress is increasingly looking like a trend. But while much of the blame is being directed at the board examination system … the real generator of stress among children lies at the twin chambers of the home and the school….
[A]t the end of the day, the intense competition of entering college or simply performing well … will remain unless one disables the very source of extreme stress before examinations: neurotic expectations.
It is here that the HRD Ministry or any other extraneous entity can do little and parents and teachers can do much. If youngsters can be brainwashed into believing that exam results and entry into a (prestigious) college are the be all and end all of high school life then surely they can be ‘brainwashed out’ of believing it.
In most cases of extreme stress among students, it is the unrelenting pressure from parents that make many youngsters snap….
On the part of the teachers, the fact that learning is as important, if not more important, than ‘scoring’ must be driven home. In this context, those responsible for framing board exams should ensure that as much correlation between learning and scoring marks is maintained.
But then, there will always be differences in performance. And there is bound to be those who will ‘fail’, regardless of what new tag one wishes to put to ‘failure’.
So what is necessary is not to lash about against the proverbial system but to ensure that our youngsters are able to take success or failure as it comes.
Above all, parents must drive home one single message to the children: nothing, definitely not exams, is worth killing oneself. — (March 19)
Hailing democracy
The Sentinel
IT must have agonised Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf to hail the making of a democratic Pakistan, but he [had] no option…. The political party that he supported is nowhere in the reckoning. Fundamentalists have been shown the door. In command of the National Assembly will be the two most strident opponents of army rule in Pakistan…. All this makes the National Assembly a field of fierce opposition to Musharraf’s diktats that will diminish by the day, thanks to democracy.
It is, therefore, expected of the new government in Pakistan to ensure that the military does not meddle with the nascent democracy….
Today, Musharraf may well be forgiven … his continued arrogance because the verdict is so very clear; the message that the voters have sent across is that it is Musharraf who has brought about the downfall of the Pakistani nation-state.... [The new] government’s foremost duty is to pick up the threads of democracy and weave a pattern that is stable, pro-people and immune to military machinations. It will take a dedicated leadership to accomplish the task and help rebuild a nation that a dictator made it a habit to cheat in order to promote his own interest….
Experience shows that democracy experiments have always failed in Pakistan. A reality check will inform anyone that blaming the military alone is unjustified because democratically elected leaders have given the military enough scope to intrude into the forbidden domain of politics. Which means the leaders … will now have to distance themselves from the commercial delights of military adventurism…. The only equation now is to let Pakistan be a state governed solely for the people.
Pakistani leaders would do well to learn real democracy from their neighbour, India. And there should be no inhibition in appreciating the fact of Indian democracy that has sustained despite its aberrations. — (March 25)