|
| April 12, 2008 | Saturday | Rabi-us-Sani 5, 1429 |
Losing the police plot?
Yet another explosion in Lahore
OTHER VOICES - Bangladesh Press
EU’s presidential race
In Basra without a paddle
FRENCH President Nicolas Sarkozy and his glamorous new model-cum-singer wife Carla Bruni may grab headlines across the world, but when it comes to serious European Union business, German Chancellor Angela Merkel continues to consolidate her reputation as the most influential politician in the 27-nation bloc.
HUNDREDS of American military personnel and “advisers” have been ordered into Basra where the American command believes British security policies have failed.
IN his review of the current state of the national economy, federal Finance Minister Ishaq Dar made two important points about putting the economy back on the right track and rectifying the widening budgetary and current account imbalances. It hardly needs to be emphasised that the economic agenda should be the government’s first priority given the hardship people are facing. Rising food and energy prices have fuelled inflation which was at an all-time high of 14.12 per cent in March. Mr Dar said the new coalition would have to take some harsh steps in the next 75 days of the current financial year to restrict the fiscal deficit — which threatens to balloon to nine per cent of GDP — to the manageable level of six per cent. The proposed measures include one or more hikes in domestic oil prices and rationalisation of taxes. He did not say how the coalition planned to shield lower-income groups from the negative impact of further increases in oil prices. The issue of rationalisation of taxes was also left unexplained.
The second point he made was that the government would seek to arrange $2.5bn from external sources to shore up the country’s dwindling foreign exchange reserves. But he did not elaborate whether the government intended to raise the present stock of foreign exchange by seeking assistance from multilateral donors or by bringing fresh foreign investment, or pursuing some other strategy. One doesn’t have the slightest clue how the economy or the common man will be affected if the government fails to arrange this amount.
The remaining part of the minister’s briefing was mostly devoted to criticism of the previous PML-Q and caretaker governments and their mishandling of the country’s finances, and a repetition of what we already have learnt from the State Bank’s last report on the performance of the economy during the first half of this year. The previous PML government and the caretakers were accused of presenting an inaccurate picture of the true health of the economy. The SBP too has stated so in its last report.
The minister also promised accountability of the economic managers of the previous government, including former Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, through the Senate’s Finance Committee and the new Public Accounts Committee for bringing the economy to this critical point. Will this principle of accountability apply to those who are going to manage the economy from now onwards? It would have been much better if Mr Dar had told us about the steps the new government might be contemplating — if it is indeed thinking along these lines — to make the processes of economic policy formulation and budget making really transparent through wide-ranging debates in parliament and the media to ensure that the finance ministry baboos do not dare fudge figures to show growth when there is none.
IRONICALLY, civilians and the police make strange, if not estranged, bedfellows. To be fair, several reasons keep this relationship at odds but the abject indigence of the force remains the real culprit. Where routine police excesses have robbed the public of all faith in their custodians, the authorities have made negligible efforts to address the woes of the force. Instead, burdensome additions are introduced in the name of security. One of these is Karachi’s Muhafiz force which, established some eight months ago, is far from honouring its promise of vigilance. Its performance is hardly the stuff of urban legend and the force only has a few arrests and an encounter with a fugitive to its name. Police high-ups of the time had hoped that the visibility of Muhafiz vehicles would serve as tools of deterrence for miscreants. However, street crime statistics tell a different story and do not endorse the force as an able prevention mechanism. According to a report in this newspaper, its 600 personnel were extracted from the notorious Sindh Reserve Force with a few exceptions from various police stations. Therefore, its origins are reason enough for consternation. Second, the training of Muhafiz personnel leaves much to be desired, including weapons training. Third, its fuel allowances are ridiculously low which curtails free movement and the absence of a designated Muhafiz police station makes the force reliant on regular police points.
The government would have done well to have used the funds earmarked for over 50 Muhafiz mobiles in the city and other technical support to strengthen existing law enforcement personnel. There are grave issues — lack of incentives in the way of pay raises, decent living quarters, training, and promotions that are judged on merit by established panels — that create police apathy which is detrimental to the citizenry. Also, our police force is riddled with political appointments that discourage neutrality. The fact that the metropolis is not home to a majority of its law enforcers translates into a detached force and promotes police crimes. Superfluities such as the Muhafiz force will not tame Karachi. But an indigenous, professional, compensated police force comprising native recruits is more likely to become the long-needed harness.
GETTING rich is great. But getting rich by endangering other people’s lives is immoral, if not downright criminal. Many people aspiring to riches in Pakistan, however, seldom see the cost-benefit relationship of their businesses in terms of how many lives they may be endangering. Seldom do enterprises operate under standard safety procedures accepted and followed in civilised societies that care about human life more than they care about money that exposing workers to grave danger can earn. These unscrupulous entrepreneurs are generously aided and abetted by corrupt officials. The explosion in Lahore’s iron market in the crowded Misri Shah area on Thursday — on the 20th anniversary of the Ojhri camp inferno in Rawalpindi that claimed about 100 lives — was a grim reminder how unstoppable greed and criminal neglect can have lethal consequences. That the man who owned the warehouse where the incident took place also died due to some still to be ascertained reason underscores categorically the need for putting human life ahead of human desire to make money.
The loss of seven precious lives and injuries to more than a dozen people, including some school children, in the Thursday explosion also highlights the failure and ineptitude of the authorities responsible for safety at workplaces. Everyone, especially those living in the dangerous proximity of hazardous businesses, knows full well how safety standards are openly flouted in factories, warehouses and plants. Only the officials in charge of implementing these standards fail to see their absence. Worse still, they choose to turn a blind eye to dangerous enterprises that spew money as well as death in equal measure. The ramshackle structure of the warehouse that exploded in Lahore was always a clear and present danger for those working there as well those living nearby even before its dangerous contents blew up mysteriously. Who allowed it to operate with such impunity should be the subject of a government investigation as much as the cause of the explosion that brought it to the front pages of national newspapers. Nothing but a strict application of laws that bar businesses from operating without safety procedures and existing in fatal proximity to residential and commercial areas can ensure that such traumatic accidents are not repeated.
Fighting juvenile crime
Jai Jai Din
JUVENILE crime is on the rise. More than 300 juvenile muggers are lurking in the capital…. The problem is felt elsewhere in the country as well. The police department has admitted to the rise in juvenile crime, but there is no complete list of the criminals….
The rise in juvenile crimes can be attributed to … joblessness, rising food costs, absence of family bonds and eroding ethical values…. Nowadays parents spend less time guiding their children…. Children from poor and low-income families, who are in search of jobs, are being trapped in a vicious cycle of crime.
(These) children … are not alone to blame for the crimes. Some rich families have found their children straying into a dangerous world as they crave for money to buy drugs and alcohol. According to a non-governmental survey, 90 per cent of young people trapped in crime are drug addicts.
We have to pay immediate attention to the growing problem…. Parents can play a central role … by practising ethical values at home. We have to engage our children in education, creative work and social and cultural activities … to stop them from drifting into a deadly world. — (April 10)
Army chief defuses speculation
Jugantor
THE army does not have political ambitions, said General Moeen U Ahmed in a meeting with editors, two days after his term of service was extended by one year.
….Moeen said the army would not take any step to militarise society. The army was working under the civil administration, he emphasised. ….As people want to see a normal democratic process, Moeen made it clear that elections would be held according to the roadmap.
But different political leaders, including former prime ministers Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina and former President Ershad, doubt the year-end polls.
The government had moved to hold a dialogue with political parties ahead of the elections. The army chief said the army would not have a role in it. But he made it clear that the country must be run by competent, honest people.
We believe that the road to elections will be less bumpy if the government succeeds in rolling back the food crisis. At the same time, like everybody in the country, we look to the army for its continued assistance in times of crisis. — (April 10) n
— Selected and translated by Arun Devnath
Being the leader of the EU’s largest economy has certainly helped boost Merkel’s standing across Europe. After all, nothing gets done in the bloc without German support — and funds.
But Merkel’s diplomatic and consensual deal-making skills have also been in much evidence within the EU, adding to her lustre as the uncrowned queen of Europe. Or perhaps future president? Increasingly, speculation in Brussels and other EU capitals has focused on whether the German chancellor could be persuaded to become the bloc’s first-ever president, following the expected ratification of the EU reform treaty this year which will create such a post.
Merkel is believed to be uninterested in the EU job and German diplomats insist that being in charge of Europe’s most powerful economy is more important and rewarding than becoming the symbolic, quasi-powerless head of the EU.
But others say the EU — currently going through one of its cyclical pessimistic periods — is in dire need of a dynamic and determined leader like Merkel to shake things up and prepare for new challenges. If Merkel does signal an interest in moving to Brussels, her main rival for the job will be former British Prime Minister Tony Blair who is, so far, the only serious contender for the post.
The German chancellor’s chances, however, have improved following a recent public opinion survey which underlined that Europeans think Germany is the current leader of Europe and Chancellor Merkel the continent’s most influential politician.
Citizens surveyed in the five EU nations, saw Germany as leader of the bloc, including 57 per cent of Spaniards and Germans, 39 per cent of Italians and 35 per cent of Britons, according to the poll which queried 6,478 people between Feb 27 and March 6.
Merkel came out well ahead of President Sarkozy as Europe’s most influential personality — even in France where 38 per cent cite the German leader against 18 per cent their own president.
Although Sarkozy is doing his best to seize the reins in Europe, 68 per cent of respondents in France still believe Berlin is calling the shots in Brussels — and Germany is also seen as the country likely to have the most influence on the rest of Europe over the next decade.
Merkel’s star continues to rise. Although most British — and Americans — said they would choose former British Prime Minister Tony Blair as a potential president of Europe, across Europe it is Merkel who gets the popular vote, making her the only serving leader to be considered appropriate.
Of course, the race to run the EU lacks the colour, excitement and passion characteristic of the presidential contest currently underway in the US. Europeans continue to be transfixed by US politics and clearly if he were to stand in an EU election, Senator Barack Obama would win hands down.
Passion and politics hardly ever mix in EU circles. But speculation that Blair, a fairly controversial politician in Europe in view of his support for the US-led Iraq war, would occupy the post has added some excitement to a generally yawn-inducing exercise.
Sarkozy strongly supports the idea of ‘President Blair’. But Belgian Foreign Minister Karel De Gucht recently poured cold water on Blair’s bid to become the European Union’s first full-time president. De Gucht said Belgium would not accept a candidate from a country that does not fully participate in all EU policies, including the euro currency and the bloc’s passport-free zone. Britain has opted out of both and also maintains its so-called ‘red lines’ on policing, justice and internal affairs.
Meanwhile, some EU officials have said that Merkel would be an ideal candidate to sit at the head of the EU table. “There are few women in the running when it comes to the EU’s top jobs,” said European Communications Commissioner Margot Wallstrom, pointing to Merkel as a highly capable woman more than eligible for such a post.
Merkel has won kudos for her ability last year to forge an EU deal on combating climate change and before that, her skill in securing agreement on an EU budget as well as the contents of the reform treaty.
She has also won praise for standing up to US President George W. Bush over the question of Nato’s eastwards expansion, making it clear at the recent alliance summit in Bucharest that Berlin firmly opposed Nato membership for Georgia and Ukraine in the short term. As a result, Bush was forced to abandon his hopes for the two countries.
Also in the running for the top EU post are Jean Claude Juncker of Luxembourg and former Spanish Prime Minister Felipe Gonzalez. Others whose names have been mentioned include Vaclav Havel, the former president of the Czech Republic, and Bronislaw Geremek, a Polish politician, but their scores are modest.
Under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty, EU heads of state and government are to choose a president of the European Council for a two-and-a-half year term, renewable once. In addition to choosing an EU president, the bloc’s leaders also have to select candidates for two more jobs: a first-ever EU ‘foreign minister’ or ‘high representative’ and a president of the European Commission.
The conventional wisdom in Brussels is that Javier Solana, the current EU foreign policy chief, will take over the job as foreign minister on January 1, 2009, but possibly only for nine months until a new EU Commission is sworn in the autumn. Jose Manuel Barroso, the current European Commission president, is expected to be re-appointed as head of the EU executive.
But even as they wrangle in private over the jobs, most EU governments have been careful not to go public with their favourites. After all, given the fact that all 27 EU states have to ratify the Lisbon Treaty, a ‘no’ vote against the blueprint in the Irish referendum in early June could not only put a stop to the talk of new presidents and foreign ministers, it would also damage EU credibility for a long, long time. n
The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Brussels.
Relations between local British and American commanders are reported to be as strained as at any time since the allied invasion to topple Saddam five years ago.
This follows the failure of the offensive by Iraqi army units ordered and directed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to drive Shia militias from the streets of Basra, the country’s southern oil capital. The move was aimed principally at the Mahdi army of the cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who the Americans are now depicting as the principal tool of Iranian meddling in Iraq.
The offensive ground to a halt, and after a ceasefire was brokered through Iran, Sadr ordered his militias off the streets. However, fighting has continued between Mahdi fighters and American forces elsewhere, most bloodily in the slum satellite community of Baghdad known as Sadr City.
During the fighting in Basra some 1,500 troops of the Iraqi army are reported to have deserted. Maliki has been criticised for trying to use units of the Iraqi army before they were fully trained and combat ready.
But the most of the blame has been heaped on the British and their policies towards the Shia militants in Basra. Last year the British pulled back all their forces from outposts inside the city of Basra, principally the presidential palace overlooking the Shatt al-Arab waterway. To effect withdrawal without a bloodbath, it is now known that local British commanders cut a deal with leaders of the Mahdi army, among others, which appears to have involved the release of some prisoners.
“That deal is now in tatters,” a British adviser said from Iraq this week. The new American corps commander, Lt General Lloyd J Austin III, who took command of US ground forces in Iraq last February, is reported to have lost patience with the British. Effectively the Americans have now taken command of allied operations in the Basra sector. Squads of “special advisers” have been embedded with Iraqi military units in and around the city. Some 140 troops from the 1st Battalion, the Royal Scottish Regiment, have also been sent back into the city as mentors and trainers.
Last week Des Browne, British defence secretary, announced that the withdrawal of further British troops from Iraq is to be halted because of the violence in Basra. The bulk of the 4,100 British forces are based at the international airport in the desert outside the city. Now that their command appears to have lost the confidence of the Americans, it is difficult to work out their precise role. “They are stuck at the airport without a paddle, you might say,” a British officer remarked sotto voce a few days ago.
The American command now seems to be taking the line of Fred Kagan and retired US Army general Jack Keane of the rightwing American Enterprise Institute. Both men take credit for inventing the “surge” of American reinforcements last year that they say has now transformed security in central Iraq. They are implacable, and very noisy, opponents of the British line that Basra was never susceptible to a military solution in the first place.
They believe that all coalition and Iraqi forces should make every effort to defeat the forces of the Mahdi army and the movement of the Sadrists as the principal tools of Iran, which will have to be confronted militarily sooner or later anyway. At the end of last month Fred Kagan told The Sunday Telegraph:
‘‘It is rather a watershed moment in the Anglo-American alliance. I understand that you prime minister has already said that the special relationship is over. This is another watershed moment. There’s an issue of special relationship. There’s an issue here of fulfilling your obligations as an ally, freely undertaken. If Britain has responsibility for that area of operations, which it does, then British forces have an obligation to step up when needed and it sure looks here like they’re needed.”
British forces and policy makers in Iraq seem not to know whether they’re coming or going. It would be impossible to reinforce, as more troops are being called for in Afghanistan. Besides, putting more battalions back into Basra would hardly make much difference. Retreat on the other hand would whiff of defeat. Relations with America are hitting a new low, with echoes of the standoff between Washington and London in the Suez debacle of 1956.
It looks like the lowest point since Tony Blair committed Britain and its forces to Bush’s Iraq adventure in early 2002. Characteristically, Whitehall is covering the embarrassment with a stony silence –– which the media are mysteriously unwilling to challenge.
Questions must be asked, in Iraq and Washington as well as London. First the Kagan-Keane narrative about coalition force against Sadr and the Shias, now endorsed by General Austin, is as usual as much fact as fiction. The surge they claim to have invented, has won tactical success, but may well invite strategic failure. It is based on paying and arming some 90,000 fighters in Sunni tribal militias who now have to be incorporated into Iraqi national armed forces. They may be opponents of Al Qaeda but they are certainly not for a continuing American presence.
The fighting in Basra has the hallmark of an intra-Shia civil war. Prime Minister Maliki of the Dawa party wanted to knock out the Sadrist Mahdi army ahead of provincial elections which he fears Sadr’s men will win if they are held later this year. He launched the offensive as new contracts were being negotiated with international companies to develop three promising oilfields west of Basra.
Maliki and Dawa have forged an alliance with the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq movement and Badr organisation militias of the al-Hakim clan, deadly rivals of the Sadr clan. Curiously the al-Hakim movement is even closer to Iran than the Sadrists, as their militia and political movement was founded in Iran and under Iranian tutelage during the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-1988. Though getting weapons, training and spiritual guidance from Iran, the Sadrists are staunch Iraqi nationalists. Unlike the al-Hakim group they want Iraq to stay as one state and not a loose federation.
The Americans are unlikely to be able to eradicate the presence of the Sadrist in the Shia community –– however much the hawks of the Washington think tanks and Nouri al-Maliki may try to say they can. They are not only getting involved in a Shia civil war, but a Shia oil civil war.
Nor will a change of CEO in the oil company at the White House at the end of the year make much difference. This week the Republican front runner John McCain, who trumpets his great experience in foreign affairs as a credential for the top job, again demonstrated his grasp of Iraqi affairs by suggesting that Al Qaeda in Iraq was a Shia movement generated by Iran.
––The Guardian, London
