ELECTION results in Nepal should come as a surprise to India. New Delhi’s failure lies in not gauging the popular mood.

This should be a point of concern because the span of thinking between India and Nepal turns out to be not a few months, but many years. People were changing and New Delhi was stuck in its wishful thinking of saving the kingship and its old ally the Nepal Congress.

To say officially that India would deal with the government which emerged in Kathmandu was to admit that it did not want what had happened and, now that it had, it would accept it. What choice does New Delhi have? People have returned the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists) in the election. Who are we to comment on their choice?

In fact, the vote for the Maoists was also a vote against India. Nepalis have experienced New Delhi’s excessive involvement in their affairs. The Maoists raised the question of India’s ‘big brother’ attitude at a poll meeting. The treaty we have with Nepal is not to their liking. We should have scrapped it long ago. Why did we not do so is beyond me.

In the same way, I do not understand former President Carter’s appeal to America to accept the change in Nepal. The most powerful democracy in the world as it is, the US should realise that, however unpalatable, the outcome of free and fair elections is final.

It does not matter if one country does not like the government in another. It is the people’s free will which counts, and Carter, who supervised the polls, should know this.

Still, not many will understand or appreciate what the Nepalis have done. Theirs is a feudal society which has lived for some 235 years with the idea that the king is god and in his rule rests democracy and prosperity. Disparities are so entrenched in the country that any call to turn against the past finds a responding chord. Hopes that their lot would improve had begun to take shape. Maoist leader Prachanda has only utilised the atmosphere.

When the whole city of Kathmandu came out into the streets in support of the demand for the abolition of kingship two years ago, it was an expression of a suppressed society to set itself free. The promise to switch over to a republican setup gave them hope of change. They have supported the change, pinning their faith on the betterment of the people.

The Maoists have been returned, not because the voters are impressed by Marxist ideology but because they trust that those who have promised a different economic order will get them out of the poverty in which they have been stuck for centuries.

True, the element of fear was there because the Maoists ‘ruled’ the countryside for years with the gun. It is an open secret that the Maoists have not surrendered all weapons as agreed upon long before the elections and have stacked them somewhere. Yet the people had no alternative. They had rejected the king. They did not want to go back to the Nepali Congress which they had tried again and again and found lacking.

It was, however, amusing to see election posters showing a photo of Stalin along with pictures of Karl Marx, Lenin and Engels. Stalin killed hundreds of thousands who dared to differ or speak out. But then Stalin’s portrait hangs prominently also at the CPM headquarters in Kolkata. Still, the CPM is part of the mainstream and puts its faith in a democratic system.

The Maoists in Nepal will do the same when they assume power. The disillusionment against them would begin, as has happened against the CPM in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, if and when they fail to deliver. The Maoists in Nepal may also come to rationalise that the establishment of a welfare state is not possible in a capitalist system, as the CPM is doing.

I am vehemently opposed to what the Naxalites (also called Maoists) are doing in India, indulging in an orgy of bloodshed and crime. But then, they make no secret of their opposition to the democratic system. They do not want to come into the mainstream because their faith is in coercion, not consensus. This is precisely the reason why the Maoists in Nepal and those in India may not join hands. One is conformist, the other against conformism. The Indian Maoists may back the radical group within the Maoists in Nepal to support the concept of a ‘red corridor’ extending from ‘Pasupati to Tirupati’.

Nepal is, however, an example which can teach the South Asian region a lesson if it is willing to learn. No doubt, poverty gives birth to desperate remedies. The feudal order negates democracy. People revolt when they are convinced that they have no way to escape the oppressive order except through violence.

Democracy gives people a peaceful option to vote against those who oppress them or do not perform. The Nepalis have done that. The question which the Maoists have to answer is whether they have the ability and determination to improve the lot of the people. The polls which the Maoists have, more or less, won are for the formation of a constituent assembly. The same people can throw them out if they do not see any promise in the constitution to be framed.

The Maoists have said they would not go back to arms. Not long ago when I met some of their leaders at Kathmandu, they told me that even if they were defeated at the polls they would not pick up the gun again. This is how democracy functions. People change masters; masters do not change the people as happens in authoritarian and military-run states.

I am not sure whether the Maoists who have emerged through violence can stick to their word if they feel they may lose power. This demands an unshakable faith in methods. Mahatma Gandhi emphasised that if the means were vitiated, the ends were bound to be vitiated. India has not lived up to that advice even though it won freedom through non-violence. Democracies, wherever they are, have to show their faith in the methods they employ.

In fact, the US of today has changed beyond recognition. It has compromised with oppressive laws and violation of human rights. Nepal’s Maoists do not have to follow it even if it is a democracy. Their undertaking not to pick up their guns again will be watched with anxiety. n

The writer is a leading journalist based in Delhi.

THE PML-Q is no longer part of the ruling coalition and the people are now too involved with the new government. However, this should not stop anyone from revisiting the party’s election manifesto which was noticeable for its emphasis on encouraging Sufi Islam in the country.

Such a suggestion was made despite the fact that numerous PML-Q leaders have good relations with sources of Wahabism and extremism in the country. Take for instance, the links between Ejazul Haq and Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and the clerics of Lal Masjid. Perhaps, the leadership, like the majority of Pakistanis, is confused about the interpretation of religion.

Nevertheless, this critique does not reduce the significance of looking at the proposal of Sufi Islam as an alternative to extremism and the radicalisation of segments of the population. How does one bring back Sufi Islam which was inherently more secular in its approach, connected people from different religious communities, and was a major source of the spread of religion in the Indian subcontinent? A lot of people refer to the Sufi tradition as representing the Barelvi school of thought.

A glance across Pakistan shows numerous shrines and mausoleums spread all over including in the Frontier Province which is considered more radical in terms of the people’s faith. The Sufis had come to the region from outside or were men and women belonging to the region who preached religion and spirituality. The names of shrines like Data Gunj Bukhsh, Bari Imam, Golra Sharif, Uch Sharif, Shahbaz Qalandar and others in Pakistan or Nizam-ud-Din Aulia and Ajmer Sharif in India are some of the many examples of the Sufi tradition.

However, things began to change during the 1980s, especially after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan when it became critical for the CIA and ISI to prepare and train religiously inclined segments of the population for greater radicalisation so that a war could be fought. The use of religious ideology as a source of inspiration had been employed earlier as well during the Bhutto regime as a means of countering a move by Afghanistan’s President Daud to encourage the ethnic card in Pakistan.

Nevertheless, it was General Ziaul Haq who can be held responsible for not only unleashing radical Islamist forces but also encouraging them to begin a phase of reformation in religion which aimed at redefining a lot of concepts including that pertaining to war and conflict. The state machinery including the American CIA and Pakistan’s ISI sought a partnership with the religious parties and militant groups to fight the war in Afghanistan.

Now both sides make counter claims. The Jamaat-i-Islami, for instance, says that it was instrumental in inspiring the Afghans. The ISI officials, on the other hand, claim that the agency was instrumental in helping the Jamaat and others to play a role.

In a nutshell, today’s extremists were born of the wedlock between General Ziaul Haq and radical religious groups and parties with the US initially playing the role of the groom’s best man. Even after the US had left the region following the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, the linkage between the militant groups and the ISI continued. The relationship was based on the realisation that a firebrand kind of religious ideology was critical in inspiring people to fight a war and gradually changing the geostrategic and geopolitical scene.

The period after the 1980s was critical in redefining and fine-tuning the concept of jihad. The war in Islam no longer remained a defensive one but became an offensive war to be fought against soft targets. In the more recent past, this definition has been expanded to tactics such as suicide bombings. Islam’s radical clerics and extremist elements see this as an effective tool of war. Young children, men and women are now told that this is essentially part of how jihad was defined in their religion.

Unfortunately, the world of Islam still lacks an institutionalised alternative voice from the religious mainstream who can contest the prevalent definition. The alternative voices which preach peace and discourage extremism, unfortunately, do not belong to the mainstream. The professors teaching religious studies or encouraging inter-faith dialogue in American universities do not necessarily have any influence on religious discourse in the Muslim world.

Given the spate of suicide attacks in Pakistan it is sad that most clerics and scholars of Islam from the mainstream have shied away from condemning such acts or expressing their opinion on the issue. For instance, the question which clerics from the Jamaat-i-Islami or others such as Farhat Hashmi must address is whether killing your own people is part of jihad. Condemning such acts privately does not have the same effect.

The question now is whether Sufi Islam in Pakistan can curb extremism? Logically, the representatives or families of the Sufi tradition have a direct interest in countering this influence. Thanks to years of General Ziaul Haq, we saw places known for Sufi culture giving birth to extremism. Although the influence of Sufi shrines continued to draw people and some scholars claim that the number of Barelvis had increased or remained constant, the fact is that such areas also became known for greater radicalisation.

The centres of spiritualism became a catchment area for both the pirs and the extremists. The power and influence of the militants, who were now backed by government agencies, attracted young men towards extremist values. For example, in spite of the shrines in Bahawalpur and Sindh, a limited number of people also started to follow the Deobandi and Wahabi school of thought and started to produce jihadis.

The existing Sufi tradition could not become a bulwark against extremism because the pirs themselves had stopped delivering to the people in terms of their spiritual needs and had become very much part of the institutional state power. Traditionally, the Sufis and the pirs used to negotiate between secular state forces and spiritualism. However, the new generation of pirs was subject to greater state intervention.

For example, General Zia was critical in bringing about the change in the leadership of the dargah of Bari Imam. Most pirs in Pakistan today no longer negotiate between the religious and spiritual and the secular. Instead, they have become linchpins of state power and vie with the authorities for greater political influence and material benefits.

The obsession with power made it impossible for these people to emphasise secular spiritual values and teach a lesson of peace and amity. There was least interest in countering the proliferation of Wahabi ideology or radical beliefs.

An alternative to radical Islam will not be produced until such forces gain institutional strength and are willing to engage the believers in an equally powerful and substitute discourse. n

The writer is an independent strategic and political analyst.

ayesha.ibd@gmail.com

SOCIETIES today spend huge amounts on passenger travel and freight transport. At present, nearly 25 per cent of the world’s total energy in the form of oil is consumed by transportation. Over the last century, travelling and transportation have been mainly fuelled by oil.

There are now growing concerns about the long-term sustainability of oil since reserves are rapidly diminishing. Pakistan imports 80 per cent of its oil. That is reason enough for it to tackle urgently the growing challenges. The way ahead is the exploitation of indigenous energy resources. Biofuel is an ideal candidate for partially replacing petrol and diesel. This is the fuel derived from biomass (either in the form of living organisms or the waste they produce).

Notwithstanding the global debate on the feasibility of biofuel and its impact on food production, this form of energy offers many advantages to Pakistan. The main one is that it is a domestic resource and thus reduces reliance on imported oil.

It is also renewable, environmentally-friendly, biodegradable and non-toxic. Biofuel can help Pakistan substantially cut its petrol import bill, diversify its energy mix and increase energy security. It also exhibits great micro-economic advantages. For example, not only can farmers become self-sufficient in meeting energy requirements, they can also earn handsome revenues by selling it in the open market.

As an alternative source of energy, biofuel has been characterised by superb growth in many parts of the world. In 2006, the global biofuel production rose by 28 per cent reaching 44 billion litres. Bioethanol grew by 22 per cent and biodiesel rose by 80 per cent. On Feb 24, 2008, this source of fuel hit another landmark when a commercial flight flew between London and Amsterdam using biofuel. One of the Boeing 747 aircraft’s four engines ran on fuel comprising a 20 per cent biofuel mix of coconut and babassu oil and 80 per cent of the normal aviation fuel.

This fuel can be broadly classified into two types: bioethanol and biodiesel. The first is used in gasoline (spark ignition i.e. oil and gas) engines and is generated via the fermentation process — mainly through sugar. It can also be developed by the chemical process involving ethylene and steam. Ethanol fuel blends usually comprise 10 per cent ethanol and 90 per cent petrol. Modern car engines require no modifications to run on this composition. However, flex-fuel vehicles can run on up to 85 per cent ethanol and 15 per cent petrol blends.

Biodiesel is used in diesel (compression ignition) engines and is produced through a variety of chemical processes mainly the transesterification process in which glycerin is separated from biomass oil to deliver biodiesel. Biodiesel can easily be made from any fat (animal fat), tree/crop oil or vegetable oil (soy, canola, sunflower, castor, palm) or even common waste products such as used cooking oil.

Recently, the Pakistan government took the initiative to promote biofuels. The emphasis, however, has been on bioethanol coming from molasses, a byproduct of sugar with the Pakistan Sugar Mills Association (PSMA) being closely involved in the advancement process. But in 2007, only six out of more than 70 sugar mills in the country had facilities to transform raw molasses into fuel quality ethanol. With the current production level of the sugarcane crop, Pakistan has the potential to produce over 400,000 tonnes of ethanol. Nonetheless, less than one-third of this amount is being currently produced. Most of the raw material — molasses in our case — is exported either as it is or in the form of industrial alcohol (an intermediate stage between molasses and ethanol) at a very low price.

Fully exploiting the aforementioned potential to displace an equivalent amount of imported petrol (in terms of energy content) can offer very healthy economic relief to all stakeholders including the government, the PSMA, farmers and the common man.

Fears that increased pursuance of biofuel may lead to the displacement of food crops do not hold water. Statistics suggest that so far less than 0.1 per cent of the total potential of molasses-based bioethanol is being used as alternative fuel. Thus a 1,000-fold increase is manageable without any adverse impact on food crops. Furthermore, efforts could be made to increase the sugarcane yield and also to introduce other energy crops such as sugar beet.

Waterlogged land, estimated to be around seven million acres, with appropriate techniques such as gypsum treatment, can also be used for growing low-quality energy crops. There is also tremendous potential to produce bioethanol from biomass waste and municipal waste. On top of bioethanol, there is also an overwhelming potential for biodiesel production. A prospective biodiesel source is the castor bean. It is a self-gown plant seen in many parts of Pakistan particularly in arid and semi-arid areas.

It is noteworthy that in terms of energy crops (i.e. seed production per hectare and oil content), the castor seed is a far better choice than other crops presently in use in Europe and the US such as corn, rapeseed, sunflower and soyabean. Castor oil (a derivative of the castor bean) is regarded as one of the best substances for the production of biodiesel because it is soluble in alcohol and does not require heat and the consequent energy as other vegetable oils do for transformation into biodiesel. Detailed figures and mappings for castor bean production in Pakistan are not available since it is very much an untapped resource.

Despite the government’s initiatives, bioethanol-led biofuel promotion programmes have made no impact. A typical example is that of the pilot project launched in 2006 as part of which three petrol stations (one each in Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad) introduced ethanol-petrol blend in a ratio of 1:9. Ironically, the track record suggests that most such initiatives evaporate in their initial stages and do not make a meaningful impact.

To make bioethanol initiatives tangible, rational policies would have to be formulated and implemented. There is a wide perception that the bioethanol programme should not be under the mandate of the ministry of petroleum and natural resources as is the case now. Bearing in mind that all over the world there are conflicts of interest between rival technologies such as fossil fuels, renewables and nuclear power, the bioethanol programme should have an autonomous mandate, independent of the influence of oil and gas stakeholders.

The present practice — export of the bulk of raw material (molasses and industrial alcohol) — is a far less lucrative approach and should be discouraged. In order to make a real breakthrough, biofuel policies should be redesigned in consultation with all stakeholders such as the PSMA, the oil and gas companies, industrialists, investors, farmers, agriculture bodies and civil society. Even automobile companies should be persuaded to introduce flex-fuel vehicles. Financial incentives, where appropriate, should be offered.

The writer is a lecturer in renewable energy at the Glasgow Caledonian University, UK.

dr.m.asif@gmail.com

A NEW report by the Geneva-based Inter Parliamentary Union (IPU) has shown that women are changing the priorities and sometimes the tone of legislatures around the world.

But, it also highlights the slow pace at which the number of parliamentary seats held by women is increasing.

In 1975, when the first United Nations World Conference on Women took place in Mexico City, some 11 per cent of places in single chamber legislatures and lower houses of parliament were occupied by women. By 2008, there had been scant progress on this front: now, just under 18 per cent of legislators worldwide are women, far lower than the 30 per cent that is widely deemed necessary for women to begin influencing the direction of parliamentary affairs.

Equitable representation of women in legislatures is clearly “an ideal, not a reality” notes the report, titled ‘Equality in Politics: A Survey of Women and Men in Parliaments’.

The study examines gender equality in legislatures from a variety of perspectives, based on responses from approximately 300 parliamentarians in 110 countries –– and follows on a similar report published in 2000, ‘Politics: Women’s Insight’.

‘Equality in Politics’ was released at the 118th assembly of the IPU, underway, April 13-18, in the South African port city of Cape Town.

The union is an umbrella organisation for parliaments around the globe.

There have been advances in Africa and Asia, for instance, with about 17 per cent of parliamentary posts in the two regions now held by women. Rwanda leads the field globally, with women accounting for some 49 per cent of those in its lower house of parliament. As regards countries that managed to have women occupy more than 30 per cent of parliamentary posts, half are developing nations.

“Developing and emerging countries have made great progress, while the situation in the so-called old democracies has not moved forward much,” said IPU Secretary General Anders Johnsson.

Asked to discuss measures that could see more women elected, the parliamentarians spoke in part of the need to alter perceptions of women’s place in society through education programmes –– and to consider the introduction of childcare facilities to free women for political pursuits.

The report also highlights the usefulness of gender quotas to bring greater numbers of women into legislatures.

According to Yassina Fall, senior economic adviser at the United Nations Development Fund for Women, “Women understand what other women need.”

The report states, however, that women parliamentarians can experience difficulty translating their priorities into political change, sometimes because of unsympathetic ruling parties.

Amongst a host of other observations, ‘Equality in Politics’ notes that for substantive change to take place concerning women’s representation in legislatures, political will must be brought to bear.

“Men and women must agree and acknowledge that women’s inclusion and equal participation in parliamentary processes not only benefits societies...but is also necessary for legitimate democracy.”

Or, in the words of a female legislator from Ireland quoted in the study: “Our democracy is unfinished when women are absent from policy making.” n

—IPS News