US-Pakistan dilemma

THE US is a country Pakistanis love to hate. In the keynote address to the Socialist International Congress in Athens, Asif Zardari claimed that Pakistan is a “Petri dish of international terrorism” which was “a product of failed international politics and not our own creation”. While Mr Zardari did not specifically point a finger at the US, it was clear which country he was referring to. While most would agree that the US does share the blame for militancy here, there is a propensity to blame America for all that ails this country. Consider the case of the deposed judges, a cause célèbre that has partially been blamed on American realpolitik. But Fareed Zakaria, editor of Newsweek International, has said that the judges are not being restored because Asif Zardari does not want them back. While Mr Zardari’s and Mr Zakaria’s statements can be debated, what is beyond doubt is that since 9/11 Pakistan has been tethered to the US and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Given this reality, it is in the interests of both Islamabad and Washington to make the most of the tight embrace they find themselves in.

On the Pakistani side, it must be understood that the primary American concern is militancy in Pakistan. While the US has 35,000 troops in Afghanistan who are in the crosshairs of militants regionally, Pakistan’s tribal areas are considered a likely source of the next 9/11; and a matter of concern to Washington is that Pakistan has nuclear weapons. From the American perspective, these facts demand firm and conclusive action against militants inside Pakistan. Although for its own sake Pakistan cannot afford to postpone any longer the day of reckoning against militants on home territory, its strategy tends to be ambivalent. That no doubt provokes the US.

America must understand that Pakistan needs the carrot as much as the stick to pass on to its people. Islamabad also must not appear to be taking orders from Washington. Hence public reaction to Richard Boucher’s statement expressing concern at the ‘cold war’ among the coalition partners and not enough being done in Fata may not be so positive. A Centre for Strategic and International Studies report last year found that only 10 per cent of the $10.58bn given by the Americans since 9/11 has gone towards development aid and humanitarian assistance. American soft-power can and must be used to achieve more. Fighting the war against militants militarily and politically requires the cooperation of the Pakistani state, but it will all come to nought if the public continues to see the real enemy as the US. America must help Pakistan help itself, even if previously the Bush and Musharraf administrations did not see the virtue in doing so. Whether this comes in the form of a ‘democracy dividend’ or an economic bailout, this must be provided now and it must be done discreetly.

Rising flour prices

WHEAT flour prices continue to rise despite sufficient grain stocks from the fresh harvest, highlighting the government’s inability to handle the situation efficiently. In Punjab, for example, millers have unilaterally raised the retail price of flour to Rs20 per kg — it was under Rs13 in May 2007. In Karachi and other parts of Sindh, flour is available for Rs30-35 per kg while it is being sold at over Rs25 per kg in the NWFP and Balochistan. Flour prices started rising in early May last year when wheat shortages appeared on the horizon due to hoarding and smuggling to Afghanistan and beyond. After months of spiralling prices and the acute shortages seen last winter, it was expected that the volatile wheat market would stabilise after the arrival of a fresh crop. But that has not happened and the problem refuses to subside. Who is to blame for this volatility? The government accuses hoarders and smugglers who want to take advantage of the differential between global and domestic prices of wheat. But it should understand that it is solely responsible for having failed to check smuggling and hoarding. It is also hesitant to intervene in the market by releasing grain to mills from official stocks. Although the government has now decided to supply grain from its stocks to wheat-deficient areas, the move is unlikely to have a significant impact on the market and contain prices. Various federal and provincial agencies have wheat inventories of almost five million tons, sufficient for eight months of consumption, and Islamabad also plans to import 2.5 million tons this year.

It is therefore plain that the government has enough space for intervention in the market in a big way to prevent prices from spiking further. But will it? The immediate need is to hedge consumers who are already suffering under the burden of food and energy inflation and are being forced to cut back on other essential spending. In addition the government must begin work immediately on executing the scheme, announced in this year’s budget, under which cash handouts are to be given to lowincome households. The Punjab government too should rapidly formulate the mechanism for implementing its plans to provide subsidised flour, ghee and pulses to the marginalised. Other provinces must also follow suit to protect their citizens. While executing such schemes, however, it has to be ensured that the subsidy reaches those who actually need it and is not misused for political gains or misappropriated by the bureaucracy along the way.

Even Nadra is vulnerable?

A FOILED bank robbery in Karachi resulted in some striking revelations about the National Database Registration Authority, the apex authority on data in the country. When a probe was launched into the attempted robbery in which a policeman and a bandit were killed, it was discovered that one of the suspects had two computerised national identity cards, one issued in Karachi and the other from Lahore. Investigations further revealed that the date of birth, father’s name and identification mark were the same on both CNICs, but they showed different residential addresses with different family card numbers and photographs. This breach of the system has elicited a strong response from officials and has raised questions about the security of the database. It is said that the system has an auto-hunt mechanism which prevents an individual from registering twice. How was this suspect able to sidestep a system that is claimed to be infallible?

Nadra was established “to modernise and revolutionise the system of registration of Pakistani nationals within and outside Pakistan”. However it seems to have fallen prey to the corrupt practices which have become synonymous with government bodies. In fact officials have expressed concern that in the past ‘insiders’ have facilitated the acquisition of CNICs with different credentials. Such practices will only serve to exacerbate the deplorable law and order situation in the country, with criminals across the country possibly acquiring more than one CNIC. On the other hand, Nadra has refuted these claims and said that these cases emerged a few years back but were dealt with swiftly. It is of supreme importance that Nadra is made impenetrable as all information in regard to the identity of Pakistani citizens emanates from this authority. CNICs are proof of existence and serve as the core identification in all legal and informal proceedings in the country. The authority should direct attention to pointing out and subsequently eliminating any weaknesses in the system.

OTHER VOICES - Middle East Press

Elections are coming

Turkish Daily News

No one can now say for sure what the verdict of the Constitutional Court in the closure case against the Justice and Development Party or AKP, is to be, but it is clear that the ruling party has started preparing for elections. Yes, perhaps it is just preparing for municipal elections, but a preparation is underway.

Unlike the past July 22, 2007, elections, the AKP is apparently taking far more serious measures to guarantee an election success, though like the April 27, 2007 e-memorandum served to boost its votes (from around 30 per cent to 46.6 per cent according to many analysts) the closure case might produce a similar backlash. Before the July … vote, the ruling party was accused of buying votes by distributing coal and foodstuff sacks to people of the low income group throughout the country. Now, the AKP is (thinking)… of declaring a comprehensive construction amnesty that is a legalisation of illegal constructions, including those on Treasury lands.

The “bribe the electorate” campaign had worked in the past and might work in the upcoming local….Of course there is “public interest” in such action. …such a bill would be enacted as law by the parliamentary majority of the AKP, (but) it would be compatible with “democratic rules”…

Can any government, any parliamentary majority, have the right to undertake such a move that would lead to the devastation of our shores, forests, areas close to water resources and other treasury-owned land, just to purchase some additional votes? — (June 28)

Self before country

Oman Tribune

The time has come for President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe to consider what is more important for his country — continuation of his stewardship or the welfare of its people. If Mugabe does pause to consider the welfare of his people, he might still be prepared to at least allow someone else to try and restore the shattered economy…. He should also realise that no one doubts the sterling role he has played in freeing his country from the clutches of colonisation. He … is respected through the length and breadth of … Africa for showing how freedom could be achieved and managed. However, the euphoria of the success of the early days of Zimbabwe’s freedom has vanished and instead there is only the daily fight for survival for the ordinary Zimbabwean citizen. Surely Mugabe has realised that his economic policies have not worked, and it may be time to give someone with new ideas an opportunity to attempt and rescue the economy of Zimbabwe from the crisis it is facing.

It is unfortunate that Mugabe is not ready to listen to the moderates and has instead gone ahead with the second round of the polls that have returned him to power with a thumping majority. It is this victory, the credibility of which is highly dubious, that will not be acceptable to the international community, including neighbouring African nations….

Strident demands are being made for the removal of Mugabe, with some even advocating the use of force. The latter would be counterproductive.— (June 30)

US & insurgency in Swat

SWAT valley’s geo-strategic importance forbids Talibanisation from taking root there. Sufi Mohammad’s demand for the imposition of his version of Sharia law dates back to 1992, a pre-Taliban period.

After 9/11, religious extremism in Swat has taken on horrific proportions under Mullah Fazlullah. The government engaged in dialogue with the Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-i-Muhammadi (TNSM) during the nineties. However, the main thrust of its policy, specifically under Benazir Bhutto, was aimed at squashing the movement through fire power.

I am a witness to one such demonstration called the Buner massacre of May 1994. I was returning from Swat in a convoy, along with foreign diplomats, which was stuck at Buner because Sufi Mohammad’s followers had blockaded the road, vowing to maintain the blockade till Sharia law was enforced in the valley. The paramilitary troops opened fire on the blockaders, killing a majority of participants and injuring all others. Although Qazi courts were also established in response to TNSM’s demand, the gory massacre demonstrated the government’s resolve to curtail the movement, which it was able to do through the nineties.

It is one of the many paradoxes of Pakistan that under the military government of Musharraf, district after district in Swat valley fell to the militants under the brutal leadership of Mullah Fazlullah. This was in no small measure a consequence of Musharraf’s agreement with Washington to fight the Taliban on Bush’s terms. The terms dictated that the US would not deal with the Taliban as POWs but would drive them into Pakistan, where Musharraf would ambush them if they launched insurgent battles in Afghanistan.

When the inevitable Afghan insurgency began and Musharraf had to fight the Taliban, the Bush administration told the media that the Pakistan army was fighting the Taliban at the behest of the US because the militants threatened US forces in Afghanistan. In other words, the Pakistan army was not killing Muslims that threatened Pakistan. This not only thoroughly delegitimised US ally Musharraf, it also further weakened the already feeble resolve of the soldiers to fight the Taliban.

Conversely, it gave a new lease of life to the Swati Mullah’s movement which was dormant since Sufi Mohammad’s arrest in 2002. US drone attacks in Pakistan which caused large civilian casualties and Musharraf’s Jamia Hafsa debacle that killed hundreds of unarmed civilians fuelled the fires of militancy further. It remains to be investigated as to whether or not a foreign hand is supplying Mullah Fazlullah with the finances he seems to be lavishly using in pursuit of his objectives.

Whatever the causes of Swati insurgency, trying to curb any insurrection by conceding to unreasonable demands is counterproductive. In the case of Swat, it is downright dangerous due to a host of reasons that lie at the intersection of regional and international politics.

The Swat problem is better explained within the larger picture. The rise of Islamic terrorism coincides with the discovery that the world’s oil production has peaked and what remains underground is not going to go round for long. The anxiety produced by this discovery is augmented by the fact that rapid industrialisation in the developing world is jacking up the demand for oil. There is global expectation that a rivalry for access to oil resources will intensify in years to come.

The ownership of most of the world’s oil reserves lies with the Islamic states of the Middle East whose defence capability is not commensurate with their monopoly of a key strategic commodity in the 21st century. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was cognisant of this gap and tried to prepare the Islamic countries to deal with it as early as 1973.

The intense animosity that Bhutto incurred from the United States was a corollary of this effort on his part. The lavish praise that Benazir got from Washington was due to the fact that she shut the door of this struggle on Pakistan People’s Party, thereby changing the direction of what was hitherto Pakistan’s largest political organisation.

Though the US has been the unquestioned hegemon in the Middle East ever since the Second World War, neocons doubt the hegemonic momentum is sustainable in the long run due to the rise of new centres of Asian power in China and India. Emboldened by their unrivalled military strength during the shake up in the international kaleidoscope caused by the demise of the USSR, they have decided to rearrange the world to their benefit before the pieces settle down.

Lacking imagination, all they could think of was to turn the political clock backwards and reinvent imperialism to safeguard their energy interests. The international consensus that evolved out of humanity’s struggle against imperialism holds the invasion and occupation of foreign lands to be immoral. Hence the neocons had to come up with a strategy for justifying a condemned policy.

Because the rise of Al Qaeda coincides with the above-mentioned development in the world’s economic history, and because it has been used as the pretext for invading countries not involved in 9/11, it is reasonable to assume that a certain degree of political engineering has originally gone into its making. The windfall profits from the dotcom bonanza of the nineties allowed the US intelligence comfortable access to tax payers’ money for financing covert operations that would plant the timed eruptions of terrorism in key strategic locations in the Middle East, thereby producing a moral Disney show that would lead the world to approve of the US invasion and occupation of otherwise much weaker countries in distant lands.

Osama bin Laden was ejected out of Sudan into Afghanistan at the behest of Washington. According to the 9/11 commission report, Sudan offered his custody to the US embassy but the ambassador declined. So did the Saudi government which works in close collaboration with the US in matters related to security. The fact that a dangerous international terrorist who openly called for worldwide attacks on US military and civilian assets, besides his involvement in the assassination attempt on the US ally Hosni Mubarak, was made to leave his known residence for an unknown one — no one yet knew he would land in Afghanistan — that too without the US embassy obtaining as much as even his fingerprints, casts aspersions on the sincerity of CIA’s pursuit of him.

Instead of arresting and interrogating bin Laden about his network, or getting the Saudi government to hang him, the US chose to rain 68 cruise missiles on Afghanistan from the Indian Ocean in 1998 because bin Laden now lived there. It highlights the theatrics that have gone into the making of CIA’s war on terror.

The writer is an energy consultant and analyst of energy geopolitics based in Washington DC.

Poland’s threat

FRANCE’S half year in command of the European Union got off to a bumpy start on Tuesday, with a threat by Poland’s President to derail the Lisbon Treaty.

Lech Kaczynsk warned he would not sign the treaty reforming EU institutions because the Irish “no” vote in a referendum last month had made his signature “pointless”. Although Mr Kaczynski has made similar threats before, his words threaten the unspoken strategy to press Ireland to hold a second referendum in the first half of 2009 by lining up ratification by the other 26 European governments.

That strategy, agreed by Europe’s leaders at their recent summit in Brussels, is already threatened by a constitutional court case in the Czech Republic and — to a much lesser degree — by a new, left-wing legal challenge in Germany.

The new warning from Mr Kaczynski — one of the twin brothers who negotiated the treaty for Poland — looks, on the surface, to be more serious. All other Polish institutions are ready to go ahead.

French officials were, however, confident on Tuesday that Mr Kaczynski would eventually fall into line. Poland is anxious to see the EU enlarged to include Croatia next year. Paris has made it clear it will veto all new members of the EU until the Lisbon rules streamlining EU institutions and voting procedures are firmly in place.

In the meantime, the risk is deepening of a second EU crisis over trade policy — this time of President Nicolas Sarkozy’s making. On Monday, the French President renewed his criticism of Peter Mandelson as Europe’s chief negotiator at the world trade talks.

He claimed Mr Mandelson’s approach would cut European food production by 20 per cent and its agricultural exports by 10 per cent. “That is 100,000 jobs lost. I will not let that happen,” M. Sarkozy said.

— © The Independent