|
| July 17, 2008 | Thursday | Rajab 13, 1429 |
Privatisation gone wrong
When the rains come
OTHER VOICES - Middle East Press
What Americans really want
Iraq: Obama’s warning
AVERTING the threat of extremism and preventing nuclear proliferation, the two cornerstones of America’s policy in our region, are likely to figure prominently in Prime Minister Gilani’s meeting with President Bush later this month.
IN his most ambitious foreign policy speech to date, Barack Obama robustly defended his stance on Iraq on Tuesday, accusing the Bush administration of pursuing a “single-minded” foreign policy that has cost thousands of lives, tarnished America’s image and emptied the nation’s coffers.
THE fog of war along the Durand Line grows thicker. Troops, helicopter gunships, tanks and armoured personnel carriers of the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) have arrived on the Afghan side of the border along the North and South Waziristan tribal agencies in what appears to be preparation for attacks inside Fata. A spokesman for Isaf has denied that plans are afoot to enter Pakistan and emphasised that Isaf’s mandate “stops at the border”. However, statements emanating from Washington suggest otherwise. Speaking at a White House press conference, President Bush said: “No question … that some extremists are coming out of parts of Pakistan into Afghanistan. And that’s troubling to us, it’s troubling to Afghanistan, and it should be troubling to Pakistan.” Keeping up the pressure on Pakistan, presidential hopefuls, Senators Barack Obama and John McCain, have emphasised that the violence in Afghanistan remains a key issue for the US. Events in Afghanistan also suggest that the US may be ready to set aside restraint. The death of nine US soldiers on Sunday in an audacious attack by the Taliban on an Isaf outpost in northern Afghanistan was the worst loss the Americans have suffered in Afghanistan since June 2005. The 32,000 American troops in the country remain very much in the Taliban’s crosshairs.
However, US or Isaf troops must not cross over into Pakistan, in hot pursuit of Al Qaeda and Taliban militants or otherwise. Doing so will be irresponsible in the extreme and will only fuel the cause of militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan while undermining the political process in Pakistan. The Taliban are itching for a battle with American forces, the “enemies of Muslims” according to Bajaur Taliban spokesman Maulvi Omar, and any US intrusion will further dent American credibility in this part of the world and burnish the credentials of the Taliban as defenders of Muslim populations under siege. Moreover, an attack by Isaf or American forces inside Pakistan will make it very difficult for the government to do its part in the fight against militancy, a war that is as much Pakistan’s as it is Afghanistan’s. Already the ominous troop build-up on the borders of Fata has stirred opportunist political dissent that threatens to paralyse the government. However, it must also be acknowledged that frustration amongst the Americans and Isaf is on the rise because of the perception of political drift in Islamabad. What is missing and is urgently required in Islamabad is a coherent policy for dealing with militancy in Fata and northern Pakistan that goes beyond the vague three-pronged strategy mooted by the prime minister. The world and all of Pakistan is looking to Islamabad for leadership and vision. The time to act is running out very quickly.
EVER since its privatisation, Pakistan Telecommunication Company Ltd (PTCL) has remained in the news for all the wrong reasons. This is in sharp contrast to the reputation it used to enjoy as an efficient public-sector entity before its management rights were handed over to Etisalat. The recent countrywide protests against the management by PTCL employees are the latest manifestation of the consumer and employee dissatisfaction that seems to negate all the claims that were made at the time of privatisation. The employees, who were promised no change in status and, indeed, no retrenchment, are now being made to suffer under the euphemistically labelled Unified Pay Scale. With July 21 set as the deadline, employees are being forced to sign documents giving the management the right to freeze their employment benefits at June 30, 2008 levels even if they have 10 years or more left to serve the organisation. Besides, there have been numerous incidents where employment status has been changed from regular to contractual, which again has a serious financial impact on the individuals concerned. All this incidentally comes not much after Etisalat introduced a Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS), which again was nothing but a euphemism for a parting kick. With the VSS taking care of more than 30,000 staffers — most of them part of the technical cadre — there was a serious decline in service standards. As many as 100,000 telephone complaints were registered in Karachi alone in the month when the VSS was executed because there were not enough linemen to handle the load. Matters have since deteriorated even further.
The Etisalat management has also not won many hearts by the unannounced imposition of various packages on consumers. It even reduced the pulse duration without an unambiguous announcement though it regularly indulges in high-scale advertising. For some strange reason the regulator, the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority, has been keeping its hands off the mess. So much so that when a consumer watchdog recently filed a plea in the Sindh High Court against PTCL and the PTA, the latter did not even bother to attend the hearing. Having retained a stake of nearly 60 per cent in PTCL, though it has no management control any more, the government cannot absolve itself of responsibility. The PTA needs to be jolted out of its slumber. The earlier the better.
IT is a looming threat — the onset of the monsoon season. The cloudy skies that should be a welcome relief from the scorching heat are in fact a harbinger of disaster on the roads for the residents of Karachi. The perils of the monsoon in Karachi are embedded in the minds of its residents who year after year have watched the drama of flooding unravel on the roads and at times in their homes. A recent report indicates that “most towns in the city are still unprepared to cope with the post-rain situation due to the lack of infrastructure, incomplete development projects and the poor financial situation”.
This problem has taken on a tangible form in the ‘city of lights’. Old-fashioned flooding is a thing of the past. The roads dug up all over the city are a forerunner of bigger problems in the near future and are forcing residents to raise questions about the timely completion of projects. How will motorists and pedestrians deal with the trenches in every nook and corner of Karachi when they are flooded? There is an irony in these ongoing development projects; they are exacerbating the very problem they were meant to alleviate. The root cause of flooding, however, has been the blocking of the main outfalls that carry water from Karachi’s stormwater drains and nullahs into the sea. These have been choked, narrowed or encroached upon for ill-planned projects or to reclaim land benefiting a few with political clout and financial resources to match it. The executive district officer for municipal services has claimed that the desilting of major nullahs and stormwater drains is about to be completed and this year citizens will face minimum trouble due to rain. However, a source in the city government told Dawn that the old city areas might be flooded in case of heavy rains due to the continued encroachment on major sewerage drains. This issue needs to be addressed so that when the drainage projects are completed their effectiveness is not impaired. Meanwhile, the DHA project is scheduled to be completed by the end of this month — which seems unlikely anyway — but unfortunately the rains won’t wait for anyone.
Prevent the next disgrace
Haaretz
THE impending end of the Ehud Olmert era is now unavoidable. Across the political spectrum, and … within Olmert’s Kadima Party, the consensus is that public disgust over the revelations about his conduct should be translated into a thorough cleaning of the political stables. If it is possible to find a positive side to the Olmert scandals, it is the hope that they will serve as a point of departure for preventing future embarrassments at the highest levels of the Israeli government.
It seems … three hurdles must be overcome. The first is that voters must decide to insist on ethics as a necessary condition for membership in the government, and especially for heading it.
The second hurdle is that the candidates themselves must fear … put[ting] themselves at risk by exposing their past. Those who know they have skeletons in their closets must know that these skeletons will be dragged out and [will] disqualify them. The past cannot be changed, but it can be used as a measure of a candidate’s qualifications for office.
Finally, it is necessary to revitalise those mechanisms available to the state, such as the panel charged with preventing conflicts of interest … The filtering mechanisms of Israeli politics failed in Olmert’s case … not [for] the first time. — (July 14)
Protest on beef imports
The Egyptian Gazette
TENS of thousands of demonstrators in South Korea protested their government’s decision to allow the sale of American beef…. [T]he demonstrations reflect the people’s awareness and will power to maintain their integrity against US pressure regarding South Korean security. Seoul banned the import of US beef five years ago over fears of mad cow disease. In April this year, the Korean government agreed to lift all restrictions on imports of young cattle as they are less susceptible to the disease. However, protesters say the plan does not do enough to protect them. Washington has been putting pressure on South Korea, one of the largest markets for US beef, to reopen this market.
Faced by massive protests, the government has tendered its resignation to defuse public anger, although the resignation has not been accepted. Here in Egypt, a large number of consumers rely on cheap imported Brazilian meat despite warnings of poor quality owing to improper storage and slaughtering methods. People don’t heed the warnings, however, because the alternative is to buy expensive local meat. The South Korean ministers’ reaction to protests against state policy shows respect for its citizens by their willingness to step aside and not cling to their ministerial chairs … — (July 12)
The overt objectives of the policy are well known. Less well known to the wider public is the covert working of the policy. Seymour Hersh, the veritable correspondent of The New Yorker, often writes in meticulously researched articles about the concealed designs of America’s covert policy in the region.
So, instead of waiting a la Mel Gibson for a knock on the head to find out what Americans really want, Prime Minister Gilani should pay close attention to what Hersh writes — not just as a feast for the mind but as deep insights into how America’s covert policy, more often hand in glove with Israeli policy, is implemented in our region.
The New Yorker is christened by conservatives as the bible of East Coast intellectuals, famously known as ‘limousine liberals’. If the conservatives are right then Hersh is The New Yorker’s Lot, the prophet of doom who exposes the doomsday designs of American intelligence operatives in our region. But unlike Lot people notice when Hersh writes. He has a distinguished record of exposing American foreign policy lies, like the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, and Abu Ghraib, and comes closest to epitomising the notion of the correspondent as a star.
In his latest article Hersh writes about a $400m American operation to destabilise the leadership in Iran through a secret military force operating in Iran and through the support of rebellious Kurds, the Mojahedin-i-Khalq, Sunni fundamentalist groups such as Jundallah, and the Baloch. As a result, there is a surge of violence in Iran for which the Iranians correctly blame the ‘Great Satan’.
The surge in Iran follows a strategic shift in American policy (which Hersh described in an article last year) after realising belatedly that “the most profound — and unintended — strategic consequence of the Iraq war is the empowerment of Iran”, and became convinced “that the biggest threat is Iran and Sunni radicals are the lesser enemies.”
President Bush announced the policy shift in January last year: “Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops…. We will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.” This was followed a few days later by Vice-President Cheney’s warning of the possibility “of a nuclear-armed Iran, astride the world’s supply of oil, able to affect adversely the global economy … [T]he entire region is worried. The threat Iran represents is growing.”
As a consequence of this policy shift Hersh warned the public throughout 2006 and 2007 of intensified planning for a possible major air attack on Iran: “Air Force planning groups are drawing up lists of targets, and teams of American combat troops have been ordered into Iran under cover to collect targeting data … to deny the Iranian regime the opportunity to begin a pilot programme to enrich uranium.”
The present American surge in Iran, therefore, is the consequence of a wider strategy and understanding with its partners in the region to counteract Shia ascendance in the region.
The covert operations in Iran are modelled on a programme in Pakistan run by the CIA, NSA, DIA, Special Forces, etc., using surrogates, Predators, satellite technology, etc., to target Taliban leaders with the precision of a brain surgeon. Hence also the surge in executions of people suspected by the Taliban to be American agents. A similar programme worked well in the Horn of Africa. But Hersh says the Baloch and others are marginal groups in an overwhelmingly Shia Iran so this ploy will not succeed.
But encouraging such insidious groups does not bode well for Pakistan. The violence will inevitably spill over the border into our country. Thankfully, for now our government is cooperating with Iran and bravely defying American pressure, evidence of this being the recent agreement to hand over a Jundallah leader to the Iranians.
US operations inside Iran are ominous coming on the heels of a major Israeli military drill that so resembles an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. The drill is not an aberration emerging from the mind of a fading prime minister with a cloud of corruption over his head and popularity equal to the statistical discrepancy. Neither is The Economist correct in describing the drill as “warmongering noises” that few believe, else the “oil price would be even higher.”
Hersh describes it correctly as the logical unfolding of a long-term strategy epitomised in Adm Mike Mullen’s latest press briefing after returning from Israel: “Iran is on a path to get nuclear weapons, and I think that is something that needs to be deterred.”
Not surprisingly, the Europeans are scared. The Financial Times raves about the unfolding of a “disaster for the greater Middle East, for the world economy and for western security.” Global markets already in the bear’s claws would “rattle” if this happens.
The short-term implications for us are clear — prices would be driven sky-high, unemployment will surge adding to further distress and social tension, and even more people will be pushed into poverty.
America is strong, wealthy and globally deployed but Pakistanis dislike imperial stretch in any form. We cannot agree with a muscular American role off our coast. When Prime Minister Gilani sits down for lunch with President Bush on July 28 he should convey to him our strong misgivings about the escalation of tension in the region, our even stronger desire for permanent peace in the region, and express in clear words our full support for the people of Iran and for the democratic process in that country.
The writer is a former principal of Gordon College, Rawalpindi.
Ahead of a trip to Europe and the Middle East next week, Mr Obama is emphasising that he intends to use soft power — diplomacy and economic aid — rather than brute force to achieve America’s aims in the post-Bush era.
If he becomes president, he says he will restore alliances that have been fractured by seven years of unilateralism from the Bush-Cheney administration. Mr Obama has repeatedly stated he will start withdrawing US combat forces from Iraq from his first day in the White House if he wins in November, transferring as many as 10,000 combat troops to Afghanistan to engage Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters operating from Pakistan.
Mr Obama says that, as president, he would completely revamp America’s approach to the world by dealing with the challenges of Al Qaeda terrorism, nuclear proliferation, energy security as well as climate change.
“For eight years, we have paid the price for a foreign policy that lectures without listening,” he told his audience in a 38-minute address at the Ronald Reagan International Trade Centrein Washington. “By any measure, our single-minded and open-ended focus on Iraq is not a sound strategy for keeping America safe.”
“What’s missing in our debate about Iraq, what has been missing since before the war began, is a discussion of the strategic consequences of Iraq and its dominance of our foreign policy.”
Mr Obama is making his first foreign trip as Democratic candidate at the weekend. He travels first to Iraq and Afghanistan with the anti-war Democrat and Republican senators Jack Reed of Rhode Island, and Chuck Hagel, of Nebraska. He then travels to Jordan, Israel and the Palestinian territories. The highlight of the European leg of his trip will be in Berlin, before he travels to France and the UK.
Before he had spoken a word on Tuesday, Mr Obama’s presidential rival, the Republican senator John McCain, accused him of defeatism over Iraq and jumping to conclusions before he had even put his feet on the ground. “Senator Obama is departing soon on a trip abroad that will include a fact-finding mission to Iraq and Afghanistan,” Mr McCain said. “In my experience ... first you assess the facts on the ground, then you present a new strategy.”
Mr Obama said there was overwhelming evidence that Washington’s focus on Iraq, where it has five times more troops than in Afghanistan, has caused it to become distracted from “the central front in the war on terror”.
“It is unacceptable that, almost seven years after nearly 3,000 Americans were killed on our soil, the terrorists who attacked us are still at large,” he said. “Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri are recording messages to their followers and plotting more terror.”
— © The Independent, London
