ASIF Ali Zardari, who was recently elected as the country’s president but now operates as its chief executive as well, has already travelled to the UK, US and most recently to China.

While his visit to Beijing was both important and urgent, rushing off to London and New York appeared unnecessary. In any case, Pakistanis were not too enthused to see their president extolling Bush for bringing peace to the world and crediting him for delivering democracy to Pakistan.

It was however his remarks in New York on India and more specifically on Kashmir that caused quite a stir. Though Indian commentators pointed out that this initiative could be a harbinger of a major change in Islamabad’s policy towards its eastern neighbour, Pakistanis were not amused by Zardari’s claim that “India has never been a threat to Pakistan”. Another faux pas was his reference to Kashmiri freedom fighters as “terrorists” — this at a time when the occupied territory is facing a spontaneous and indigenous agitation.

The normalisation process with India should of course be pursued with seriousness and sincerity. But Musharraf’s policy of unilateral concessions and advocacy of out-of-the-box solutions will neither satisfy the Kashmiris nor secure us the peace that people aspire for. The veteran Indian journalist Praful Bidwai however advocated that Zardari’s statements should be taken at their face value and “India must reciprocate Zardari’s overture by giving a determined push to the peace process”. This makes eminent sense but given India’s track record a meaningful initiative from Delhi is not likely.

By the time President Zardari decided to visit China, political discord, economic problems and deteriorating law and order had combined to pose the gravest challenge ever to the country. Moreover, Pakistan remained a key concern in the US presidential debates, overshadowing even Iraq and Afghanistan. A joint report by a dozen US think tanks also warns that “Pakistan may be the single greatest challenge” facing the next president. It calls on him to order a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) to determine what precisely the US should ask Pakistan to do to counter the terrorists, so that it could become the basis for developing a strategy that “seeks to adjust” Pakistan’s position in a cost-benefit analysis.

It was in this atmosphere that Zardari met with Chinese leaders, including President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao. Twelve agreements and understandings were signed, including those relating to cooperation in the oil, gas, coal and mining sectors. The joint statement described our relations as an “all-weather friendship” that had “withstood the test of time and practice”. More importantly, China reiterated that it would “continue to view its relations with Pakistan from a strategic and long-term perspective and make joint efforts with Pakistan” to take this cooperation to new heights. It also referred to the Treaty of Friendship signed in April 2005 as “historic and of immediate significance”.

Contrary to media reports, there was no official word of any financial assistance, though a Chinese spokesman did affirm that Beijing was ready to “support and help Pakistan within our capability”. This was understandable because the Chinese are unlikely to extend major economic assistance, not because they do not have enough reserves at their disposal (currently estimated at over US$1.9tr), but because providing large cash grants is not in the nature of their policies. As regards cooperation in the civilian nuclear field, this would be forthcoming, as confirmed by Foreign Minister Qureshi. Chinese commitment on this score was, in fact, made some five years ago.

China remains Pakistan’s closest friend and strategic ally. This has been proven on more than one occasion. Nevertheless, notwithstanding the public bonhomie, Pakistan’s relations with China today are not without question marks. This is primarily because China is no longer simply a regional power that has to cater to Pakistan’s interests alone. As a world power, it has to see Pakistan through the prism of its global interests. Moreover, China has a laundry list of concerns vis-à-vis Pakistan that precedes the latter’s decision to join the US-led war on terror.

In this context, it is important to recall that while the Chinese were happy to see the Taliban being driven out of Kabul, they viewed Musharraf’s enthusiastic embrace of the US, without prior consultation with Beijing (as should have been done), with considerable misgiving. More surprises were in store for China when it saw Pakistan agreeing to unprecedented concessions being granted to US and Nato forces to use Pakistan’s facilities. This gave rise to concern not only in Beijing but in Moscow, Tehran and some of the Central Asian capitals as well.

But it was Musharraf’s policy of hunting with the hounds and running with the hares that left the Chinese nonplussed, unable to fathom how Musharraf could be a US ally in the war on terror while allegedly extending support to jihadist elements. They would not, of course, speak out publicly but their misgivings with our policy were deepened when Chinese nationals began to be targeted by the militants. It was only when Musharraf received a phone call from the Chinese president and their firms were advised not to send personnel to Pakistan that Islamabad woke up to the gravity of the situation.

Currently, China is also worried about recent strains between Pakistan and the United States, fearing that this could trigger greater instability in Pakistan that could delay or deny China the economic benefits that it wishes to draw from its relationship with Pakistan, including use of Gwadar Port and participation in the energy corridor project.

This does not however mean that the Chinese are willing to countenance any dilution in their strategic ties to Pakistan. This is indeed a ‘time-tested’ friendship, established by China’s founding fathers. Pakistan continues to be viewed as a potential counterweight to India, notwithstanding China’s efforts to improve relations with its southern neighbour. Moreover, Pakistan’s importance may not now be necessarily in the military sphere but increasingly in the economic realm. With China’s voracious appetite for energy growing by the day, it has to tap all possible sources and it is here that Pakistan could play an important role as a resource bridge to China, especially for the flow of oil and gas from the Gulf and Iran. It would be an expensive and difficult project, but given China’s massive energy requirements it cannot afford to depend on the vulnerable sea routes alone.

But for the full potential of Sino-Pak relations to be achieved, Pakistan has to set its own house in order and arrive at a national consensus on issues such as terrorism before it can draw China into its economic life. Zardari’s decision to personally chair inter-ministerial meetings to monitor the implementation of agreements signed with China may not be appropriate, but if seen as evidence of the government’s seriousness in this regard it should be welcomed. But it will need much more, including vision, imagination and resolve, to achieve this strategic objective.

ORGANIC farming offers Africa the best chance of breaking the cycle of poverty and malnutrition it has been locked in for decades, according to a major study from the United Nations.

New evidence suggests that organic practices are delivering sharp increases in yields, improvements in the soil and a boost in the income of Africa’s small farmers who remain among the poorest people on earth. The head of the UN’s Environment Programme, Achim Steiner, said the report “indicates that the potential contribution of organic farming to feeding the world may be far higher than many had supposed”.

A combination of increasing population, decreasing rainfall and soil fertility and a surge in food prices has left Africa uniquely vulnerable to famine. It has been conventional wisdom among African governments that modern, mechanised agriculture was needed to close the gap but efforts in this direction have had little impact on food poverty and done nothing to create a sustainable approach.

The research conducted by the UN Environment Programme suggests that organic, small-scale farming can deliver the increased yields which were thought to be the preserve of industrial farming, without the environmental and social damage which that form of agriculture brings with it. An analysis of 114 projects in 24 African countries found that yields had more than doubled where organic, or near-organic practices had been used. That increase in yield jumped to 128 per cent in east Africa.

The study found that organic practices outperformed traditional methods and chemical-intensive conventional farming. It also found strong environmental benefits such as improved soil fertility, better retention of water and resistance to drought. And the research highlighted the role that learning organic practices could have in improving local education. Backers of GM foods insist that a technological fix is needed to feed the world. But this form of agriculture requires cash to buy the patented seeds and herbicides.

— © The Independent