|
| November 25, 2008 | Tuesday | Ziqa'ad 26, 1429 |
Police woes
PML-N’s regressive outlook
Will we break the begging bowl?
Bush feels nostalgic
OTHER VOICES - Sindhi Press
IT was a measure of the degree of desperation and the extremely limited options for Pakistan’s economy that the redoubtable finance adviser had to announce his readiness to leapfrog to Plan C, that of approaching the IMF for help.
HE has sometimes appeared a reluctant traveller, and has not always made friends overseas. But the outgoing US president, George Bush, was in wistful, nostalgic mood at the weekend as he completed his last scheduled foreign trip.
IT has now been confirmed by the foreign minister that the ISI’s notorious political wing has been officially disbanded. The move, it is said, came after approval for this major policy rethink was granted by the president and the prime minister — and, it goes without saying, the chief of army staff who also happens to be a former ISI boss. Taken at face value, this is a commendable step in the right direction. The Inter Services Intelligence clearly has no business meddling in politics and the democratic process. But that is precisely what the ISI has done, with varying degrees of success, since the creation of Pakistan. It is said that Gen Ayub used the agency for purposes other than keeping tabs on external foes while Gen Yahya relied on it to monitor opposition forces in the former East Pakistan. But it wasn’t until the iron rule of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and his Pakistan People’s Party that the ISI’s ‘political wing’ became an official entity. Under Mr Bhutto, the ISI and the dreaded Federal Security Force were used to target political opponents in clear contravention of the government’s democratic mandate.
The ISI’s external jurisdiction is not under discussion here, though that too has been questionable over the years. It is widely believed that the 1990 elections were rigged by the ISI to favour the anti-PPP Islami Jamhoori Ittehad led by Nawaz Sharif, a man who rose to political power on the shoulders of the army. Gen Aslam Beg, who was COAS at the time, has since confirmed the rumours of massive manipulation. In 2002, the ISI in league with local administrations is said to have played a key role in ensuring victory for Musharraf loyalists operating under the banner of the PML-Q. In the nine years or so that Gen Musharraf called the shots, the ISI was implicated in the ‘disappearance’ of hundreds of citizens of nationalist or Islamist bent, and political opponents too were reportedly kept under surveillance.
In this changed geopolitical world it is imperative that almost all the manpower and other resources available to the ISI be redirected towards the fight against militancy and terrorism. It has been said by our leaders over the last few years that Pakistan has no external enemies now. Yet, the intelligence deficit in terms of keeping tabs on militants within the country has been obvious to all. It can only be hoped that results on this count will improve once the ISI is not distracted by its political duties. Needless to say, the army’s divorce from politics must be genuine, complete and sustainable. Pulling army officers out of government jobs and officially dismantling the ISI’s political wing will be meaningless if meddling continues through unofficial channels. An entire mindset has to change.
GIVEN the sad reality that the relationship between the citizenry and the custodians of law is based on fear and scepticism, the recommendation that a task force comprising citizens be established to introduce reforms in the police to create good governance is hardly surprising. This suggestion was presented at a recent meeting of the National Project for Participatory Citizens on ‘Police interaction and training for improved policing of human rights violations and advocating police reform’— the primary aim being “human rights sensitisation with the police and to build and expand work in improving policing of human rights”. However, making the police force more responsive and addressing the trust deficit between the public and its law enforcers came across as the most significant item on the agenda. And rightly so, as the solution lies in confronting the culture of apathy that plagues the police ranks and stations. Members brought up issues such as lack of educated personnel, elimination of political influence and provision of incentives to an indigent force.
Perhaps, aside from the force’s impoverished state that spawns both police crime and apathy, such platforms should keep a tight focus on two key aspects as far as Karachi’s police corps is concerned. Firstly, the force has to be far more indigenous than it is today. A citizen’s fundamental right to security and faith in law enforcers is inextricably linked to a police officer’s sense of belonging to his area of duty. A naturally sensitised force can evolve if more of its members belong to the areas in which they operate. This will involve an overhaul of the department’s image with enhanced remuneration, rewards and guaranteed, non-politicised promotions. People from within the city may then come to see policing as a lucrative career option, which in turn can go a long way in building a homegrown corps as opposed to recruits from villages and other provinces whose lack of exposure makes them vulnerable to ethnic discrimination, political patronage and corruption. Secondly, the Police Order 2002 must be implemented in its entirety. Its accountability mechanisms are of supreme importance as they define police offences that merit punishment, making torture and violence punishable by imprisonment of up to five years. Also, the same Police Order has a provision for police station community boards which can deter excesses by the law enforcers and prevent the many journeys to repeated injustices that begin at the door of a police post.
GIVEN its somewhat conservative orientation, the PML-N could be forgiven for assuming that it is a man’s world. But it is time for a reality check if it thinks that it can get away with blatant male chauvinism in a political atmosphere that has seen the rise of women parliamentarians whose presence can no longer be perceived as token. So it was no surprise that the move by opposition leader Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan to appoint Hanif Abbasi — after another male colleague turned down the offer — as head of the National Assembly’s standing committee on women’s affairs was slammed by none other than the party’s women parliamentarians. That Chaudhry Nisar, instead of gracefully accepting the demand that a woman be nominated to the position, chose to decline the government’s offer of the slot altogether shows how deeply entrenched are attitudes that smack of utter contempt for the idea of women’s empowerment. What is even more deplorable is the fact that women are not considered worthy enough even to run their own affairs.
At the same time, it is an encouraging sign to see women taking a principled stand, even if it means not toeing the party line — and one hopes that party divisions do not prevent women in parliament from cooperating on women’s issues on a nationwide basis. Obviously, unanimity on policy is essential to maintaining unity within a political party. But if this means regressing on values that endorse universal liberties, including the progress of women, then there is need for a different outlook that shuns hidebound views and recognises new political realities. A record number of women contested the February elections on the general seats. We have a woman speaker in the National Assembly who only a few days ago took the initiative in setting up the women’s parliamentary caucus. We have women in the Senate who question misogynist views. These happenings no doubt must have emboldened women, giving them a sense of empowerment. In fact, with society more sensitised to women’s issues, old moulds are being increasingly challenged. This is what the PML-N and others of its ilk must realise as they conduct politics inside the assemblies.
It was a shotgun marriage, with the unloaded gun being handed over to the party who is being forced to marry, with the IMF conditionalities camouflaged as part of a home-grown plan.
The State Bank governor had dutifully fulfilled a day earlier one of the conditions implicit in the deal with the IMF by raising the discount rate by two percentage points to 15 per cent, exactly double of what is prevailing in neighbouring India. The main rationale offered for the interest rate rise is that it would keep inflation at bay.
Even though inflation is at record high levels there are signs that as the recession engulfs the world economy the main threat will be deflation rather than inflation. Already oil prices are 60 per cent lower than their peak earlier this year and the government has reluctantly acknowledged this by passing on a fraction of this decline to the consumers. Other imported commodity prices, such as palm oil, are also on the decline.
The real purpose of raising interest rates is to administer a contractionary shock to the economy — in keeping with the IMF doctrine. As always the IMF is more concerned with the health of the financial rather than the real side of the economy since it wants to ensure the safety of its investment. The recent financial crisis in the US has brought out clearly the perils of overemphasis on financial sector growth.
It is ironic that while all the major economies of the world, including the US, China and India, are busy mounting fiscal stimulus packages, we are being asked to adopt a path of fiscal contraction. This will most likely affect not only our development expenditure, but also our social sector expenditures. The sop being offered in the name of social protection (a new cliché replacing ‘safety nets’) is unlikely to be adequate or reach the deserving poor.
While Pakistan ‘has been there before’, the fast-track ride to the precipice this time is largely political in origin. The macroeconomic management of Pakistan’s economy since it started drifting early this year in the wake of impending political changes after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto has been increasingly unpromising. The caretaker cabinet completely lost its grip over the economic situation, which worsened further as protests mounted and caused serious disruption of economic activity.
The rapid rise in inflation, the mismanagement of wheat supplies and the rapid increase in load-shedding following the steep rise in oil prices completely unhinged the management of the economy. It was hoped that the downward plunge in deteriorating economic fundamentals would be stemmed after the February elections and the crushing defeat they dealt on the Musharraf-Chaudhry regime.
Unfortunately, because of the deliberate foot-dragging by Musharraf with the tacit backing of the US, the transfer of power to the newly elected representatives was delayed until April. From then on the anti-Musharraf coalition was unable to put together a viable plan for economic revival because of their inability to agree on political issues, especially the restoration of the dismissed Supreme Court judges.
For a brief period the coalition government was able to function, with most of the economic and social sector portfolios allocated to the PML-N. The new finance minister, Ishaq Dar, who had held the same portfolio under Nawaz Sharif in the 1990s, seemed well prepared to change the course of the economy towards a more stable and resurgent path and bring about major changes in his economic management team. However, he had to resign after Nawaz Sharif made his participation conditional on the restoration of the judiciary.
Thereafter the PPP’s Naveed Qamar was assigned the finance portfolio which he had held in an earlier PPP government. However, the turmoil in the stock market, the steady decline in the value of the rupee and the haemorrhaging of foreign exchange reserves that accompanied the coalition’s attempt to oust Musharraf through impeachment or forced resignation brought things to a head and the business community was in panic about the fears of a possible default by Pakistan on its foreign debt.
After Musharraf’s ouster and Zardari’s installation as president, the threat of a default and the need for a bailout became increasingly urgent as the momentum for capital flight, contrived or otherwise, increased. Matters were further complicated by Pakistan’s role in the war on terror, which was linked to the military and economic aid it has received since 2001 and of which it hopes to receive more (through the Biden-Lugar initiative) in the future to overcome its deteriorating economic condition. The US withheld about $1bn of its compensatory aid to Pakistan for participation in war on terror for ‘audit reasons’.
In order to instil confidence in the market and among foreign investors and donors, as well as to revive the stock market, a new finance minister, Mr Shaukat Tarin, a banker-turned-businessman and ex-chairman of the Karachi Stock Exchange, was inducted into office. Meanwhile, the new president himself went on a tour of Pakistan’s trusted allies, including China, Saudi Arabia, UAE and the US, to mobilise the support of its friends. However, these efforts failed to bear any tangible results — except for $500m from China which had given the same amount when Pakistan faced a similar crisis in 1997 —in view of Pakistan’s poor credentials as a debtor, as well as due to the continuing global financial crisis which has made all potential donors extremely tight-fisted.
It is about time that not only Pakistan’s economic managers but also its political leaders as well as its people permanently renounce the habit of begging in times of crisis and explore more viable strategies for macroeconomic management and development. Instead of finding friends abroad who would take a stake in our economy our leadership should try to gain the confidence of its own people by pursuing policies which contribute to the welfare of the majority rather than that of the small elite whose extravagant lifestyles frequently land the country on the verge of bankruptcy. For this the country needs serious long-term planning rather than ad hoc crisis management which we have become accustomed to.
syed.naseem@aya.yale.edu
Attending a summit of Pacific rim countries in Peru, he said his farewells to foreign leaders and made repeated references to his imminent retirement.
Bush “felt a little nostalgic”, the White House press secretary, Dana Perino, confessed, as the president gave in to public reflection on his time in office.
Bush told China’s president, Hu Jintao, he was unlikely to see him again, at least not as the US president. At a meeting with the Canadian prime minister, Stephen Harper, his pending departure again surfaced. Bush joked that his “forced retirement” would begin on January 20, with the handover to president-elect, Barack Obama, at noon that day.
Bush was in a conciliatory frame of mind at the summit, ready to put aside differences — albeit temporarily — with Russia over Georgia, missile defence and a host of other issues. After shaking hands with the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, Bush said: “We’ve had our agreements, we’ve had our disagreements.”
But he added: “When we disagree, we’re able to do so in a way that is respectful to our two nations.”
His summit speech was retrospective, recalling 9/11 and how US flags fluttered from fire engines in Canada, baseball players in Japan observed moments of silence, children knelt at the US embassy in South Korea, and a sign unfurled at a candlelight vigil in Beijing that read: “Freedom and justice will not be stopped.”
Mindful of criticism at home that Bush is failing to rise to the challenge of the economic crisis engulfing America and the world, administration officials insisted the trip to Peru was no farewell visit and that there was serious work to be done.
But although the US president may yet make one more, unscheduled foreign sortie, to Iraq, the sense of finality was hard to overcome.
“I’ve worked hard on a lot of fronts,” Bush said, adding later: “I have given it my all. And now I am very hopeful that the man who succeeds me as president of the United States succeeds in his job.”
— The Guardian, London
Sindh’s tax contribution
Kawish
HOW much does Sindh contribute to the federal pool and what does it get against it? These stories have been narrated repeatedly. A tragic aspect of these stories further came in the limelight when more facts were published in a recent news report.
The report discloses that during the last six years Sindh contributed Rs22tr but it got only Rs3tr during this period. The report further says that in the year 2003-4 Sindh contributed Rs3tr but received only Rs38.2bn.
Talking about Sindh in economic terms we find two major facts. Both are extremes. This province is rich in resources and revenue generation, on the other hand its people are living below the poverty line. Despite being rich in resources its people are braving abject poverty. This situation sometimes compels them to commit suicide and hand over their children to charities. What an illogical situation. A federal unit is contributing such a huge amount, but in return it is not getting enough feed its people.
Non-official experts and even common people have been protesting against this injudicious distribution of financial resources. This excess surfaced strongly when a private member of the National Finance Commission from Sindh resigned and complained that when a member raises a voice for the judicious share of Sindh he is termed a traitor. In the Musharraf era, anyone demanding rights under the constitution was termed a traitor. After that the NFC award was not announced. It is believed that if new NFC award was announced it would have benefited Sindh because Sindh is demanding distribution of financial resources on the basis of revenue generation.
Demanding a share on the basis of revenue generation is not illogical. If a province is contributing a huge amount, it has a constitutional and moral right to demand its share accordingly. Sindh is not demanding to distribute resources on the only indicator of revenue generation, but is also demanding to include other indicators, i.e. poverty; backwardness, area etc., while deciding the distribution of resources…. It has been noted that whenever representatives sit to resolve inter-provincial matters the federal representative toes the stand of the big province.
When we calculate the revenue generated by Sindh during the last six years and the share which it got in return it is next to nothing. We are talking about a province which contributes 69 per cent to the federal pool. These are not unofficial figures. The root cause of these excesses was the unrepresentative government. Now there is an elected government which should find remedies and take effective measures to change the situation. — (Nov 23)
— Selected ad translated by Sohail Sangi.
