| November 25, 2008 | Tuesday | Ziqa'ad 26, 1429 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
Professionals in PCB
Renaming NWFP
Law on industrial relations
Another failure of foresight
Fata and US reservations
Amazed and shocked
Law and order in party govt
Blast in Lahore
The great divide
Readers are requested to restrict their comments to a maximum of 400 words. We reserve the right to edit letters for reasons of clarity and space. Letters, including those by e-mail, should carry the complete postal address of the sender. The views expressed in these columns do not necessarily reflect the views of the newspaper.—Editor
PRESIDENT-elect Barack Obama’s apparently studied and serious recent references to the Kashmir dispute have once again generated renewed international interest in this long-festering and perilous flashpoint on the world map.
A lot of water has flowed under the bridge since first prime minister Liaquat Ali Khan’s press statement of Nov 16, 1947 saying: “There is not the slightest doubt that the whole plot of the accession of Kashmir to India was pre-planned. It cannot be justified on any constitutional or moral grounds. It is quite clear now that what the Indian government is after is permanent occupation of Kashmir.”
Similarly, more than half a century has elapsed since the first foreign minister of Pakistan, Sir Zafrullah Khan, was constrained to carry this impression recorded in his memoirs (Servant of God), at the conclusion of the long and frustrating negotiations carried out by the last UN mediator Dr Frank P. Graham that largely, but incredibly, centred round the definition of ‘bulk’ to be applied to Indian forces which were to remain back during the agreed plebiscite:
“He (Dr Graham) presented scheme after scheme which Pakistan , anxious to break the deadlock, accepted and India , determined to block any move forward, rejected. He made as many as six reports but India remained cynically and barefacedly intransigent. By that time India had made up its mind that Security Council or no Security Council, Graham or no Graham, it would under no circumstances relax its military hold on Kashmir.”
But then that was what was. Filibustering by one party has paid off. The geopolitical power calculus and world equations have radically changed. Indeed finding a modus vivendi has become inescapable.
But why settle for a modus vivendi with its unhappy nuances and not go for trend-setting, mutually negotiated, tripartite arrangements aimed at serving the supreme interest of the people? To my mind, given the will by all concerned, one such win-win possibility, in outline, could be:
a. Under the umbrella of the UN create a political entity encompassing the borders of the British princely state of Jammu and Kashmir.
b. This political entity should comprise three confederating states, namely, (i) areas covering Azad Jammu and Kashmir and other parts of the princely state administered by Pakistan, (ii) areas consisting of Jammu, Ladakh, etc, under the control of India minus the Valley and (iii) the Valley itself.
c. The aforesaid political entity to be a mandated territory under the UN with a joint administration of the three confederating units and the UN.
d. Each confederating unit will have a representative assembly, provided that, save for the assembly for the Valley, India and Pakistan will have the right to nominate 25 per cent of seats in assemblies for units currently under their control as set up in (b) above.
e. The political entity will have its borders guaranteed by the UN for 25 years whereafter by virtue of predetermined arrangements the territory will assume the status of an independent, neutral state — Swiss model — and India and Pakistan will cease to nominate people to the two confederating units as provided in (d) above.
M.J.AS’AD
Karachi
HAVING gone through a roller-coaster ride with a general, a diplomat, and a medical doctor, the Pakistan Cricket Board is finally headed by a former Test cricketer, Ijaz Butt. A former cricketer running the cricket show makes a logical sense.
The chairman is transforming this logical sense into the very structure of the organisation. He is in the process of placing former ball players at top positions. Saleem Altaf (chief operating officer), Javed Miandad (director-general, cricket affairs), Wasim Bari (director, human resources and administration), Aamir Sohail (director, National Cricket Academy), Intikhab Alam (coach) and the legendary Abdul Qadir (chairman, selection committee) are all renowned cricketing figures. This is a good start.
The next move should be the appointment of a new captain. The team needs a captain who, statistically, is a top-notch player, a good sportsman, a binding force within the team, and whose sole agenda is making the team strong and successful. He should have no detrimental-to-the-team personal agenda, as in conspiring against the best players to be excluded from the team. The name of Mohammad Yousuf must ring a bell.
A statistical look at the performance of the seven batsmen we have shows that Shoaib Malik ranks below average. The seven players are Mohammad Yousuf, Younis Khan, Misbah-ul-Haq, Salman Butt, Kamran Akmal, Shoaib Malik, and Shahid Afridi. He is the lowest performer as fregards scoring Test centuries; he has scored only one in 21 Test matches. Compare that performance with Yousuf’s who has scored 23 in 79 Test matches. This makes it, on average, one century every fourth Test. It goes for Younis’s 15 centuries in 58 Tests, as well. Even Misbah, who has played only 10 Test matches, has scored two centuries.
Shoaib ranks below most in fielding as well. He even ranks below Yousuf who was termed unfairly as a bad fielder by some. Yousuf has caught 59 catches in 79 Tests, making it one catch every 1.33 Tests on average. Shoaib, on the other hand, has caught only nine catches in 21 Tests, making it one catch every 2.33 Tests. By the way, since he bowls as well, he is at an advantage to get more catches in a caught-and-bowled scenario.
In a nutshell, of the seven players mentioned above, he does not rank among the top three in any of the following categories: Test batting averages, ODI batting averages, Test centuries, ODI centuries, Test catches and ODI catches, respectively. His ordinary performance alone should prompt the highly accomplished former cricketers in the PCB administration to take immediate action.
Besides appointing a new captain for the team, the PCB should also lift the ban on the players who have joined the ICL. Other countries are refusing to come to Pakistan to play and we are depriving our team of the top performers.
The international cricketers play county cricket in England; they play Australia’s domestic cricket; what is wrong with playing for the ICL. The players are out there to play. Let them play. It is that simple.
Therefore, our cricket team should have a new and a true captain. The players who play for the ICL should also be able to play for the country. The positive work of bringing professionals in the PCB should continue.
SYED AQEEL SARWAR
Lahore
JUST as if we did not have enough issues — the growing menace of Talibanisation, western borders infested with enemies of Pakistan, skyrocketing inflation, depleted foreign reserves, a bleak economic outlook, illiteracy, abject poverty, joblessness, victimisation of women, to name a few — our leaders have opened up another Pandora’s box.
Why cannot the lawmakers see immediate and clear dangers that have rocked the very foundations of the state and the nation?
Renaming the NWFP as Pakhtoonkhawa is a divisive move, as it is based on linguistic differences, and ignores the sentiments of those whose first language is not Pushto.
People of the NWFP have more in common than the apparent difference of language; why emphasise the difference and not the commonalities? Why stoke acrimony when we need harmony?
Some elements in mainstream politics who have always thrived on wedging a divide in the social fabric have happily thrown their support behind the move — and this is most unfortunate.
If at all renaming the NWFP is the most pressing problem for the current lawmakers, let it be a name that reflects the spirit of the land and its proud culture; let it be a name that brings its people together and does not drive them apart.
MAZHAR MAHMOOD
Brazil
IT is most unfortunate indeed that we have not been able to pass a somewhat acceptable law on industrial relations in almost seven years. Usually some features of every law on this subject are criticised either by employers or workers but never any law on this subject has met the fate of IRO, 2002 and IRA, 2008.
The reason for the outright rejection of these enactments is obvious: the failure of the government to take the stakeholders into confidence before passing them.
In fact, the subject of industrial relations is so sensitive and the problems involved therein are so intricate that no one can claim to know or resolve them satisfactorily without taking the stakeholder into confidence. Simple omission of taking the stakeholders into confidence is enough for the outright rejection of outcome.
In the past, governments used to take the stakeholder into confidence before passing the enactments through holding tripartite labour conferences or similar other processes.
It was for this reason that some features of those laws received appreciation at home and abroad.
For example, when I used to explain the provision of IRO, 1969 relating to determination of the CBA and the settlement of an industrial dispute to the representatives of the employers associations of other countries visiting Pakistan, they used to be all praise for it.
The law of none of their countries had so methodically devised six steps procedure such as bilateral negotiations, conciliation, strike/lockout notice, strike/lockout, arbitration and adjudication for the settlement of an industrial dispute, with enough discretion of the parties to mutually extend the time limit for some of the crucial steps, as our law did.
Likewise, none of the countries had the type of democratic procedure for the determination of the CBA as we had. In India even now the CBA is determined on the basis of the total amount of the union’s monthly subscription.
It would, therefore, be more appropriate if the IRA, 2008 is repealed and a tripartite labour conference is called to deliberate over a new enactment.
The recommendation of the conference along with the points in dispute and reservations and objections of the parties shall be placed before a committee comprising representatives of the government, employers and workers. The new law shall be based mainly on the agreed recommendations of the committee.
HAIDER ZAMAN
Topi
TRANSPORTING the material to fight the so-called war on terror in Afghanistan has for many years been a hugely profitable business for the long-distance hauliers of Pakistan.
It is Pakistani vehicles, their owners, drivers, loaders and ancillary staff who have all benefited from the US using the Karachi-Khyber Pass route to supply the 67,000 foreign troops — including about 32,000 Americans — currently stationed in Afghanistan.
Almost 75 per cent of all the Nato and US supplies, including petrol, food, military equipment and possibly ammunition, are moved overland through Pakistan.
It may not be for much longer. Militants in tribal areas through which the vehicles pass en route to Torkham have made a series of effective high-profile raids, which forced the government to suspend the operation a week ago — resuming it last Monday after security was belatedly improved.
Tens of millions of dollars’ worth of supplies have been lost in the last 10 months. March saw between 40 and 50 tankers burnt, and in April Taliban captured a consignment of helicopter parts — which they will have no trouble selling on the international arms black market. The straw that seems to have broken the camel’s back was the hijacking of 13 trucks recently containing, among other things, the two Humvee jeeps. The trucks were recovered while the jeeps were not.
A report in the Washington Post said that the leakage along the route through Pakistan has forced the Pentagon to look for alternative routes. These will be more expensive in terms of the fuel needed to traverse them — but safer.
They are likely to run through Europe, the Caucasus and some Central Asian states, but not Iran or Uzbekistan.
Agreement for transit has already been reached with Georgia and talks are under way for a similar agreement with Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.
The supply of foreign armies fighting in landlocked Afghanistan has for centuries been the Achilles’ heel of every nation that has fought a war there.
The British in their numerous military adventures used almost exactly the same route as is being used today — but without interdiction by Taliban.
The mujahideen almost brought the Russians to their knees by cutting their lines of supply.
America and its allies are rich and powerful enough to circumvent the problem by simply walking around Taliban in Pakistan. If they make life too uncomfortable here, the US will simply take its business elsewhere, with Pakistan the loser again. It would have made both economic and strategic sense to protect our goods vehicles in their transit of the tribal areas.
The distance is not great, there is only one road and it should have been within our capacity to secure it. We did not — or could not — and it will be the Pakistani haulage industry (and the other big loser, the Karachi Port Trust) that will end up paying the price of poor planning and yet another failure of foresight.
MUHAMMAD ARSHAD NADEEM
Islamabad
I WOULD appreciate if some expert on Fata would explain how Fata, which is a creation of British administrative brilliance to manage tribes, is different from the Reservations set up in the US in the 1850s to manage American or, Red Indian, tribes.
The Indian Reservations as they are known, like Fata, are also federally-administered.
The American, or Red Indian, tribes settled in the Reservations are free to lead their tribal way of life, as are, I believe, the tribes in Fata.
The Indian tribes living in Reservations maintain their hierarchical order headed by a chief, who would be the equivalent of a Malik in Fata. The Indian chiefs exercise more social, rather than real, power over their tribes.
Is that so too with the Maliks? The tribes in Indian Reservations have their own social and legal systems, not unlike jirgas in Fata.
These systems, however, do not supplant the law of the land in Indian Reservations. Is the law of the land also supreme in Fata?
The US president, and the secretary of interior who oversees the Reservations, can travel to any Indian Reservation in safety, and return safely.
Can the president of Pakistan, or the prime minister, or the adviser on interior, travel in safety to Fata and, more importantly, return safe and sound?
S. KHALID HUSAIN
Karachi
I WAS shocked and dismayed after reading the news report (Nov 23)that narrated the ordeal of a young Christian girl who had come to Karachi to embrace Islam. I just couldn’t believe and it’s highly shameful that those who are considered the important component of our legal system, who provide justice, actually gang-raped the girl.
Why didn’t they once think of their professional obligations towards their nation? They take the oath as lawyers that they will be honest to their profession and morals.
I appeal to the authorities concerned to take strict notice of the deteriorating law and order situation in Karachi, which once used to be the city of lights.
ANITA NIZAR ALI
Karachi
KUNWAR Idris, in his article ‘Law and order in party government’ (Nov 23), presents a brief history of abuses of bureaucracy by various governments.
However, he chose not to mention how the government officials fared during Nawaz Sharif’s and Benazir Bhutto’s rule. Are we to assume that the abuses did not take place?
He also proposes and supports the concept that the police should be under provincial government rather than local government. I find his arguments illogical and flawed.
The doctrine that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” hold true also for elected governments.
Concentration of power in the hands of the chief minister is dangerous and will only make the police a tool of the present day’s government.
If the department of the police is under the local government and not centralised, the chances that politicians can misuse it are much reduced.
I also think that the police should not be directly under nazims. A selection board should appoint the district police chief for a certain period.
The local government should control the budget but have no executive powers in the affairs of the police. An ombudsman should be appointed to check the abuses by the police.
Further, law enforcement should not be the only function of this force; it should be built to help the people.
I also believe that if local governments have defined autonomy, they can run without interference of higher levels of governments, and if are not political party-based, governance will be less acrimonious.
ZAFAR HUSSAIN
Ontario
AS a Lahori, I was shaken by Saturday’s serial bomb blasts targeting the World Performing Arts Festival. As a Pakistani, what was more disturbing to me was the fact that no one I spoke to after the incident seemed to be enraged, or even seriously affected by it. The fact that there were no fatalities seemed to be reason enough to quickly forget the attacks and move on with our lives. Anyone who does this though is completely missing the point… does it take hundreds of fatalities to shake us now? Is it not enough that a liberal, enlightened way of life has specifically been targeted again? Shouldn’t we be galvanised into fighting back against those who seek to violently disrupt activities that harm no one and provide pleasure to many?
In the context of the Marriot blasts, in an environment where the enemy has made it clear that we are not safe in our cities having a cup of coffee, or watching a play, or attending a wedding is it too much to ask the silent majority of tolerant, enlightened Muslims of Pakistan to realise who the enemy is and to realise that silence or appeasement is not the answer?
ASSAD AHMAD
Lahore
THIS is apropos of your editorial, ‘The great divide’ (Nov 22).
It is tragic that one half of our children of school-going age do not go to school. Perhaps the greater than this tragedy is that those who go to schools do not learn much!
In case of those children who do not go to schools or have missed going to schools during their school-going age, it should be understood that it was because most of them had to work to earn not only their livelihood but also support their poor families.
These children have been victim of abject poverty and had little option other than to opt for work. Any effort by government or society to ask the children to leave their jobs and get enrolled in the formal system of education is not likely to yield any result, unless their economic lot is improved.
This is not peculiar to Pakistan only, several other poor countries have been through a similar situation. One such country was Vietnam, where poor economic conditions forced many children to work with their parents and relatives in paddy fields. Educationists there developed a curriculum revolving around the business of rice/ paddy cultivation.
This ‘rice curriculum’, as it was known, included in it elements of botany, chemistry, mathematics as well as basic information on type of soils, manures, crop economy and so on. It met both the individual and society’s objectives: increase in production of paddy due to enhanced knowledge of the crop and spread of literacy. This type of experiments proved to be successful in other countries, including China also. In Pakistan’s rural areas most of the out-of-school children are engaged in one or the other agriculture-related activity. In urban areas most of such boys end up at one or the other motor garage or technical workshops, where they learn the skill while earning a bit.
I do not know if anybody from public or private sector has ever targeted these children with a specially-designed curriculum that meets their economic needs while making them literate. Our effort is usually confined to issuing an appeal to the children and their parents through costly advertisements, asking the illiterate to enroll in schools.
We fail to spare even a thought about economic conditions that have forced these unfortunate children to work. Any strategy that is based on the premise of separating work and education exclusively in a poor country like Pakistan is most likely to fail.
Let’s come to the plight of those who chose to go to school or enroll in formal system of education. It is said that the two basic aims of education are development of inner resources and adjustment of the individual in the economic life of society. The later factor means gaining proficiency in the management of some art, craft, trade, or profession through transfer of knowledge in an organised manner.
In a recent WB report it has been stated that out of about 40,000 government-run primary schools, more than half do not have basic facilities like water supply, latrines and even boundary walls.
In most of these schools physical punishment at the hands of ill-qualified and unsuitable teachers is a common sight. Then, even these teachers are not regular and punctual in discharge of their duties as there is no fear of accountability.
The result is that Pakistan is the only country in South Asia where the standard of education has declined!
We must remember that education holds the key to most of our national problems, from economic well-being to strengthening of democracy.
DR MOHAMMAD ALI SHAIKH
Former director,
Centre for Information
& Research, SZABIST
Karachi
You can also send letters to the Editor
Just send your message to the following address: letters@dawn.com
Make sure you include your full name, postal address, e-mail address, and in the case of Pakistan your day-time telephone number.
