| December 27, 2008 | Saturday | Zilhaj 28, 1429 |
Transparency in education
Gaza: more bloodshed?
IT seems America is in it for the long haul. According to a report released by the US Joint Forces Command, Washington is committed to fighting insurgency across the Muslim world for 25 years, which is quite a commitment indeed. Going by his campaign pledges, president-elect Barack Obama’s time frame for pulling US troops out of Iraq is clearly far shorter than two-and-a-half decades. As such it can be assumed that Iraq is not part of this long-term strategy. And given that other targets in ‘the Muslim world’ are yet to be defined, it is perhaps pertinent to focus on Afghanistan and America’s involvement in that strife-torn country. The expected increase in US troops there and plans to pump in hundreds of millions of dollars into new military facilities are in keeping with statements made
by top US officials that Afghanistan can continue to count on American support. Such preparations do not, however, gel with earlier assessments by several western officials, including the ISAF spokesman, that the war in Afghanistan cannot be won militarily. They also seem to be at odds with Washington’s stated support for Kabul’s negotiations with elements within the Taliban. So what is the preferred option for the US, military engagement or negotiations? A mixture of both, it seems.
It is clear that the Afghan security apparatus is not yet capable — won’t be for years, probably — of single-handedly taking on the Taliban or protecting life and property even in areas that are not remote. Seven years after the invasion of Afghanistan, the writ of the occupation troops and local security forces is still limited largely to Kabul. Clearly a lot more work needs to be done, and as such a case could be made that significant gains cannot be achieved without foreign military assistance. The flip side though is that as long as foreign troops are present on Afghan soil the Taliban will remain in a position to play the occupation card and win sympathy for their violent cause.
Post 9/11 and the ouster of the Taliban from Kabul, the US and its allies laid great emphasis on the reconstruction of Afghanistan, creation of jobs and the resurrection of the country’s physical and institutional infrastructure. But that plan lies in a shambles, in large part because of the US invasion of Iraq. The huge resources which were needed in Afghanistan for both development work and taming the Taliban — the two are connected for reconstruction can only be undertaken in an atmosphere of security — were instead diverted to an unjustified war against a make-believe enemy. Nor has much headway been made in choking the narcotics trade that funds the Taliban, which is not surprising given the clout that drug barons wield in Kabul’s corridors of power. It is time to address the basics.
THE Sindh finance department’s concern about the alleged lack of transparency in the disbursement of grants from an endowment fund for education should be taken seriously. It is not entirely unbelievable that unscrupulous elements may be misappropriating the fund. The fact is that the education sector has now emerged as one of the most notorious in terms of wasteful spending and embezzlement. Had this not been the case Pakistan would not have had the unique distinction of playing host to the phenomenon of ‘ghost schools’. These are institutions — reported to be 12,737 by the education census of 2006 — that exist only on paper with huge sums being earmarked and disbursed for their running. This has become possible because of the bigger sums now being allocated to education by the government and aid-giving agencies without any mechanism for accountability being enforced on the ground. This is a pity because education is one of the most neglected areas of governance and whatever funds that are made available should be spent prudently. Squandering or misappropriating them is a crime because millions of lives are affected by the failure of the authorities to provide quality education to the youth of this country.
The endowment fund that has come under the spotlight was set up by the Sindh government with an initial amount of Rs1bn for needy students seeking higher education. The aim of the fund was to facilitate the production of highly trained professionals to man industries, financial institutions and training institutes. The correctness of this approach cannot be questioned. It hardly needs to be pointed out that the inequities in society have made good education inaccessible to the indigent. Moreover, higher education in the public sector is becoming unaffordable even for those with modest resources. Hence scholarship schemes offer the most practical means of reaching out to students who show potential and commitment but lack resources. Thus they can be provided the opportunity to enable them to uplift themselves and become an asset to society. But for such schemes to achieve their desired goals, it is important that stringent and sensible guidelines are formulated and honestly implemented. The proceeds from the endowment fund must be earmarked for education only — preferably in the field specified. They must go to meritorious candidates who cannot afford to pay the fees of institutions of higher education and not to the relatively affluent. Above all, there should be a moni-toring mechanism to ensure that the guidelines are strictly observed.
WHILE Gaza waits for yet another Israeli invasion, the Palestinians remain divided, with no indication yet that Fatah and Hamas will resolve their differences to focus on their common goal. The Israeli ‘disengagement’ from Gaza in 2005 was in any case a fraud perpetrated by Ariel Sharon. Despite the much-touted withdrawal, Israel controls all land, air and sea exit points, and has since then carried out innumerable invasions of Gaza on every imaginable pretext to go after
‘terrorists’. However, as B’Tselem, an Israeli NGO, said in a report in March, 50 per cent of the casualties in Israeli attacks on Gaza have been civilian. With the Israeli press reporting that the cabinet has given a green signal to the army for another armed incursion into Gaza, one can expect a new round of bloodletting in the Mediterranean coastal strip. The threat to invade Gaza comes in the wake of one of the biggest barrages of Hamas rocket attacks on Israel as retaliation for the killing of three Islamist fighters by Israeli security forces. Hamas has vowed to resist an invasion and has threatened to resume suicide attacks inside Israel.
While Israel is at it, the Palestinian leadership must ask itself what it is doing to advance the cause of the holy land’s liberation. Since Hamas expelled Fatah fighters from Gaza in June 2007, the schism between the two has widened. No wonder peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas have made no progress. Hamas has also boycotted the Egypt-brokered peace talks because PA authorities had detained some Hamas workers. One should welcome Abbas’s statement in which he appealed to Hamas to return to talks, saying he accepts Hamas whatever its philosophy. Hamas has also threatened to boycott the snap parliamentary election which Abbas may call. Fatah and Hamas leaders should realise the disservice they are doing to Palestine’s cause by their quarrel. A united Palestinian leadership will be in a much better position to effectively resume the struggle for the two-state solution to which Israel and its patron America remain committed.
