| January 26, 2009 | Monday | Muharram 28, 1430 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
Maritime education
Wedding meals
Govt spending vs education
Dowry prohibition: other side of the coin
Golden opportunity for Obama
Power of the street
Incomparable indeed!
Killing dacoits
Cars with tinted windows
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
THIS is with reference to the starkly contrasting views on certain issues in South Asia held by the British and the Indian foreign ministers. Pranab Mukherjee has shown his biased perspective by (a) trying to blame Pakistan’s state institutions for the Mumbai carnage and (b) cleverly trying to detach the attacks from the Kashmir issue, in order to divert the international community’s attention from it.
This he did by saying: “Attack on Mumbai need not be looked at through the prism of Indo-Pakistan relationship” and that terrorism “is the biggest menace to the humanity and it is to be confronted.”
One would like to emphasise that during the last few months, after the Barak Obama indicated his intention of focusing on resolving the Kashmir dispute to enable Islamabad to concentrate on its western border, which was followed by a French official’s concurrence, New Delhi had seemed unnerved.
Now, David Miliband has come out with the same remedy in an article in the Guardian (Jan 15), saying this “would help deny the militants in the region one of their main calls to arms.” As was to be expected, this promptly drew fire from India’s foreign ministry spokesman for the top British diplomat’s “unsolicited advice on internal issues in India like Jammu and Kashmir.” Even the Indian prime minister hastened to slam him.
This demonstrates that New Delhi, because of its shallow perspective, is, as in the previous 60 years, still trying to defy the world’s collective wisdom, which was first demonstrated most clearly in the UNSC resolution of 1948 recommending self-determination for the Kashmiris.
By constantly striving to dodge a fair and consensual solution to ending the bloodshed in this ‘nuclear flashpoint’, India is showing its utter disregard for the undesirable consequences, most notably the brutalisation of the helpless Kashmiris and the inevitable militancy.
It may be of interest for Mr Miliband to note what Bertrand Russell, who had worked for India’s independence and used to call himself ‘a lifetime friend of India’, had written in his interesting book, ‘Unarmed Victory’ (1962), which had discussed his role in defusing the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1961 and the Sino-Indian war of 1962.
He had not only seen the Indian approach to China as bigoted but also accused India of using double standards when it came to dealing with problems like Kashmir and Nagaland.
His attention is also drawn to some facts in the context of the Muslims’ militancy in various parts of the world. What would have happened if India had solved the Kashmir issue in accordance with the UNSC resolutions? Obviously, there would have been no violence in the region today. Similarly, if the USSR hadn’t invaded Afghanistan in 1979 and Israel had been created in, say, a part of Russia or North America, rather than Palestine, there would have been no jihad or terrorism in the related areas.
Thus, it is some countries’ expansionism and hegemonism that has really been and is the greatest menace for the world, rather than the subsequent armed uprising, which the victims call freedom struggle. Mr Mukherjee hasn’t been honest in his diagnosis.
Some other related points should also be worth the British FM’s time. In March, 2000 when President Clinton arrived in India on a state visit, 36 Sikhs were massacred in occupied Kashmir whose responsibility was quickly affixed on LeT and Pakistan by New Delhi. However, Madeline Albright later on quoted Mr Clinton in her book as blaming Hindu fundamentalists for it. This is a serious charge.
An inquiry by a retired Indian judge had found an Indian agency to be involved. This proves New Delhi doesn’t mind deceiving the world leaders when trying to defame Pakistan or the Kashmiris.
Similarly, a serving Indian army officer, Lt-Col Shrikant Purohit, has been blamed for the Samjhota Express blasts that killed about 80 Pakistanis in 2007. The whole world’s attention has cunningly been diverted to Mumbai and LeT by India but these other crimes must also be examined, if truth is to be known and justice done to the Muslims. Islamabad must also insist on this instead of swallowing all the pressure passively.
M.Y. KHAN
Karachi
THIS is the apropos of the article, Maritime education for economic prosperity’ (Dec 28), and subsequent letters written by others. In many countries like the Phillippines, Indonesia, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong and China the maritime sector plays an important role in the growth and foreign earnings of the country. Shipping tonnage in Pakistan declined during the last three decades putting seafarers in difficult times.
Some poor experienced seamen who could not find jobs were found crying outside the shipping office. The government policymakers, specially the minister for overseas employment, never paid any heed to contact foreign countries, specially Arab countries, where Indians and Filipinos were employed, to find jobs for the Pakistani seafarer. Our media, particularly Dawn, is playing an important role in highlighting the problem faced by the seafarers.
Even today job opportunities are rare for the freshers, who attend training course of five months and then are entitled to obtain a seaman book from the government shipping office.
After getting training and a seaman book they are found wandering for years to find a job and those who have enough money (say Rs300,000) get the job. No one has so far written about the problem of unemployed seafarers who spend thousands after selling their property to get the training from these institutes to obtain the seaman book.
I reiterate that the government should set up special committee to find jobs for the jobless seamen.
In total, there are seven approved training institutes, one of them owned and managed by self but I suspended the operation when I did not find appropriate staff.
I have worked in maritime training institue in Malaysia at Melaka where there were 14 master mariners, five chief engineers, three radio officers and more than six naval retired chief petty officers and dozens of other administrative and clerical staff, all fully dedicated to the teaching profession and were restrained from performing any other business or service.
The burden on each instructor never exceeded 14 periods of 45 minutes each per week. Operating and running a college just for the sake of attendance of the students is easy but maintaining the required standard is difficult as none of the institute can afford to keep full-time required qualified staff as is hired by the institutes in other countries.
At present training institutes in Pakistan are undermanned and are unable to mantain the standard. In some institutes there is only one master mariner with two or three naval retired chief petty officers training hundreds of seafarers in the name of maintaing STCW conventions.
All these institutes should merge into two to maintain a high standard of training to match with the standard of other countries. Instructors of the institutute should be barred from conducting any business other than the training but these practices are not followed in Pakistan and most of the master mariners and engineers teaching in institutes are not dedicated to their teaching profession and are engaged in other businesses and are also minting money from training institutes.
As far as training and coaching for candidates appearing in the certificate of competency examination is concerned, if they attend the approved training courses they get remission in sea service otherwise they have to work extra on board to gain extra experience as required by the STCW convention and then are qualified to appear in the competency examination.
Short mandatory courses, also called modular courses, required by the STCW convention, are conducted by these institutes and certificates issued by them are required to be with the seaman while working on board, which can be checked by port authorities abroad. An attendance certificate for competency examination is not checked by port officials but competency certificates can be checked if required
CAPT ZULFIQAR A. ABBASI
Principal, Raconhouse College of Nautical Studies
Karachi
THE latest Supreme Court ruling banning wedding meals is yet another reflection of the apparent tussle between those who favour serving meals at wedding functions and those who are against it. Wedding celebrations are going to be very costly in South Asia, including in Pakistan. People often waste too much money and food on such occasions. Many times, people run into debt for bearing the expense of a wedding ceremony.
Many people did not like this idea and some bribed the authorities to skip it but for the middle class and the lower middle class it was a welcome relief.
Now a major portion of Pakistan’s economy revolves around wedding functions. There are many wedding management companies operating in Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi responsible for decoration of the venue, dance rehearsals and arranging firework shows etc.
A bridal dress can cost half a million rupees and the whole event some time costs Rs20 million. Gold and silver are literally handed out as gifts and presents. The lavish social custom is expected even among the poor who constitute more than 30 per cent of Pakistan’s population of over 160 million.
The concept of one dish appears to be a realistic and practical compromise but our elite class, as well as our rural people, think that without serving meals weddings remain colourless.
Moreover, they fear that in the absence of any meals, their in-laws and other relatives will call them miser, though Islam teaches us to lead a simple life and shun pomp and show.
This is an interesting situation for the Pakistan government: on the one hand, there is a popular demand for letting people serve as much food as they want and, on the other hand, there is a silent majority who are happy with the current ban on arranging one dish on the wedding celebration.
There may be more to the wedding meals controversy than the mere desire to reduce ostentation and help the poor. I suggest to the government if someone wants to add one more dish to a wedding menu, he must pay Rs50,000 for the extra dish, whether it’s a spicy or a sweet dish. The government can use this money on marriages of poor and needy people.
However, the best is to serve one dish only.
FAIZA SULTANA
Lahore
ACCORDING to a press report, the chairperson of the Higher Education Commission has informed the National Assembly that the government has suspended the establishment of nine engineering universities due to financial constraints, and the other report is that former president Musharaf spent Rs281 million on Punjab visits in three years (2005-2007) by making 32 visits and during this period former Punjab chief minister Pervaiz Elahi used Rs36.78 million from the public exchequer.
The expenditure was incurred on hiring of tentage, furniture, transportation, lighting, refreshments, etc. Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani has already spent Rs80 million on foreign visits. Does the public have the right to know what is the amount overall used by rulers during the last 20 years on their foreign and internal visits. Is that amount was possible to set up nine engineering universities.
Our rulers, military or politicians, have never made education as number one priority, though everyone claimed that national interest is supreme. Is it not in the supreme national interest to educate the nation? Our rulers have no remorse spending huge amounts of taxpayers’ money on their personal image-building and projection.
The experience of other countries shows that strong institutions through a process of checks and balances promote meritocracy that, in turn, throws up quality leadership. Regretfully, in Pakistan we have erected the entire state edifice on the basis of patronage. In politics, public and private enterprises, the judiciary, sports organisations and even universities leadership is chosen on patronage. In an unjust milieu, leadership remains flawed and comprised. If political leaders are chosen on the basis of family lineage and personal loyalties, there should be a law to check and control the extravaganza of the rulers’ ruthless use of public money. It is imperative that the government spend at least 25 per cent of the GDP to educate the nation to make the country prosper.
ENGR. S. T. HUSSAIN
Lahore
THIS is with reference to Aamir Aqil’s letter, ‘Dowry prohibition’ (Jan 18). While I agree with his altruistic stance in part, I wish to state that some sort of dowry has always been given since pre- and post-Islamic days, from the girl’s side, as the aim is not to burden the new husband to start providing all the basics from scratch, and to have a comfortable start in life.
However, like all other concepts, this is also being abused, especially now. On the one hand, the affluent families are providing designer outfits worth lakhs of rupees, inspired mostly by television soaps. This creates peer pressure on the not-so-solvent families, as they try to match or excel their family members and friends.
The other side of this coin is that while harping on trying to abide by Islamic tenets, the girls’ families demand exorbitant ‘haq mehr’ and demand that it should be paid immediately. If we were to adhere to the Islamic rate, which is ‘sikka ra’ejul waqt’, the sum would not be a problem. My colleague who got married recently was taken aback when the prospective father-in-law demanded Rs400,000 in cash and 10 or more ‘tolas’ of gold! My friend wanted to break off the match but since he had become fond of the girl, he sold his apartment and acceded to the demands! He is still not happy, as the girl brought a minimal dowry of only a few trinkets. Although a well-to-do family, they decided on a ‘shoestring budget’ wedding. The bride and her family continue to make extravagant demands for furnishing and decorating the house, foreign trips, holidays, etc, and my poor colleague is developing health problems, and is under debt, as a result.
So, I feel that the CII should deal with the more serious dilemmas of taking corruption, bribery, violence, dishonesty, education, etc., at the grassroots instead of wasting time on trivial issues. It should not concern itself with the giving of dowries, which is still a voluntary act, and should remain as such. Of course, there should be no duress, either way.
ABID ALI
Karachi
WELL-known poet Longfellow had written a poem about America, part of which reads:
Humanity with all its fears, /With all the hopes of future years, / Is hanging breathless on thy fate!
The situation, at the historical but critical time when Barack Hussein Obama has taken over as the first Afro-American president of the United States is such that Longfellow’s verse may very well have been written for Mr. Obama himself.
As has been increasingly evident through the last one year, even more than the Americans, the rest of the world appeared to have almost a palpable interest in the young and promising candidate becoming the president of the world, as any American president effectively tends to be.
It is no secret that apart from the financial debacle, the biggest problem facing the US is its troubled relationship with the Islamic world, in particular those Muslims who have taken to militancy. The good thing is that President Obama, in his very first address after the swearing in, has offered a new way forward based on mutual interest and respect.
That the great majority of the world’s Muslims are themselves extremely keen to see their ties with Washington to revert to the way they used to be until just a couple of decades back, should have been clear to anybody following the media in the Islamic countries, specially including Pakistan.
However, some examples that have surfaced after Mr Obama’s inauguration, should be interesting for him (Dawn, Jan 22). Dewi Asmara Oetojo, a lawmaker in Indonesia’s parliament, who had been his classmate in a primary school in Jakarta in the late 1960s, observed:
“We’re convinced he’ll be able to bring change because even when he was a kid, he already had a ‘go global’ attitude. It will be easy for him to bridge all the differences between West and East. He will bring peace to the world.”
Another classmate, Onny Padma, said: “He has a good understanding about Asian people. When he lived here, he learned a lot about our culture. It will be easier for him to build better ties between Indonesia, Asia and America.”
Along with these hopeful assessments, came the apprehension of the head of Nahdiatul Ulema, the largest Indonesian Muslim organisation adhering to the Sufic strain of Islam and having around 60 million followers.
The gentleman, Maskuri Abdilah, in expressing his views, also gave voice to the sentiments of the global Islamic community. “It is very good that Obama wants to find a ‘new way forward’ with the Muslim world but first he has to change US policy over Israel and the Palestinian conflict.”
On its part, the OIC also sent a message of hope and cooperation to the US president, wisely noting: “A nation can either be great or feared, but rarely both at the same time.”
It is being said that Barack Obama is planning to visit a large Muslim country, possibly Indonesia or Egypt, within this year, to commence a new era of ties with the Muslims. While he should surely go where his heart takes him (and security allows), I think if he includes Pakistan and Palestine (although it would be more difficult, due to Jewish opposition) as well in his itinerary, that would open many doors and many hearts in the Islamic world for him.
His security services may caution him against doing that, but I feel if he can stand up in Islamabad or Jerusalem and offer talks to the Islamists and to act as an honest broker in resolving disputes, it will do more for him than years of formal diplomacy can.
KHALID CHAUDHRY
Karachi
LAW Minister Farooq Naek says judges will not be restored through campaigns on the streets. He is wrong.
Campaigns on the street will not only restore the judges, they would also solve the problems caused by the rulers’ self-indulgent brazenness in leading the nation down the garden path with vows made to be forgotten, with honey words uttered not to be honoured, with commitments made not to be met, with promises made not to be kept, with pledges given not to be delivered.
The plundering of the faith and trust of the people, the dashing of their hopes, by the rulers has created problems that haunt the land and grow more worrisome with each passing day. Hopefully the transformation will be peaceful.
SKH
Karachi
AN Israeli doctor says: “Medicine in my country is so advanced that we can take a kidney out of one man, put it in another, and have him looking for work in six weeks.”
A German doctor says: “That is nothing; we can take a lung out of one person, put it in another, and have him looking for work in four weeks.”
A Russian doctor says: “In my country, medicine is so advanced that we can take half a heart out of one person, put it in another, and have them both looking for work in two weeks.”
An American Texas doctor, not to be outdone, says: “You guys are way behind, we recently took a man with no brains out of Texas, put him in the White House for eight years, and now half the country is looking for work.”
A CITIZEN OF THE WORLD
Via email
IN his letter, ‘Time for soul-searching’ (Jan 16), Rizwan Asghar Chaudhry has remarked: “Of late the CCPO of Lahore has shocked the whole nation by…. saying that the people have (a) right to kill a dacoit who breaks into their house.” He sees this statement as tantamount to sanctioning the ‘law of the jungle’.
I am afraid Mr Asghar is too ‘dacoit-friendly’ and has been quite carried away by sentiments, while also being ignorant that the Pakistani law allows it. Even in the US I have seen written on private property: “Trespassers will be shot.” Once, while studying over there, I had lost my way and drove into a ranch-like place — not taking the notice seriously — and came out alive only because the owner(s) happened to be absent! An American living in the area, from whom I next sought directions, told me about this.
The gentleman should realise how callous even the mobile phone snatchers, what to talk of dacoits, have become that they kill a person merely for resisting them. A dacoit who enters a home is likely to be much more dangerous.
Mr Chaudhry, we only live once and I, for instance, have no intention of letting anybody snatch my life without doing all I can to resist it, if I have a licensed firearm to do it with relative safety. I dearly hope I will never have to kill or hurt anyone though.
A READER
Karachi
THE Sindh police, from time to time, have been carrying out unnecessary campaigns against tinted car windows as their efforts have so far miserably failed.
The simple reason for this is that with street crime growing unbridled travelling in cars with see-through glasses is tantamount to inviting the attention of robbers, muggers, highwaymen and other criminals who are ever ready to pounce upon anyone who come their way.
The modus operandi of such criminals involves spotting a car, head count of the car’s occupants, a good view of valuables in the car and estimation of time required to carry out the entire robbing activity.
With tinted or covered windows we deprive them of all these luxuries and hence save our families from horrors that take place almost every day in this city.
I would, therefore, request higher authorities to stop wasting their energies in searching for cars with tinted glasses, and instead focus on cars with party flags, AFR number plates, and bicycle riders who are mostly involved in such criminal activities.
ARSALAN FARUQI
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.
