Challenge and opportunity

IN the wake of the Mumbai attacks, it appears that the chief victim has been the meticulously crafted peace process between Pakistan and India that had seemingly received fresh sustenance when a democratic government took over in Pakistan.

That the tragedy took place only a couple of days after the two countries had agreed to boost cooperation between their civilian investigation agencies to control cross-border terrorism and illegal immigration has added to the poignancy of the disaster.

Pakistan’s initial response was appropriate, with expressions of sympathy coupled with strong condemnation of the terrorist action. However, as soon as accusations of our involvement in the Mumbai attack began to emanate, instead of maintaining a cool-headed stance, the government began to send conflicting signals.

The operations in Mumbai were still ongoing when the Indian media began to speak with assurance bordering on certainty about Pakistan’s involvement in the attack. Soon thereafter, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh warned that “neighbouring nations” would have to pay if their territory was allowed to be used to launch attacks on India. Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee was more explicit claiming that while “proof cannot be disclosed at this time … preliminary evidence, prima facie evidence, indicates elements with links to Pakistan are involved”.

Admittedly the global perception about Pakistan is bad but with over a dozen insurgencies of its own and recent evidence of Indian army officers’ involvement in the Samjhauta train carnage, Delhi should have been a little more circumspect. The manner in which the Indians jumped the gun and began firing on all cylinders to drag Pakistan into the mess was clearly motivated by the desire to capitalise on the Mumbai tragedy and derive political mileage from it.

Some observers claim that domestic considerations may have played a role. The need to cover up a massive intelligence failure during state elections and general elections next spring — all at a time of growing popularity of the right wing BJP — may also have been a factor in Delhi’s adopting a belligerent posture.

Others see in India’s reaction evidence of its concern with president-elect Obama’s pronouncements of meaningful US involvement in the India-Pakistan normalisation process, and more importantly, in the resolution of the Kashmir issue, to permit Pakistan to focus with greater intensity and effectiveness on its western borders and in battling domestic extremists. Whatever the rationale, India has historically resisted all foreign involvement in Kashmir, saying it was a bilateral issue.

New Delhi feels particularly peeved that this should happen so soon after President Bush had made India the linchpin of his Asia policy and modified, even abandoned, the long-held US non-proliferation policy to concretise their strategic alliance. India does not want to be bracketed once again with Pakistan or the long-derided zero-sum game to be revived.

Is it then beyond the realm of possibility that Delhi may now be engaged in making the best of an awful situation? If the embers of the burning Taj can be used to paint Pakistan with the brush of terrorism, it would place us in an extremely difficult situation that could have awful consequences. More importantly, Obama’s initiative for this region could turn out to be stillborn. Are the Indians trying to make a virtue out of necessity?

What should Pakistan’s approach and effort be, both domestically and externally, at this time? Six things come to mind.

First of all, mere denials will not suffice; they have to be backed by the convincing repudiation and rebuttal of Indian allegations.

Second, our offer of assistance and cooperation should be genuine. If need be, we should be willing to go the extra mile to meet international concerns.

Third, we have to galvanise our friends and persuade them to pitch in for us in this crisis.

Fourth, we have to ensure that decisions are taken after due deliberation; the confusion and lack of coherence shown last week left us looking incompetent.

Fifth, the government has to carry along all stakeholders at home. This is a time for unity and solidarity. Political differences must stop at the water’s edge when it comes to the country’s security.

Finally, and most importantly, we have to get our act together and recognise that extremists and terrorists are no friends of Pakistan. They have not only challenged the state’s writ and created mayhem at home, they are also pushing the country into international isolation.

The world is convinced that we either lack the will or the capacity, or both, to take on the terrorists. We have to prove them wrong, by formulating and executing a policy that is a judicious mix of political engagement, economic incentives, administrative reforms and the limited use of force.

Understandably there is increasing concern in Pakistan over what is seen as the absence of governance, the impression of drift and lack of direction. This is particularly unfortunate as most Pakistanis were confident that the restoration of a democratic dispensation would not only rid the country of an authoritarian regime but also bring about a fundamental reorientation resulting in good governance and the rule of law.

Will this unexpected crisis in South Asia lead to our politicians closing ranks and pledging that henceforth their policies would keep the national interest above individual and party considerations? That is our fervent hope, especially following the all-party conference where a united stance was in display. More importantly, will both India and Pakistan recognise that their destinies are linked by an umbilical cord that was not severed even when we became two sovereign states?

Mumbai was definitely a challenge to the Indian state, just as the Marriott was to Pakistan. Let the leadership in both countries take up this challenge and turn them into opportunities to prove that neither Mumbai nor the Marriott will deter them from their commitment to the ‘irreversible process’ that enjoys popular support and contains in it the seeds of genuine peace. This would be the most telling message to those who wish to inflict harm on them and far more effective than mutual accusations and recriminations.

Not so fundamental rights

ON December 10 the people of Pakistan will join worldwide celebrations of the 60th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

This will also be an occasion to address the need for a review of the fundamental rights chapter in the Constitution of Pakistan. A review of the people’s rights presumed fundamental is necessary for a variety of reasons.

First, fundamental rights have often been suspended in Pakistan and for such long periods that ordinary citizens have had difficulty in treating them as fundamental. Apart from the fact that every usurper of power began his reign by suspending these rights, the constitution itself downgrades them by providing for their suspension in a state of emergency and the courts have justified such actions. Democratic elements, especially defenders of rights of the federating units, have been striving for decades to make recourse to the emergency provision less easy than it is at the moment.

The president can issue a proclamation of emergency (and fundamental rights can be suppressed) if he “is satisfied that a grave emergency exists in which the security of Pakistan, or any part thereof, is threatened by war or external aggression, or by internal disturbance beyond the power of a provincial government to control”. A strong consensus has developed on the justification for suspending fundamental rights in the event of war and external aggression although the assumptions underlying this view can be challenged for being rooted in a colonial legacy. It can be argued that the state would be better placed to face aggression by respecting people’s fundamental rights rather than by denying them.

This argument has been strengthened by the recent experience of the large-scale derogation of fundamental rights under the cover of the so-called war on terrorism. But this aspect of the matter has not been debated in Pakistan and it will not be easy to abandon the traditional view that in the event of external aggression, and not when aggression is perceived as likely, fundamental rights can be suspended.

However, the question whether any internal disturbance that is beyond the power of a provincial government to control can be used to suppress the fundamental rights of the country’s population has been thoroughly debated and democratic opinion strongly favours the deletion of this provision from the basic law. An amendment to this effect will help in persuading the people that fundamental rights are indeed an essential feature of the constitution, although the judiciary’s efforts to protect such features of the constitution from encroachment by praetorian rulers have hardly succeeded.

One way of reinforcing the fundamental nature of the basic rights of citizens is to make any alteration to them more difficult than other constitutional amendments. For instance, Canada and India have placed any amendment to fundamental rights outside parliamentary jurisdiction and have, in fact, made it subject to popular verdict. Islamabad could revive the people’s confidence in the constitutional text by adopting a similar approach.

A second and perhaps more important reason to call for a review of the chapter on fundamental rights is that Pakistan is lagging behind in the international human rights movement. The contents of this chapter have remained largely unchanged since they were adopted by the first Constituent Assembly in 1950 while the world had taken many significant strides towards strengthening the substance of human rights. As a result Pakistan has failed to recognise two new basic rights — the right to development and the right to a healthy natural environment. No great deliberation is required to show that the Pakistani people need guarantees to these rights even more than the people of advanced states.

Besides it is time to examine the indefensible division of basic rights into chapters on fundamental rights and principles of policy. The key rights to education, health, social security, non-discrimination on the basis of gender, and culture and language have all been relegated to the status of principles to be respected at the rulers’ discretion. No citizen can approach the courts to secure them. 35 years have passed since the principles of policy were drafted in the existing form.

The excuse for denying education, health and social security as fundamental rights of the people was lack of economic resources. The actual reason, however, is a callous disregard for the rights and interests of the people, a refusal to accept their status as citizens of a modern state and not subjects of a medieval potentate.

Three arguments underscore the urgency of shifting economic and social rights from the principles of policy to the fundamental rights chapter.

First, the present arrangement whereby these rights are not judicially enforceable is violative of the principle of the indivisibility of human rights. This is a stigma Pakistan should not like to live with any longer.

Second, at present the Pakistani people attach the highest priority to the right to a decent and adequate livelihood. Human rights have no meaning for them if they do not have the right to work and to a guarantee of fair wages that can assure them of a decent existence. Neither do they have any meaning if women are not guaranteed equal wage for equal work.

And third, the ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has made movement towards its implementation imperative.

This is also a good occasion to create safeguards against the derogation of constitutional guarantees through irresponsible law-making — an indefensible practice favoured by the country’s authoritarian rulers. Further, it is necessary to remove the flaw that while the constitution bars discrimination against women, minorities and the poor, legal mechanisms to ensure implementation are non-existent or deficient. The burden of resisting the denial of a right or discrimination is on the victims and most of them do not have access to means of redress even if they have been established.

There is no doubt that the human rights agenda before Pakistan is quite difficult. This task should not be viewed as something contrary to, or isolated from, the struggle to establish good governance. The most important indicator of good (or democratic or civilised) governance is going to be the extent to which the citizens of Pakistan, especially the underprivileged and the marginalised, can be enabled to enjoy their fundamental entitlements.

A world without hope

IT has been more than a year since the military operation began in the idyllic valley of Swat. But the promised peace is nowhere in sight. As the biting cold envelopes the vales and hills of Pakhtunkhwa, the bitter reality of an endless conflict continues to stalk each living being in the blood-soaked land.

While the Taliban overrun one region after another — Bajaur, Mohmand, Orakzai, Darra, Shabqadar, Khyber Agency, even the suburbs of Peshawar — a perpetual state of denial has descended on officialdom and political circles in the province.

A guessing game is going on about the extent of the terrorism; its domestic and external support revolves around the media with no clear answers. US drone attacks are routinely condemned by leaders of all shades but no alternative mechanism is available to confront the menace of extremism that is threatening our very existence.

Travelling across Hayatabad on Khyber Road, the famous Katcha Garhi camp once inhabited by displaced Afghans has again become a refugee camp, this time for the fleeing hordes from conflict zones, mostly Bajaur. Approximately 300,000 or more have been displaced and as winter sets in, more are pouring into the chaotic streets and dusty lanes of Peshawar which with its barricades, fortress-like walls and security check posts resembles a city at war within.

This paper regularly prints heart-rending stories and photos depicting the miserable conditions of the internally displaced — lovely children and their families suffering the consequences of the conflict brought on by the ruthless Taliban as well as the perpetrators of state violence whose excesses are reaped by helpless, innocent civilians.

Some headlines reveal the horrors of the conflict: ‘Celebrating Eid away from home’ is the tale of a student away from his family during the festive occasion while ‘Displaced students forced to take odd jobs’ cites young vendors as saying that they earn Rs100 a day but that the police harass them. In ‘Longing for hometown’, the children are fed up with their life in relief camps. It quotes five-year-old Fatima playing with an empty bottle, a box and plastic spoons as saying, “I have left behind my dolls. Now I have nothing to play with. I don’t like it here.”

Her playmates too are fed up. The nights here are cold and the days boring. “Maybe our houses have been destroyed but I have kept my dolls safe in a secret place. So I want to return home,” says Fatima.

‘Katcha Garhi camp: Where life stands in a cul-de-sac’ reveals the dilemma of Razia, an anaemic mother of two, who is expecting another child: “ I don’t know if I will die or survive,” she says, “I heard a few days ago a woman in labour was turned down by a hospital and she gave birth in a tent.” The report also focuses on five other pregnant women in nearby tents who have to sleep on bare floors while winter approaches. Having had to walk for days on hilly terrain, many complain of weakness. Some have had to have abortions. Life is living hell for them as they complain of lack of food. They huddle together at night and talk about returning home.

Meanwhile, on the occasion of Universal Children’s Day, Dr Abdul Hamid, president of the Pakistan Paediatric Association reveals that some 7,000 children at the camp need better food, shelter and sanitation. “We must strive to safeguard the present and future of the 300,000 IDPs of Bajaur…. Acts of terrorism could find a place in the children’s minds if they are not halted,” he says. “The people must come to the rescue of these children who are prone to chest diseases in winter.”

We get to know from a translated letter that Sidra, a bright eighth-grade student from a remote area of Swat, and whose school was burnt down, is now just another internal refugee living in an anonymous camp. She implores: “Can the gloomy atmosphere generated by the Taliban and the government in Swat be reversed?” Indeed, this question is on the lips of parents and children who have become the fuel for this blazing conflagration.

Children who have lost their parents need support and sustenance. Are the two warring parties ready to assist these helpless children? No, it is inconceivable that these unfortunate children will ever receive any help from either the Taliban or the government. If they ever cared, why would they have started this senseless and aimless war?

Have we ever troubled ourselves to think about the lives of these people? Most of their schools have been blown up and the children have no place to turn to for an education. Religion urges the acquisition of knowledge by every Muslim man and woman. If this is the case then why are those who perceive themselves as true believers blowing up beacons of enlightenment?

Why don’t officials care about education? Why are innocent children being sacrificed in a war which is aimless and endless? These are questions on the lips of thousands of children and helpless parents who have been forced to leave their homeland, Swat, with tearful eyes and proceed towards an uncertain future.

adilzareef@yahoo.com