Nato: seeking a new role

IT IS a measure of how dramatically global realities have changed in the space of less than a decade that Russia and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization have set up a new forum for security cooperation. The historic accord between Moscow and Nato was signed near Rome on Tuesday. The accord creates a new Nato-Russia Council and gives Russia an equal voice with the 19 member states on key issues, including the war against terrorism, peacekeeping and preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Russia’s emergence as one of the key players in Nato affairs is widely viewed as a reward for Moscow’s enthusiastic support to the US-led war on terror and the increasingly pro-West stance of its leadership. While the Russians and the leaders of the western world rejoiced over this remarkable new development, the supreme irony of the situation was not lost on most observers. After all, Nato was originally formed in 1949 to counter the expansion of communism spearheaded by the former Soviet Union.

For more than half a century, Nato, dominated by the US and comprising many important western European nations, guarded the security of the West from a perceived Soviet threat. It led to the subsequent emergence of the Warsaw Pact, which comprised the Soviet Union and its client states in eastern Europe. The two alliances remained bitter adversaries until the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. With the break-up of the Soviet empire, the Warsaw Pact simply withered away. That called into question the very raison d’etre of Nato — a security alliance without a defined adversary. In the early years after the fall of the Soviet Union, this ambiguous role continued to fuel suspicions between the western powers and the new Russian Federation. Moscow questioned the rationale behind the alliance’s continued existence in the post-cold war period. It also expressed resentment at Nato’s decision to consider opening its doors to Moscow’s former allies and especially breakaway Soviet states. In 1999, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland became members much to Moscow’s chagrin. Even today, a number of former Soviet allies are queuing up to join Nato, bringing the alliance to the doorstep of Russia.

Gradually, however, there was a thaw in relations between Moscow and Nato, with the two sides even conducting joint peacekeeping exercises in Bosnia and Kosovo. The wheel has now come full circle and the Russians are now in a position to influence the policies of the organization. There are, however, many questions being asked about Nato’s future role. Does the alliance still have a military role following the end of the cold war? Does its mandate to stem the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction mean it can join the US in any future attack on Iraq? Is the alliance capable of taking on amorphous tasks such as fighting a war against terrorism? Do the increasingly assertive European countries have the will or the desire to finance an alliance which remains basically a US-dominated entity? And most importantly, in the absence of a clearly defined foe, who is likely to fill the vacuum as Nato’s main adversary? The Nato leadership will have to find answers to such questions if it is to carve out a new role for itself in today’s unipolar world.

Stealing of culture

CONTINUING illegal excavations around sites of archaeological and historical importance in the NWFP’s Mardan district should be a cause for concern for the federal ministry of culture and the relevant provincial authorities. The region has about 700 sites, many of which have fallen prey to a coterie of bounty hunters acting in collusion with local officials. Priceless artefacts, including a bronze Buddha statue sold for an estimated Rs 2.8 million, and ancient coins have been stolen from these sites. The thieves are quite resourceful since a number of them are believed to even possess metal detectors with which they go about hunting for old coins. A steady demand overseas for such historical treasures means that there will always be some unscrupulous elements who will be willing to take the risk to steal from this archaeological site. In fact, given that the archaeology department has consistently failed to take adequate measures and that local authorities are no match for the resourceful and often well-connected relic hunters, it is no surprise that the theft of such priceless treasures has continued to grow in scale and daring and become such a profitable business.

The maintenance of such sites all over the world is usually financed by charging visitors, but given the state of law and order and the overseas image of the country at the moment, that may not be a viable option for the present. However, the government would do well to take effective measures to prevent this seemingly endless plunder of our historical wealth. Security at these sites should be tightened up and the guards should be alert and equipped to deter would-be thieves. Where possible sites should be adequately fenced off and cordoned, and areas or structures inside them containing precious artefacts should be kept under strict watch. In addition to that, government officials involved in the theft of the treasures should be weeded out and prosecuted for their crime.

The help of local people too should be solicited in bolstering the protection and preservation of cultural treasures. Apart from giving one a sense of history and belonging, well-maintained historical sites have the potential to attract visitors from far and wide, which in turn can provide a much-needed boost to the local economy. Hence, locals should be made to see how they have a stake in preserving the archaeological sites in their neighbourhoods.

Reward — and punishment

THE decision by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the Association of Certified Chartered Accountants (ACCA) to institute awards for Pakistani companies known to be observing or promoting environment-friendly norms and measures could be one way of inducing the private sector to realize its social responsibility in curbing industrial pollution. The intention of the awards scheme seems good but this initiative from the private sector should be seen as a supplement and not a substitute for government efforts for curbing pollution. As for this particular scheme, it is a good idea to reward firms that are seen to be observing anti-pollution rules — something that should encourage others to fall in line with the requirements of a pollution-free environment.

The rewards scheme also perhaps serves to underline that the government has not been doing a very good job of fighting pollution on the preventive and control fronts. The environment ministry and the various EPAs have hardly imposed fines on violators or implemented existing legislation like the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997, in the case of polluting industries. Had they done so matters would not have come to this. The Pakistan Environmental Protection Act of 1997 allows the government to take a variety of measures to reduce pollution, especially in respect of treatment and disposal of solid waste and effluent. An environmental impact assessment is supposed to be an integral part of any feasibility study of a proposed industrial project but this requirement is hardly ever complied with. The Act also provides for the establishment of tribunals where parties affected by industrial pollution can sue alleged polluters. These courts were set up in Punjab for a short period but they ceased to exist after the notification under which they were set up lapsed. Instituting awards like what the WWF and ACCA have done is fine but it cannot replace the work of the government which is to implement the quite comprehensive legislation that exists for the prevention and control pollution.