Blair’s accountability

SERVING prime ministers are usually not called before a court to defend their honesty. A country has to have strong traditions of parliamentary democracy to do that. It must also have a really brash leader willing to defy public opinion on a key issue of war and peace to land himself in such a soup. From what is emerging from the Hutton inquiry, it is plain that such a country is Britain and such a leader is Tony Blair. Ever since he decided to join his ally in the White House in Washington in launching a war on Iraq, the British prime minister has been in a sea of trouble at home. Defying public opinion in his eagerness to toe the Bush line, the prime minister was under compulsion to provide a rational justification for his action. This he did by overruling his advisers and intelligence services to project Saddam Hussein as a grave military threat.

Mr Blair, perhaps, believed that he was politically strong enough to get away with such a controversial policy move. After all he did have the backing of a majority of Labour MPs and was in no immediate danger of being unseated, all the rumpus in the House of Commons notwithstanding. He might have emerged unscathed had the BBC not reported in May the “sexing up” of the September dossier on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. The storm that was let loose and Dr David Kelly’s death, which came in its wake, have brought things to a pass, forcing the government to institute an inquiry. But all the issues are interrelated and the process of accountability and the rule of law have now taken over. As the Hutton investigation proceeds, the British prime minister may find himself deeper and deeper in the quagmire. He would also discover that in such situations politics does not always give protection to a leader in office. In fact, Lord Hutton’s findings, whatever they eventually are, could cast a shadow on Mr Blair’s political future.

There are other factors which are not going Mr Blair’s way either. The British forces in Iraq are facing tough resistance from the people in that country. In the past week, three British soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq, bringing to 11 those killed since May 1 when Mr Bush declared the war in Iraq over. All this has added to the embarrassment of a leader whose popularity rating has fallen in recent months. Conversely, developments in London will make their impact felt in Baghdad as well as in Washington. Will President George Bush find it possible to sustain his bellicose strategy of occupation of Iraq? True, American policy has been characterized by unilateralism in its approach, and it is not subject to the same kind of public scrutiny and accountability as in other established democracies. But Britain has provided Mr Bush strong moral support by sharing some of America’s military burden and the political odium that has gone with it. If Mr Blair is forced out of office before his term expires or has to call early general elections, President Bush may find an important plank knocked out from under his feet. There are many in other capitals also who will watch the outcome of the Hutton hearings with trepidation. It will certainly have profound implications for international affairs, British politics and constitutional law all over the world. The entire justification for the war on Iraq is under inquiry.

Still up in the air

THAT the technical-level talks between Indian and Pakistani aviation experts have not led to an early resumption of air links between the two countries or the restoration of overflight rights is a matter of regret but perhaps of little surprise. Pakistan’s insistence that India give assurances that it would not unilaterally snap air links or bar Pakistani overflights proved to be the major stumbling block. This was obviously beyond the ken of bureaucrats, and will have to await a decision by the political leaderships in the two countries. The consolation is that both sides have agreed to meet again at a later date, and it should be hoped that by then attitudes would have further mollified in both India and Pakistan. Unless political hurdles are overcome at the top level, talks held at the lower levels will remain uncertain and tentative.

A total of 12 weekly flights operated on the Karachi-Mumbai, Karachi-Delhi and Lahore-Delhi sectors at the time of the suspension of air links in December 2001. Over 100 overflights, most of them by Indian carriers, used the two countries’ airspace. At the talks in Rawalpindi, Pakistani civil aviation experts stressed the need to resume direct air links immediately pending the decision on overflights, but the Indians insisted that both issues should be resolved simultaneously. On the positive side of things, the two sides agreed to increase the number of destinations and flights between the two countries. There was also an agreement on allowing private airlines to operate regular flights. The joint communique issued at the end of the two-day meeting did not mention the two areas of agreement because there was no broader agreement on the resumption of flights and overflights.

While New Delhi and Islamabad straighten out the wrinkles on this tricky issue, it is time something was done to resume the train service between Lahore and Delhi. The only existing direct travel link between the two countries is the just resumed bus service, which is woefully inadequate in terms of its capacity to cater to the demand.

Stampede deaths

THE Kumbh Mela stampede in India on Wednesday is another reminder of the hazards that lie in store when large numbers congregate for religious or other events. At least 45 people were killed when a press of pilgrims broke down a barrier blocking their way on a narrow street in Nasik, some 200 kilometres north of Mumbai, the city itself rocked earlier in the week by two deadly bomb blasts. The barricade in Nasik was meant to ensure a smooth passage, but the arrangement went tragically and terribly wrong. Most of those crushed in the stampede were women, many of them infirm.

This is not the first time that the Kumbh Mela or other religious congregations in India have been struck by disaster. Similar gatherings in other countries and places have also seen accidents happen. The Haj has repeatedly been hit by stampedes, the worst incident being in 1990 when 1,426 pilgrims were killed. In 2001, 30 people died during an urs in Multan. There have also been stampede deaths on occasions where no religious factor was involved. Crowds at football matches and rock festivals have suddenly panicked, with tragic consequences. Accidents on religious occasions are sadder, because the pilgrims in most cases undergo great hardships of travel and bear heavy expenses to reach their cherished destinations. It will always be a matter of surprise and regret that while authorities everywhere are in a position to estimate the number of pilgrims expected for a particular religious occasion, safety often remains a matter of luck. It is important that ways should be found to control the number and movement of pilgrims and worshippers, and arrangements for their security drastically improved.