Consensus in Shanghai
SINO-AMERICAN relations have traditionally been volatile. From the strained aloofness of the past several years, the two countries have now veered to a warmth in their relationship which would not have been conceivable a few months ago. The event which brought about this change was, no doubt, the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington and the Bush administration’s stern response in the form of its war against terrorism in Afghanistan. Meeting on the sidelines of the APEC forum in Shanghai, the leaders of the two countries chose to put aside their differences on Taiwan and other issues, which have divided them in the past. They wanted to appear united in their common security concerns in relation to international terrorism. In support of the American military campaign, China has sealed its borders with Afghanistan and has extended cooperation in intelligence matters and in interdicting the financing of terrorist organizations. Further, to save itself embarrassment, Beijing has clamped down on dissenting voices within its own borders.
At the moment the two countries have a common interest in eliminating Taliban rule in Kabul which is seen to be promoting terrorism in the region and abroad. China’s own experience of Islamist extremism has not been too happy. It has had to cope with its own brand of fundamentalists in Xinjiang province who are believed to have links with the Taliban in Afghanistan. If America’s war against terrorism can help root out this menace from China’s flank, it is understandable that Beijing would want to cooperate with Washington. But it has been careful not to give a carte blanche to Washington, though America hardly needs one. Beijing has reminded Washington that its anti-terrorism efforts should have clearly defined targets and innocent casualties should be avoided.
Given these constraints, the two sides have not gone overboard in embracing each other even in this hour of crisis when both find themselves on the same side of the terrorist divide. The Americans made it clear on the eve of the APEC meeting that the sanctions on China are to remain in place. For his part, President Jiang Zemin has reminded President Bush that he is bound by the three joint communiques which define the positions of the two sides on Taiwan. This remains the ultimate point of contention between them, with the US using the Taiwan card to arm-twist China into falling in line when needed.
When the war in Afghanistan is over, Sino-American ties may slide back to their old grooves. If America is shrewd it would not be led into believing that its writ will now run unhampered in the region. True, there has been silence on the part of the Shanghai Six which has brought Russia, China and four Central Asian republics in a political and strategic partnership in the region. Uzbekistan has extended strategic and military facilities to Washington and Russia is lined up on the side of the coalition. But what is certain is that China will seek to restore the equilibrium as soon as the war is over. Even at the press conference he addressed jointly with Mr Bush in Shanghai, the Chinese president called for the role of the United Nations being brought into full play in Afghanistan. The fact is that this is the only way to neutralize America’s predominance in the region and ensure that the US military presence will not become a permanent feature of the geopolitical landscape of Central Asia, South Asia and Afghanistan.
Unjustified increase
THE increase in the power tariff of Wapda and the KESC allowed by the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA) on Friday will come as a great shock to the customers of the two utilities especially at a time when the prices of POL are falling and the trend is projected to persist. The NEPRA has allowed the increase of 11 and 13 paisa per unit to Wapda and the KESC, respectively, with immediate effect subject to government notification. The raise is said to be based on the plea that the increase in furnace oil prices during the last quarter of the financial year 2000-01 is estimated to raise the fuel bill of both the power utilities for the current fiscal year.
According to the NEPRA, the fuel bill of Wapda is estimated to rise from Rs 71.743 billion last year to Rs 75.307 billion this year. To offset the increase of Rs 3.54 billion in cost, an equivalent additional revenue has to be generated through an estimated sale of 33.56 billion units during the remaining period of the year. On this basis the average increase should have been 10.62 paisa per unit but since consumers using less than 50 units have been exempted from the increase, the raise in case of the rest of the consumers has been fixed at 11 paisa. The same formula has been applied in the case of the KESC.
The NEPRA’s formula does not seem to be as fair as it has been made out to be. The total cost of fuel consumed is being divided by the number of customers to whom bills are being issued. Power lost during distribution, which was calculated at 25-40 per cent, has not been taken into consideration. This level of distribution losses, which should not normally exceed the maximum of 15 per cent, have been mainly due to theft committed in collusion with the employees of the utilities. The previous application of Wapda for an increase was turned down by the NEPRA with the instruction to cut down losses on account of theft and distribution which were considered excessive. It was to check these losses that the army management was inducted in both utilities.
If the line losses remain as high as before and there is not much reduction in theft, then the increases do not have much justification. The increase in power rates is going to affect the economy adversely. Already the industry and exporters were under great pressure, as the existing rates have eroded their competitiveness in the international market. The new increase will further worsen the situation.
‘Hyde parks’ in Karachi?
THE Sindh government has approved a Karachi city government plan to identify and designate open spaces around the city where public meetings can be held without disrupting traffic or civic life in general. The city government has identified 17 such open spaces where social, religious and political parties will be allowed to hold public meetings and peaceful protests. The plan is inspired by the ‘Hyde Park Corner’ model: it allows individuals or groups of citizens to vent their views openly and to a public audience without the fear of being booked for breaking the law that otherwise may ban such public gatherings elsewhere in the city.
Public protests and political meetings in the past two years have officially remained banned. But this does not mean that these have not been taking place. Often such meetings have disrupted life in the city and caused unnecessary standoffs between the organizers and the law enforcement agencies — on occasions, leading to violent clashes. If the plan goes ahead as envisaged, it is bound to be welcome by citizens, who in the past have suffered on account of the disruptive or paralyzing effects such meetings and protest rallies. The idea is good and has been in practice in many advanced, democratic countries. Whether our politicians will accept the idea remains to be seen.