Targeting Kofi Annan

Following his re-election for a second term, President George W. Bush believes he has received a mandate to continue his unilateral approach. The resignation of Secretary of State Colin Powell, who had sought unsuccessfully to moderate the reliance on power, was seen as the victory of the neo-conservatives who give primacy to the role of the sole superpower in running the world.

During the election campaign, the Democratic contender had sought to take advantage of the apparent disquiet over the handling of the war in Iraq. Sensing his vulnerability over this issue, and anxious to demonstrate his policy of keeping the UN engaged, President Bush had made a few moves seemingly to get the UN involved more directly, specially with regard to the electoral process in Iraq.

The US effort to bring the security situation in Iraq under control got nowhere, and in fact the tempo of armed resistance, of kidnappings and of attacks on Iraqis recruited in the official police and national guard increased steeply, as did the number of US casualties.

Though the US had called off the earlier invasion of Fallujah, after heavy civilian casualties got embarrassing publicity, the supporters of the local Al Qaeda commander, Zarqawi, seemed to be having things their own way.

More and more areas in the Sunni triangle and around Baghdad appeared to be getting out of the control of coalition forces. The US commanders, who were acting within certain constraints, became impatient as they had the firepower to decimate the Iraqi resistance in the no-go areas.

The expectation that other countries would send forces to protect a UN presence was also not fulfilled, because this presence did not materialize owing to Washington's inability to guarantee the security of the UN personnel.

In the meantime, both Bush and Blair continued to face mounting criticism domestically for manipulating intelligence concerning Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction, or its links with Al Qaeda.

Increasingly, the picture that emerged was of a prior decision by the Bush administration to attack Iraq, for which available intelligence was interpreted to suit that intention.

As the controversy persisted, and the very legality of the war on Iraq was questioned, the UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, came out with the view that as the attack on Iraq was made without the authority of the UN Security Council, it violated the charter of the world body.

In other words, it was illegal. He also came out with the view that the war against Iraq had not made the world any safer. President Bush nursed a grievance against Mr Kofi Annan, which came out clearly after he had won the re-election.

Although irregularities in the huge oil-for-food programme run by the UN after the Gulf War of 1991, had been pointed out from time to time, the responsibility was not pinned on the secretary-general in the earlier years.

Indeed, the task of preventing the smuggling of oil from Iraq lay with a UN naval task force constituted largely by US and British ships. The two powers did not move actively to prevent the misuse of the oil-for-food programme, and their governments allowed thousands of contracts by shipping and oil companies in the US and Europe to be implemented without careful scrutiny of prices charged and other conditions.

Among prominent financiers involved in the earlier years in Iraqi oil-for-food transactions was Marc Rich a naturalized US citizen, born a Belgian Jew and who built up a vast financial empire, and made substantial contributions to President Clinton's election fund. He had been arrested and sentenced to imprisonment on charges of tax evasion.

He was pardoned by Clinton on virtually his last day in the White House in 2001. Incidentally, his record also included excessive profit-taking in contracts for the sale of rice on behalf of the Rice Export Corporation of Pakistan in the mid-90s.

The Republican administration of George W. Bush picked up the case after charges of corruption in the oil-for-food programme surfaced again in 2004. The apparent disregard shown by Secretary General Kofi Annan for US sensitivities drew the ire of the administration, specially as his vulnerability became known over the apparent involvement of his son, Kojo.

He had been employed by a Swiss firm, Cotecna, whose name had come up in connection with some large contracts. The secretary-general has a fine record of accountability, having subjected himself to UN inquiry when he was under secretary-general for security, and therefore responsible for preventing genocide in Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

Immediately after he became aware of the latest scandal over the oil-for-food programme, in which his son was being implicated, he moved expeditiously to appoint a highly respected person, former US Federal Reserve Board chairman, Volcker, to head a committee of inquiry.

This did not prevent a chorus of condemnation by Bush loyalists. William Safire, well-known supporter of Israel and of Bush policies, accused Kofi Annan of "stone walling" and "obstruction of justice" in a column in The New York Times Senator Coleman of Minnesota, chairman of the committee appointed to look into the scandal, also doubted the secretary-general's credibility, and called upon him to resign.

President Bush himself, speaking to the press on December 2 called for a "full, fair and open" inquiry into the matter. The manner in which the secretary-general is being demonized, after a record of service that has won him the praise of most UN members, and also earned for him the Nobel Peace Prize, suggests that the Bush administration is returning to its unilateral ways.

Senior Republican figures, notably Vice President Dick Cheney are known to be still receiving large amounts from oil firms they worked with, and the previous Bush cabinet was known to be the richest in personal wealth in US history.

Making money is viewed as central to the capitalist system. Evidence of huge contracts being given to favoured US firms has not aroused the kind of outrage that is being worked up over the UN's financial mismanagement.

Kofi Annan's second term runs till the end of 2006, and he enjoys the esteem of the great majority of UN members. He cannot be forced to resign, and may well stand up successfully to US pressure on him for his criticism of US policy in Iraq.

However, indications are that the Bush administration will relegate the UN to a subsidiary role, and rely on its own military power not only in Iraq, but also in the entire Middle East.

Its commitment to introduce a US style democracy, and human rights translates into continuing policies of regime change in Islamic countries in its post 9/11 war against terror.

There are voices of moderation within the US to which the Bush administration must pay heed. In a recent editorial The New York Times points out that the UN bureaucracy was not empowered to keep tab on the operation of the oil-for-food programme, which was the responsibility of the Security Council. While calling for a proper inquiry, the paper considers that it is very premature to call for Mr Annan's resignation.

The writer is a former ambassador.

Bringing development to Balochistan

The basic issues of underdevelopment pertaining to the Baloch and Balochistan have lost their relevance in the flux of politics comprising certain deep-rooted biases. Political forces out to malign each other in their effort to gain power and pelf, have worked to the detriment of the poor masses of the province.

Some trumpet the national interest while their rivals decry the deprivation of smaller nationalities. In reality, both parties identify class interests with those of national or nationalist interests.

In all this, the facts are not reaching the public. Take the case of the mega projects in Mekran including the Gwadar deep-water port, the coastal highway and the Mirani dam.

The first phase of the seaport is complete and the coastal highway is almost ready except for some minor work to be done on the long bridge of River Basol near Ormara. Though the Mirani dam project is lagging behind, this will also hopefully be completed as scheduled.

During the visit of a parliamentary subcommittee to Gwadar, one was struck by the way reality has been distorted. It is almost impossible for an outsider to get to the truth about an issue which is being so vociferously debated and projected, or vehemently opposed, by a group of stakeholders.

The basic issue is not the construction or the operation of these projects but their ownership. The state land, which belongs to the province, has been usurped by the land mafia in collaboration with the Mekrani underworld and its members who are in government and the legislative bodies.

This grabbing of land has been made possible after the survey and the settlement of Gwadar tehsil by the settlement department whose officials wilfully transferred tens of thousand of acres of state land to persons with no right to them.

These were totally barren lands, sand dunes, state forests and uncultivable wasteland but which according to revenue laws, regulations and settlement manuals cannot be transferred through dishonest entries.

Again, according to the rules, no person can sell his agricultural land to a person who is not a resident of the district in which such land is situated. For this transaction, he must seek the permission of the district collector.

Only then can a mutation be effected in the record of rights. But huge transfers involving thousands of acres of land have been made without observing the mandatory provisions of revenue laws.

In Gwadar it is not even agricultural land that is being sold and transferred to outsiders, it is state land that has been dishonestly grabbed and made over illegally to the land mafia.

This mega corruption has deprived the government of Balochistan of a major source of income amounting to perhaps trillions of rupees. But the government seems to have accepted the loss without a murmur, and is therefore in no position to take remedial action.

The federal government and its appointed committee have also made themselves oblivious to this grave aspect of the issue. It is high time that the government took serious notice of this business of unlawful and illegal transfers and transactions made in the wake of the construction of the seaport.

This rectification will be favourable for the development of the second phase of the deep-sea port and for the allied facilities of the port due to be commissioned.

The second important issue being ignored is the fact that Gwadar is connected to Karachi only through Hub. It is disconnected through Turbat, Panjgur and Khuzdar and onward to Quetta.

This is making the people restive as they feel that they are being converted into a landlocked province despite having the longest coastline in the country. So it will be in the best national interest to commence construction work on these roads and with the same speed witnessed in the building of the coastal highway.

The third factor is the lack of drinking water in the town itself. The provincial government must go ahead with plans for the installation of a desalinization plant to meet the requirements of construction and development.

These steps will surely enhance the credibility of the government in the eyes of the people of Balochistan as they would then be able to participate fully in the activity that may take place in Gwadar.

It is repeatedly being impressed upon the Baloch that the mega projects will provide a lot of opportunities of not only employment but business, trade and investment for everyone.

All these opportunities can be availed of when Gwadar is connected to the rest of Balochistan through a highway running to Turbat, Panjgur, Khuzdar and onward to Quetta. At present, this facility is not available.

A holistic approach in development is needed to bring Mekran and Balochistan into the national mainstream. This is the only way to make these mega projects operative and successful, and to bring development to backward and neglected areas. This is also the way to root out the killings and acts of sabotage that we are currently witnessing in the province.

The writer is a former chief secretary of Balochistan.

Afghanistan's 'democratic' polls

Excellent news from Afghanistan. A new president, chosen in its first-ever democratic election, has just been sworn in. He pledges to extend democracy across Afghanistan, liberate and educate all women, and wipe out "the last remnants of Islamic terrorism" impeding economic and social development.

Foreign troops supporting the Kabul government will remain only until security is assured and terrorism eliminated. But this was not Kabul, December 7, 2004, where the US-installed regime of Hamid Karzai was inaugurated to great fanfare from Washington and the western media. Both hailed - quite mistakenly - "Afghanistan's first elections."

Correction. Afghanistan's first true national elections were in 1986 and 1987, under Soviet military occupation. How quickly we forget. First, the KGB organized a loya jirga, or national assembly, in 1985 and, through bribes and intimidation, got its new Afghan "asset", communist secret chief boss Najibullah, positioned to replace the ineffectual Afghan communist puppet then in office.

In 2002, CIA got its Afghan "asset", Hamid Karzai, nominated interim president through a loya jirga that was as rigged as the one that promoted Najibullah. National elections in 1986 and 1987 confirmed Najibullah, Moscow's man in Kabul, as president of Afghanistan. These elections were manipulated, yet they were still fairer than the recent US-staged Afghan election.

How can this be? The Afghan communists, realizing their position was increasingly shaky, allowed genuine opposition parties to run and even sought a coalition with anti communist forces. But the Mujahideen spurned Najibullah as a traitor and Soviet puppet.

In the US-run Afghan election, all serious parties or individuals opposed to the American occupation of Afghanistan were excluded. So only ethnic minorities, like Tajiks, Hazara and Uzbeks, candidates were bribed to run, and figures favouring collaboration with the occupation were represented.

Warlords, who control 80 per cent of the nation, were bribed with tens of millions to give at least tacit support to Karzai. Afghanistan's majority Pushtun were represented only by a few minor candidates without any political base.

The most important Pushtun leader, Gulbadin Hekmatyar, declared a "terrorist" in 2002 for opposing the US invasion, was, of course, excluded. This exclusionary policy guaranteed that Afghanistan would be ruled by a regime representing certain minorities, a guarantee of ongoing political instability.

Afghans, it is true, turned out in large numbers to vote. Elections are still a novelty and a popular entertainment in Afghanistan, even fake ones. Iraqis will also vote in great numbers next year. Only in developed democracies are citizens are too lazy or indifferent to vote. But the Afghan election, supervised by the same UN official who helped rig elections against Islamic parties in military-ruled Algeria, had no more democratic credibility than the Soviet elections of the 1980's - and perhaps even less.

Karzai rules only downtown Kabul, protected by 200 US bodyguards, 17,000 US troops and a token Nato force. Karzai's own people cannot be trusted to protect him from assassination.

Najibullah, at least, could walk through downtown Kabul and greet people in the bazaar. It costs Washington $1.6 billion monthly to keep Karzai in power. Without the foreign troop's bayonets, Karzai's little puppet regime would quickly be swept away and he would share the same gruesome fate as Najibullah.

The real power behind figurehead Karzai, of course, remains the Tajik-Uzbek dominated Northern Alliance, which is the rump of the old Afghan Communist Party. Afghanistan's former Taliban rulers almost totally ended poppy/heroin production.

Today, America's Northern Alliance communist allies have restored the multi-billion dollar drug trade and now control 95 per cent of the world heroin supply. As in 1970's Indochina, the US again finds itself in bed with major drug dealers while espousing a platitudinous "war on drugs."

The other mainstay of the Karzai regime is General Rashid Dostam,who makes Saddam Hussein look tender by comparison. Outside Kabul, Afghanistan is a chaotic mess ruled by warlords and drug kingpins. The Taliban are lying low and waiting with usual legendary Pushtun patience for the US to withdraw.

The US has put its head into a hornet's nest in Afghanistan. Staying on is hugely expensive and painful. But a US pullout would be hailed as a triumph by anti-American forces across the Islamic world. So the US is good and stuck in Afghanistan - just, in fact, what Osama bin Laden wanted. - Copyright Eric S. Margolis 2004

Saarc continues to plod on

It is difficult to get excited about Saarc. Or other acronyms like Unesco, FAO and the UN for that matter. To the common man who barely ekes out a living, they are remote, untouchable and unapproachable.

Organizations run by patrician right-wing grandees who often find themselves in a highly ambiguous relationship with the swathes of poor, destitute masses whose destinies they try to influence.

One doesn't see too many of these visiting firemen in Karachi these days. But there was a time before 9/11, when the city was inundated by United Nations observers, mostly with second wives half their age, who spoke Takalog or some of the dialects of the national language of Thailand, and who like western diplomats, inevitably came to regard the metropolis as a hardship posting.

Saarc is a little different. Perhaps because it's closer to home and familiar, and because it was South Asia's first serious attempt to forge a regional association to promote the well being of its people.

But in spite of all the feverish activity that has taken place during the last 19 years, the numerous seminars and workshops where businessmen, jurists, journalists and women fighting for women's rights, have presented learned tomes, it has made little difference to the lumpen mass of South Asia, whose cultural impoverishment blots out any modest material improvement.

Sir Humphrey Appleby, the permanent under secretary of the Yes Minister sitcom, and creator of the 64-word sentence, would have probably described Saarc with characteristic British understatement - "lots of activity, without any real achievement." That is, more or less, the general perception.

The delegates, nevertheless, enjoy themselves immensely as they dash between New Delhi, Colombo and, of course, the Maldives, where the blue of the water rivals the Mediterranean.

Somewhat allergic to seminars, I try to avoid the local ones which, invariably never start on time and where speakers usually compete to see who can hurl the largest number of platitudes at the audience. But on occasion, one has to give the old bones a wry shrug to oblige a friend, like the time a doctor, who had a vague connection with this regional association, asked me to listen to a paper he had first read in Bhutan.

It was probably the only seminar that started on time, because the specialists in the hall were anxious to get back to their clinics where they were earning Rs 5,000 an hour.

I don't remember the topic. But the audience appeared particularly enthralled by the number of outre and elaborate illnesses that Asians are encouraged to suffer. This is at least one area in which India and Pakistan are not lagging behind the West.

Every year somebody or the other holds a seminar to commemorate the first summit of Saarc, which was held on December 8, 1985. The editorials, which invariably pop up in the newspapers, are predictable and usually say more or less the same thing.

"Significant progress has been achieved in many areas...but," and then there follows a presentation of the most depressing statistics which highlight the heightened awareness of human transience, thwarted-ness and disappointment, which add an elegiac depth to the various editorials.

This year Ahsan Mukhtar Zubairi, secretary general of The Karachi Council on Foreign Relations, Economic Affairs and Law, played host, as speakers were asked to comment on the "Achievements, Failures and Future Prospects of Saarc."

There are certain subjects on which a speaker can become highly emotional and vent his spleen, like the time Bill Clinton came to the aid of Bosnia and Kosovo, when the British and the French had turned a blind eye to the genocide that was taking place.

Or George Bush and Tony Blair, asking Pervez Musharraf with a straight face and in all apparent seriousness, to investigate the causes of terrorism and why the Americans are so unpopular. But there isn't a great deal or anything new about Saarc that one can say which hasn't been said before, at least 18 times.

Though there was a number of important people on the stage who were rustling papers and waiting to be called, like the minister of state for foreign affairs, a former chief justice of the Sindh High Court and a few consuls general from Saarc countries, the audience had really come to hear what the Indian High Commissioner Shiv Shankar Menon had to say. It was also inevitable that he would be made the target of all the questions that would be asked.

I cannot speak for Islamabad, but whether it is by accident or by design, the most educated, articulate and polished of the diplomats who have taken up posts in Karachi over the years, happened to have come from India.

Members of the audience naturally expected the high commissioner to speak well, and to steer clear of the post-prandial convivialities one usually comes across in lectures on subjects in which not many people are interested. He did not let them down.

Warming up to his task, he said Saarc had a clear mandate when it was formed in 1985. According to the charter, the basic aim of the association was to accelerate the process of economic and social development in member states through joint action in the agreed areas of cooperation.

Judged by this standard, Saarc has clearly not fulfilled the expectations of the people and remains one of the weakest of the various regional organizations, which has been overtaken by other groupings.

But, he added, there is still hope, and the major reason for this is the fact that the member states are displaying their ability to learn from their past. The Islamabad summit, with the signing of the social charter, the agreement on Safta and the additional protocol to the convention on the suppression of terrorism, were clear signs of rejuvenation.

He then enumerated the various myths about Saarc. The first was the one about the asymmetries of size, development and other factors between Saarc member states somehow hindering economic cooperation and development. This was just not true. The opportunities spring from the amazing diversity of South Asia.

A glance at the relations with the rest of the world would show that our largest trading and economic partners are those who are most different from us. We are fortunate that the process of development in South Asia in the last 50 years has created diversified economies and that we are able to meet many of our needs ourselves.

The second myth is that political differences between member states affect the ability of Saarc to ful fill its mandate. In his opinion the founders of the association were wise not to link economic and social cooperation to a resolution of political disputes.

On the contrary, successful cooperation could create the conditions for greater harmony, which might enable a successful resolution of differences. The high commissioner gave the example of disputes about the South China Sea, which have not prevented Asean from working with each other and with China.

The guest of honour, Makhdoom Khusro Bakhtiar, after pointing out that Pakistan had the lowest budget deficit in the region and was poised to compete with other Saarc countries, said it was not appropriate to draw a parallel to the European Union, Asean and the Berlin Wall.

While I was trying to work out what the Berlin Wall had to do with the wheat-for-meat barter that had been taking place across the India-Pakistan border for 56 years, the questions started and the audience waited with bated breath as it wondered when the query on Kashmir would surface. It did, right at the very end, after which the attractive moderator had the last word. She decided to call it a day.

Time to face home truths

While President Pervez Musharraf cannot be faulted for speaking the candid truth about the crises facing the Muslim world during his recent trip to Latin America, the US, Britain and France, facing up to certain home truths has largely eluded him.

The general is more confident holding forth eloquently about skeletons in others' cupboards, from Iraq to Palestine to Kashmir, but the absence of a similar candour on the home front is puzzling, to say the least.

He has obviously spent a lot of time brooding over the causes of terrorism and lack of stability in many Muslim countries. Thus, it is only fair to expect him to have some understanding of the depth of the socio-economic and political quagmire at home too.

It is pertinent to note, for instance, that much like the US in Iraq, the army back home does not have an exit strategy out of the political arena.

Riding the wave of the US friendship, President Musharraf has found a good ear in the West for his solutions to many long-standing Muslim problems, and so has come the invitation for him to play a role in the resolution of the Palestine conflict. But the cynics will argue that US-Pakistan relations have historically taken a zigzag course. It is Washington's exigencies that have always marked the twists and turns of these relations. Pakistan is in or out of favour at a given time at the sole convenience of the US.

It would be a mistake for General Musharraf to believe that the current warmth in relations is due to his personal charm and sagacity; it is more likely based on the army high command's decision to help the US out in its global war on terror.

But this should not give the armed forces a carte blanche to perpetuate their involvement in the country's politics, and its systems and institutions. This is exactly what has been happening in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, when the army chose to make a U-turn on the Taliban whom many believe to have been a monster of its own creation.

The carrot and stick approach, whereby former blue-eyed boys of the establishment are now being hounded - Javed Hashmi's confinement on treason charges being the latest example - and erstwhile bad boys are shown the carrot, as in the sudden release of Asif Ali Zardari, is a conduct that reflects opportunism or expediency.

This, like many other faux pas of the past, offers no break from the way the army-led establishment has conducted itself all these years - regardless of whether it was headed by General Zia or as now by General Musharraf.

Five years into the army-crafted and installed political order, the average Pakistani today is poorer, more dissatisfied than ever before with the status quo and less secure, even as he goes out to say his Friday prayers.

This is despite the fact that the country has a record amount of foreign exchange in its reserves. To the common man, the truth of our so-called economic turnaround has meant that the rich have become richer and the poor poorer, as recent independent economic surveys have pointed out.

Pakistan's cities present a dismal look. The lack of growth in the physical and social infrastructure has made them worse living places than they were, say, 10 years ago. Today, a greater percentage of people live below the poverty line than ever before.

The buzzword of public-private partnership has failed to show any results. Take, for instance, the case of primary education in rural areas. Land earmarked for schools has been vandalized and put to personal use by the very private-sector entrants to whom the government entrusted the job of running those schools. Healthcare fares no better.

Pakistan is one of the few countries where polio is threatening to come back with a vengeance because of the callousness with which the national immunization programme is being run. Both education and healthcare remain at the bottom of the government's priority list.

The country's bigger cities do not have a reliable transport system, and the government seems to have no plans to cater to this basic public need. The land mafia, comprising influential building contractors and real estate speculators, reigns supreme.

This has largely put land and housing out of the reach of the genuine middle class buyer despite easy availability of home finance at affordable rates. He is now condemned to seek shelter in outlying and far-off suburbs where the lack of infrastructure is appalling and crime rampant.

Commuting to work everyday has its own miseries, for no reliable transport system exists. The government has failed to come up with a housing policy, and no housing schemes for the poor and middle classes are on the anvil.

On the governance front, the new local bodies system based on the government's devolution of power plan has failed to take off. The devolution of power directly to the districts, bypassing the provincial governments, has created numerous hurdles in the way of the new system from day one.

This state of paralysis has perpetuated a constant war of wills between the local and the provincial governments, with the public being at the receiving end. The much trumpeted police reforms have yet to show any results, and none are expected because of the way they have been applied.

The police remain as corrupt and inefficient as ever. The extra funds provided for structural development within the force have been spent on additional VIP security protocols that the present government has had to put in place in the face of growing threat to the safety and security of its high-ups.

The general law and order situation remains precarious throughout the country, at times threatening to get out of control, as in parts of Balochistan recently. The operation in Wana also looks to be open-ended and without a clear direction.

The Legal Framework Order and the 17th amendment to the Constitution have distorted the parliamentary democratic system beyond recognition. For all practical purposes the country now has a presidential form of government, with the real powers of decision-making resting with the president and the National Security Council.

This has stifled independent functioning of parliament as envisaged under the 1973 Constitution. Distortions like these have made a mockery of parliament itself, forcing it to put a rubber stamp on bills such as one "requesting" the president to keep holding the office of the army chief.

The induction of serving and retired military personnel in public-sector organizations has neither bettered the lot of these bodies economically nor made them any more responsive to public needs.

The Karachi Electric Supply Corporation, for one, has continued on its downward spiral despite long years of being under military management, with little chances of the utility being able to stand on its feet in the near future.

The announced reduction of 50,000 low-rank personnel in the army service was another eyewash, which has resulted in 50,000 poor families losing their livelihood. The army officers' perks and salaries have been raised accordingly to compensate them for doing without their batmen.

At a time when unemployment is driving many frustrated men to suicide, as borne out by statistics in recent years, this was an ill-advised move. On the larger national level, the government has failed to resolve many key issues that have long plagued inter-provincial relations.

Agreements on water-sharing and the building of dams continue to be elusive. The National Finance Commission award has fared no better. Controversy over the Thal canal project has refused to die down.

The government, despite General Musharraf heading it as the army chief and president, and despite the creation of the NSC, has failed to resolve these important issues.

The initial euphoric claims of good governance and sustainable democracy now ring hollow. The selected barring of certain politicians from contesting polls and allowing others, among them corrupt individuals and loan defaulters, has seriously eroded the government's credibility.

The graduates sitting in the assemblies have done no better than their non-graduate predecessors in terms of initiating any meaningful legislation. The bills are rushed through parliament and passed in a matter of minutes - all at the instance of an unaccountable civil and military bureaucracy.

The induction of 33 per cent women in the assemblies has not made any dent in the tragic fate of the teeming millions of uneducated, suppressed and victimized women in the name of tradition and tribal values.

The promise of reviewing obscurantist laws such as the Hudood Ordinances, laws of evidence and Qisas and Diyat have remained unfulfilled. The toned down legislation on honour killing passed last month by parliament falls far too short of the needful, and is not likely to deter those killing women and then seeking a safe passage by invoking the Qisas and Diyat law.

The general's reform agenda which he unveiled soon after seizing power in October 1999, and redefined it after Pakistan joined the global war on terror in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks on the US, has remained unfulfilled. No meaningful reforms in any field have been carried out.

Take, for instance, the so-called madressah reforms, which have remained a non-starter. Cosmetic measures put in place have done only what they were expected to do: papering over hard facts. Today, the frustrated citizen has learnt to take everything that President Musharraf says and promises with a pinch of salt.

A state of social and political apathy pervades society that has largely remained stagnant over the years. This also defines the lack of interest among the general public in the flawed political process now in place, and in the "enlightened moderation" now being stressed upon as a key to the solution of all our problems.

The government itself keeps playing fiddle with the very forces of religious and ethnic obscurantism keeping the more enlightened and mainstream secular parties at bay. Merely paying lip service to lofty ideals will not bring about any change in society as we have witnessed during the past five years.

It is facing up to these home truths that is needed, and taking practical steps to have the promised reforms carried out that will ultimately show President Musharraf as being a man of his word.