A post above politics

IN urging President Musharraf not to take sides in the run-up to the Feb 18 polls, the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency has highlighted countrywide apprehensions that the integrity of the elections would be compromised by partisan attitudes. This concern is justified on the grounds of President Musharraf’s close links with the PML(Q) that is widely regarded as an establishment party. Indeed, much mutual back-scratching has been witnessed in their relationship. The party has frequently given statements in his support and organised rallies for him to address. In return, the president has urged the electorate to vote for those who backed him, and allowed the PML(Q) a headstart in poll campaigning. Moreover, his tone of scepticism with regard to the electoral standing of other political parties, including Benazir Bhutto’s PPP, is also reflective of a blind spot when it comes to his loyalties.

What has also detracted substantially from the image of the president as the holder of a neutral post is his blessings to the composition of the present caretaker administration, set up in November after the dissolution of the assemblies. It is no secret that the interim government that is supposed to lead the country towards the next polls consists largely of those affiliated to the PML-Q and other allies of the president. This dispensation has been criticised not only by the president’s political opponents but also by several civil society groups that, along with many others, have good reason to fear that fair and transparent polls will not be held under this set-up.

While an amended Constitution allows the president more powers than merely those of a ceremonial head of state, it also states that he “shall represent the unity of the Republic”. The inference that would ordinarily be drawn from this provision is that the president must be non-controversial in all his dealings, fair-minded and above any kind of party politics. Unfortunately, President Musharraf has, until now, shown himself to be incapable of this, which is why so much concern is being expressed over the holding of the polls. What he must realise now, before it is too late and a new wave of anarchy is unleashed in the country, is that Benazir Bhutto’s assassination has complicated for him what was already a volatile situation. But, the anger over the cavalier manner in which the government is responding to the death of a popular leader is not divorced from other issues that have contributed to frustration among the people. Flawed economic policies and a defective democratic process have also been the legacies of the last government commandeered by President Musharraf whose popularity ratings have plunged dramatically over the years. If he continues to be a participant in politics that cannot be defined as representative of the aspirations of the federation, President Musharraf will be doing a great disservice to both his country and to an office that should be above divisive motives.

The hidden agenda

LET us hope that the naval “incident” involving Iranian and American ships in the Straits of Hormuz on Sunday is not allowed to cloud the main purpose behind President George Bush’s visit to the Middle East beginning today. The Iranian version of the “incident” was technical. It said the American ships were questioned on entering regional waters, they introduced themselves, gave their identification numbers and were allowed to proceed. The Americans said the Iranian boats were “visibly armed” and termed the Iranian behaviour “aggressive” and “hostile”. On Monday, the State Department warned Tehran that Washington was going to confront it if Iran threatened America’s security or that of its allies. However, the tone and tenor of the American president’s visit to the region was set when he told Israeli Radio that the US would “defend” Israel against Iran.

The Bush visit has two purposes: one, to push forward the Arab-Israeli peace process, two, to promote democracy in the region. The third and unannounced purpose is to garner Arab support against Iran’s nuclear programme. The first of the aims is a PR exercise, and given America’s past record it is unlikely that the Bush administration will pressure Israel into giving up its intransigence. As for the second purpose, America has been doing this for long, the mess in Iraq being one outstanding example of how Washington spreads democracy in the Middle East. However, it is Iran that seems to be the main purpose behind the Bush visit. Here too the American president will find it difficult to get support from the “moderate” Arab regimes because the US intelligence estimate has knocked the bottom out of the neo-cons’ crusade against Iran.

No state in the Middle East has the military capability to threaten Israel. On the other hand, it is Israel which has waged war on all its neighbours, and occupied and annexed their territory. The Bush visit will be considered a success only if he manages to make Israel agree to halt the expansion of the settlements, create no hurdles in the way of a pullout from the West Bank, and declare categorically that it will abide by the Annapolis timetable so that a sovereign Palestinian state emerges by the end of the year. Given the compulsions of America’s domestic politics, it is to suffer from delusions to believe that President Bush will annoy the powerful Zionist lobby in an election year.

Security for newborns

TWO recent cases of abduction of newborn infants from a hospital in Rawalpindi, which occurred within a span of less than a month, have once again raised questions about the security of hospitals in the twin cities. Rawalpindi has been rocked by cases of such abductions from time to time over the years but all these failed to serve as a wake-up call for a major review of security procedures in public hospitals. Hopefully, it will be different this time. For this to happen, the blame game between the hospital administration and the affected parents will first need to stop. Infant abductions from hospitals also occur in developed countries like the US, Canada and Britain, but in these countries the response is usually a security policy revamp in the hospitals affected.

Some of the measures that our hospitals can also adopt to prevent and foil infant kidnappings include the formulation and dissemination of an infant abduction response plan, the installation of close circuit television surveillance cameras covering all angles of the wards, door access controls, emergency alarm panic buttons and a public address system in all departments of the hospital to alert the security in case of any emergency. Many hospitals abroad have also adopted a baby watch tag system — hi-tech electronic tracking devices and a sophisticated monitoring system — that allows the hospital to track a baby anywhere in the hospital, with an alarm being triggered if a newborn baby is taken off the floor. In addition, our hospitals also need to instill security awareness not only in their staff but also in patients and their family members. Another important measure to prevent further kidnappings in our hospitals is ensuring that those who are involved, particularly members of criminal gangs, are caught and given stiff sentences. Those who are making baby-snatching and selling a business rightly deserve harsher punishment.

OTHER VOICES - Sindhi Press

Ethnic bias unacceptable

THE president has held some ethnic and political groups responsible for the vandalism seen during the riots that erupted after Ms Bhutto’s assassination. The ethnic group might be the people of Sindh, who were agitating over the murder of their beloved leader, while the reference to a political group seems to point to the PPP.

It is true that the people of Sindh protested and took to the streets but some miscreants took advantage of the situation and resorted to looting and burning of private and public property. How did the president deduce that this vandalism was ethnic-based and that all of Sindh was involved? Now the entire province is being punished as thousands of people have been booked under the Anti-Terrorism Act.

When law and order collapsed, some third party took advantage of the situation. The history of this country is witness to the fact that the ruling-class elites created ethnic biases by depriving the smaller nations of their rights. It would be advisable at this juncture to avoid such bigoted and hurtful statements. — (Jan 5)

Benazir murder must be probed

THE president has sought the help of Scotland Yard experts in investigating the tragic murder of Ms Benazir Bhutto. The PPP believes that if the October 18 incident had been investigated by foreign experts, the Liaquat Bagh tragedy would have not happened.

It is regrettable that as seen in other political murders the evidence has been washed away in this case as well.

When a Scotland Yard team investigated the Mir Murtaza Bhutto case it was not allowed a free hand and hurdles were created in its working, as a result of which the team abandoned the probe halfway. This team must be aware of that past experience and the problem is compounded by the destruction of on-site evidence.

The government has already named some culprits and has … hence become a party to the case. How it is possible for the government to withdraw from its previous position given that such a move would affect its reputation? Some circles hold the government responsible and rule out the possibility of any impartial inquiry under the present rulers. — (Jan 4)

— Selected and translated by Sohail Sangi.