Oil policy flaws

THE new petroleum policy, as enunciated by the Economic Coordination Committee of the cabinet on Friday, leaves much to be desired. On the face of it, it may seem that the oil marketing companies (OMCs) and petroleum dealers have successfully held the government hostage. Artificial shortages of petroleum products ‘created’ in Punjab and the Frontier in recent weeks left consumers flabbergasted and helpless in equal measure. Much to the public’s disappointment, the government seems to have buckled under pressure now — or has it? Perhaps not, as it sheepishly admits that it has been pocketing an amount upwards of Rs50bn over the past six weeks through the petroleum development levy and sales tax on petroleum products as global oil prices tumbled, not sharing the sum thus pocketed with the OMCs and petroleum dealers. Hence, in the words of the finance ministry officials, “The government is now ethically bound to raise the [profit] margins of the OMCs and dealers after the decline in international crude oil prices.” It all sounds like a bad joke, and a cruel one at that given the spiralling inflation. One would be justified in wondering whose side the government is on.

It is equally disappointing that the Oil and Gas Development Corporation (OGDC), which is one of the few public sector entities that have not seen their accounts go in the red, should dictate a policy whereby the government is called upon to invite foreign investors on amazingly high rates of return, with tax exemptions, to undertake new explorations. The OGDC is fairly qualified; there’s no dearth of technical expertise or funds to do the needful itself, it can be argued. Why then take the more expensive option of relying on foreign expertise? If there is a technical need to do so, i.e. the OGDC does not possess the required advanced technology; this should be debated in parliament before going ahead with the luxurious proposal. Foreign investment on most favourable terms should be attracted only in areas where the country most desperately needs it; many experts believe oil and gas exploration does not qualify on that criterion.

As for petroleum prices, the government has to restrict its own profit-taking and that of the OMCs and dealers if it is to retain its credibility with the people who voted it into office, hoping for some economic relief to trickle down to them. Close to a year in office, the government still has no coherent economic policy or a recovery plan on which the people can pin their hopes. Borrowing from international monetary institutions on high commercial rates may be a short-term need; it cannot be viewed as a long-term action plan. The people deserve a break and they want it now.


AFTER blowing hot and cold in the weeks following the Mumbai disaster, Pakistan has expressed regret at the Indian decision to freeze the composite dialogue process. The Indian foreign minister had earlier termed the suspension of the dialogue as a “pause”. One hopes that these signify at best differences of a semantic nature and both sides understand the importance of sustaining the composite dialogue they had launched in 2004. It is, therefore, encouraging that Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has now declared his government’s “unwavering commitment to the dialogue process”. But in the same breath he has resorted to finger-pointing to hold India responsible for bringing the two countries to square one in terms of confidence-building measures. Given the vitriolic exchanges between the two governments in recent weeks, the need of the hour is for them to moderate their tone to improve the political climate in South Asia if the peace process is to be revived.

Both sides, one can presume, understand the importance of negotiating their disputes. But it is a pity that leaders on both sides have allowed political expediencies to determine the course of events. Mr Gilani has identified the factors that have led to the impasse as “Indian blame game, media vilification campaign and warmongering”. Incidentally, Pakistan has not been lagging behind in reciprocating with an eye for an eye in this unfortunate exercise. If the prime minister means business and wants to pave the way to revive the peace process, he should first work earnestly to put an end to the war of words that has devastated the atmospherics in the region. This would call for a tacit understanding with India requiring both governments to stop playing to the gallery and refraining from negotiating in the glare of media publicity.

There is no doubt that confidence-building measures are fundamental to a stable relationship between India and Pakistan. In the cacophony of the war hysteria that came in the wake of Mumbai many events of a significant nature — that can, in fact, be described as confidence-building — have been overshadowed. On new year’s day, Islamabad and New Delhi exchanged their lists of nuclear installations and facilities as has been the practice for the last many years. The two sides have been issuing visas — though the number of travellers has declined given the tension, the bus service between them continues and trade across the LoC has not been halted. Shouldn’t we be focusing on this?


THERE is sibling rivalry between crime and punishment where both continuously try to outsmart the other. Crime thrives on cracks in the system of punishments while, frustrated by their own failure, punitive mechanisms sometimes jump the gun. In Punjab, such readiness to skip legal and judicial procedures and to inflict a deadly lesson on the law-breakers appears to be normal. Only recently, three robbers were killed in a police encounter in a Lahore locality; just before that three others were gunned down by the police in Sialkot. According to the provincial police’s own figures, 66 alleged criminals were killed in 2008 in 42 police encounters in Lahore alone. Almost 75 per cent of these killings took place while the province was under the current administration’s watchful rule.

In fact, one hopes that Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif’s administration is not attempting to match previous ‘achievements’ on this score. During his party’s previous stint in power between 1997 and 1999 more than 850 suspected criminals were killed in what human rights activists then called extra-judicial killings. Between then and now, the law and order situation may have deteriorated so much and our trust in the justice system eroded so completely that voices against encounter killings are still feeble, and few and far between. In fact, there seems to be a certain acceptance of the practice in society as a quick-fix to many a social evil. Official endorsement, like the one that came some days ago from a senior police official in Punjab, only boosts such acts. The press quoted the official as saying that the government would give ‘shields’ to citizens who ‘kill’ criminals. That such incitements can lead to mob violence, translated as proxy encounters, appears an insignificant aspect to the proponents of this type of raw and ready justice. The government can do better by removing gaping holes in the system of punishments instead of jumping over them and encouraging others to do the same. Encounters will fail to deter crime. What we need are sweeping police and judicial reforms in the province to do the job.


THE Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) will be in the news later this week in a court case involving violence in the workplace. But behind that there’s a much larger — and more positive — story. The hospital is modernising medical treatment for psychiatric patients and… trying to transform how we all treat them as human beings. That means patients will be involved in decisions about their treatment, there will be fewer locked doors, and restraints (physical or chemical) will… be a last resort.

Any incidents of violence against a patient, nurse or other staff member — such as the cases where nurses were injured, resulting in charges against CAMH under Ontario’s occupational safety law — are deplorable and ought to be preventable. But those incidents shouldn’t derail Canada’s largest psychiatric facility from the right course. CAMH must do what it can to prevent violence, but locking people up isn’t the way. It is welcome, then, that hospital staff unions say they agree on that point. But they also say not enough is being done to train workers, provide safety devices …or conduct serious reviews….

In an environment where restraints have been standard practice, it is understandable that staff would be nervous about reducing them. But CAMH says it has reduced the use of restraints by 67 per cent over the last three years without an increase in violence. And research from jurisdictions that have gone even further shows an actual reduction in staff injuries. Yet recent statements and ad campaigns by CAMH workers and their unions have hyped “escalating violence” at the hospital. Unions take such steps to gain public attention and more leverage in their internal discussions with management over working conditions…. That’s why it’s so important that this week’s court case be kept in context. CAMH treats 22,000 patients a year. Only about 3,600 require a stay in the hospital, and fewer than three per cent of them display any aggression to others.

For its part, the hospital should do more to explain the changes to its staff…. It isn’t just staff who need to embrace the new methods. Better treatment for people with mental illness requires a cultural shift in the general public. ….Right now, most psychiatric patients at the hospital must use communal showers. Their rooms don’t even have cupboards for clothes. Society wouldn’t tolerate such facilities for patients with any other type of disease. Someone going for psychiatric treatment ought to be afforded the same respect and care…other illnesses have long received. Happily, CAMH is in the midst of revitalising…. …Doors open to the surrounding community will replace a troubling history of isolation. But it’s one thing to say: “Let them out.” Then what? Will businesses hire psychiatric patients? Will residents welcome them to the neighbourhood? ….The stigma of mental illness can be as debilitating as the disease itself. ….”We’re trying to open the door,” physician-in-chief… says about CAMH’s transformative agenda. That will require us all to think differently. — (Jan 6)


‘THERE have been no major revolutions in modern history without intellectuals; conversely there has been no major counterrevolutionary movement without intellectuals.’ —Edward Said

What makes an intellectual? Can teachers be considered as intellectuals? What role can they play to bring a change in society?

These are some relevant questions to be discussed in the fast-changing national and international scenarios. A number of scholars, including Antonio Gramsci, Julien Benda, Edward Said and Ali Shariati, have tried to define the nature, status and role of intellectuals in society.

It was Gramsci who first focused on the significant role of intellectuals and devoted a chapter for this discussion in his book The Prison Notebooks which is an early critique of the notion of hegemony. Gramsci considers everybody an intellectual but there is a section of people who, because of their social status, are able to perform their role. He divides intellectuals into two groups: the traditional intellectuals and the organic intellectuals.

Teachers, like priests, are included in the group of traditional intellectuals. Contrary to traditional intellectuals are organic intellectuals who work for the interests of different classes and enterprises. Gramsci considers social space as an important factor for intellectuals. This social status gives them an opportunity to bring a change in society by improving the existing social conditions.Ali Shariati defines an intellectual as one “who is conscious of his ‘humanistic status’ in a specific social and historical time and space”. This notion of an intellectual is closer to that of Gramsci who suggests that anybody has the potential to become an intellectual. Ali Shariati, who himself was a university teacher, believes that a teacher is potentially an intellectual who can have an impact on the thought patterns of the young generation and contribute towards social improvement. Edward Said in his book Representations of the Intellectuals refers to Julien Benda, widely known for his book The Betrayal of the Intellectuals, “who believes in a tiny band of super-gifted and morally endowed philosopher-kings who constitute the human conscience”. This view of intellectuals is narrow and skewed towards morality. In his definition, the role of intellectuals appears to be more abstract and idealistic. This notion of intellectuals entails a readiness for all kinds of sacrifices including crucifixion.

A point common to these scholars is their own practice as intellectuals. Gramsci, whose brilliance could have qualified him for any lucrative job, opted to be a journalist simply because working as one would give him more space to work and have an impact on minds. Because of his provocative political writings, he was sent to jail for 10 years where he breathed his last.Edward Said, a university professor, led a very active life as a teacher and intellectual, challenging a number of prevailing stereotypes and inviting scathing criticism in return. His book Orientalism critically analyses and challenges the artificially created basis of ‘positional superiority’. His allegiance to the Palestinian cause brought him criticism from different quarters but he paid the price for the sake of his ideals.

Ali Shariati, who hailed from Iran, influenced a large number of students. He was such a popular teacher that his classes ran into hundreds of students. His popularity was a source of disturbance for Iran’s dictatorial forces under the Shah. Finally prevented from teaching, he left for London where he was found dead in his flat in mysterious circumstances.

Paulo Freire, a Brazilian educationist and activist, considered teaching a political act. He challenged the ‘banking concept of knowledge’ and advocated the need of critical pedagogy. He not only professed the ideas of critical pedagogy but in fact practised critical literacy with the aim of improving the fate of the masses. Freire was also imprisoned by the government for his ideas. These are some contemporary examples of intellectuals who had an interest in education and who sought to practise their ideas and paid a price for them.

Is teaching a political act as claimed by Freire? Should teachers be striving for a change in society? There has been a growing realisation that education, like knowledge, is directly linked to power, and teachers, as central actors in the process of education, are involved in a political act. Education cannot be confined to neutral and objective conditions. Edward Said rightly suggests that, “Politics is everywhere; there can be no escape into the realms of pure art and thought or, for that matter, into the realms of disinterested objectivity or transcendental theory.”

The contemporary scenario of education, largely controlled by corporate organisations, in a direct or indirect manner, would promote a neutral, value-free, and apolitical version of education where the teachers’ role is reduced to that of a mechanical worker’s. Ironically, intellect and intellectuals, by default, are associated with the dominant paradigm of the West. The need for local intellectuals is to understand their own people, milieu, and culture, and to be seen to practise what they profess. Importing foreign educational theories and trying to implant them in local conditions without any sensitivity towards the indigenous environment cannot improve social conditions.

Ali Shariati emphasises this indigenous perspective by suggesting, “A real intellectual is one who knows his society, is aware of its problems, can determine its fate, is knowledgeable about its past and who can decide about himself.” To bring a qualitative social change into our society we need teachers who can think out of the box, believe in education as a transforming force, and, again, practise what they profess. Given the neo-liberal version of education this role is becoming extremely challenging.

The writer is director of the Centre for Humanities and Social Sciences at the Lahore School of Economics and the author of Rethinking Education in Pakistan.

Email: shahidksiddiqui@yahoo.com


EVEN if Israel wins on the battlefield or in the diplomatic corridors it is already paying the price of its Gaza onslaught in intensified hatred in the hearts of its Palestinian neighbours in the West Bank. The campaign also appears to be increasing public scepticism about the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s chosen path of negotiations as the way to establish an independent state alongside Israel.

The diplomacy championed by Mr Abbas has for years been difficult to sell to Palestinians because it has brought little or no relief from occupation or improvement in their daily lives, only the expansion of Israeli settlements. This existing frustration — which helped Hamas defeat Mr Abbas’s Fatah movement in the 2006 elections — is now combined with popular anger and dismay at the carnage among fellow Palestinians in Gaza.

Palestinian Authority security forces are keeping a tight lid on protests, preventing confrontations with Israeli troops and arresting anyone raising Hamas banners at rallies. But displays of identification with the beleaguered Gazans are everywhere. Nine-year-old green-kerchiefed Girl Scouts, their foreheads marked with the word Gaza in red ink, were among those who marched through the main al-Manara square in a protest. They held up pictures of bandaged toddlers, and dozens of demonstrators chanted, “With blood and spirit, we will redeem you, O Gaza”.

Leaders of Fatah, which lost control of Gaza to Hamas fighters in June 2007, are torn between their own hopes that Hamas, which they view as a usurper and agent of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Jordan, is defeated, and the people’s anger over the Israeli campaign. There is a great deal at stake for them. “If Hamas is victorious and the Israelis raise the white flag there will be a problem in the West Bank, more people will support Hamas, and the Arab regimes will have problems too,” said Ziad Abu Ein, the deputy minister of prisoner affairs and a veteran of 13 years in Israeli prisons.

Bassem Khoury, the president of the Palestinian Federation of Industries, launched the PA-supported National Palestinian Campaign to Relieve Gaza by holding up a picture from the al-Ayyam daily newspaper showing the head of a Palestinian girl buried in the rubble of an Israeli attack. “This is unbelievable,” he said. “How will this help the Israelis? It only generates more recruits for Hamas.”

Unlike the people, who seem less concerned as yet with apportioning Palestinian blame, some Fatah leaders are calling for national unity with accusing Hamas of causing the suffering in Gaza. Tawfik al-Tirawi, an adviser to Mr Abbas and a former security chief, said: “The political leadership that miscalculated has brought catastrophe on itself and its people.”

Palestinians in the West Bank have their own long-standing grievances against Israel: the ongoing occupation, checkpoints Israel says are needed for security but that hamper their movement, often humiliate them and paralyse economic life, the expropriation of Palestinian land, and the threat of Israeli army incursion or arrest. The images from Gaza are being layered onto a collective memory of being expelled at Israel’s creation in 1948.

— © The Independent

__________________
Regards,
P.R.