Need for dialogue
Thursday, 19 Mar, 2009
THIS is the time for cooperation and dialogue, not one-upmanship. True, relations between Pakistan and India have improved and a potential catastrophe has been averted. Where once threats of war were flying thick and fast, there is talk of joint efforts to crack down on terrorism in South Asia. Intelligence has been shared and progress made by those trying to track down the masterminds of the Mumbai massacre. A top Lashkar-i-Taiba commander was arrested and Jamaatud Dawa, allegedly a front for the LT, shut down after it was proscribed by the UN. Even so, greater goodwill needs to be demonstrated by both countries. In this regard, the onus is heavier on Pakistan as India feels it is the aggrieved party and because most of the attackers are believed to be Pakistani. Against this backdrop, there is little point in saying that the authorities here are not satisfied with India’s response to the 30-odd questions raised by Pakistan in connection with the ongoing investigation. If there are reservations about the information provided by India, such qualms should be conveyed through official channels, not the media. Even if the intelligence shared by India is not 100 per cent complete, any leads that have been provided should be followed up without delay. India too needs to show greater restraint. It is understandable that New Delhi wants quick action. But at the same time it should be recognised that investigators here need to build a case that can stand up in court.
Terrorism threatens the very existence of Pakistan and no country has suffered more in recent years at the hands of homegrown extremists. As such it is in our own interest to step up the fight against those who wish to impose their medieval values on others. The attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore bore striking similarities to the assault in Mumbai. People who argue that the Lashkar-i-Taiba has never threatened Pakistani interests fail to the fact that never before had the Pakistani state come down so hard on the LT. Of course it is yet to be established that the LT was behind the Mumbai or Lahore attacks. Still, it is clear that our biggest enemies lie within.
There are other reasons too why the architects of the Mumbai carnage must be brought to book at the earliest. Without greater strides on this count, progress is unlikely on the core issue of Kashmir and other lingering disputes such as Siachen and the demarcation of maritime borders. Recent reports have suggested that Pakistan and India were close to striking a deal on Kashmir when Gen Musharraf was ousted as president. If trust is restored by bringing closure to the Mumbai tragedy, there is no reason why we cannot strive for that level of understanding again.
************************************************** ********
Managing civic utilities
Thursday, 19 Mar, 2009
IT is encouraging that the need to provide and strengthen municipal infrastructure in Pakistani cities is now receiving the attention of development planners. Given the rapid pace of urbanisation — 50 per cent of Pakistan’s population is expected to live in towns and cities by 2015 — it is time this sector was addressed seriously. The priority must be to devise feasible strategies for water supply, sewerage and waste water management, and public transport systems which are crucial to the quality of life of citizens in urban areas. One would therefore welcome the Asian Development Bank’s interest in supporting the capacity of provincial and municipal governments in developing and implementing urban policies. Focusing on these areas is significant because the country’s failure to develop an adequate municipal infrastructure in any city is attributed to flawed strategies and the inability of local governments to implement plans. The ADB should also share the responsibility for this failure in the past because, as it has itself admitted, there have been instances when it financed projects unsuitable for local conditions.
In view of this, one cannot be sure that the Country Partnership Strategy that the ADB signed with Pakistan last week will succeed. At a time when the trend is towards re-municipalisation the world over, the bank speaks of supporting private sector participation in service delivery and urban transport system investment. It plans to set up Urban Services Corporations jointly owned by local governments in some “secondary towns”. The USCs will be staffed by professionals from the private sector with an emphasis on outsourcing, design-build-operate contract modalities and performance-based concessions or lease arrangements. The induction of the private sector in municipal services is a contentious issue in developing countries because it inevitably leads to the escalation of charges citizens have to pay for utilities that are often of poor quality. Karachi has experienced this in failed experiments of privatising KESC and solid waste management in the city. It is time the government tested indigenous strategies which are based on the principle of participatory development and seek to induct local populations to build civic infrastructure on a self-help basis in various neighbourhoods. Under such an arrangement, municipalities provide and strengthen the strategic infrastructure by delivering bulk supplies. This approach has succeeded in areas where it has been tried — the Orangi Pilot Project being the most notable example.
************************************************** ********
Israeli missile attack talk
Thursday, 19 Mar, 2009
REPORTS that Israel could use missiles in its formidable arsenal to attack Iran must be viewed with concern by all those interested in a peaceful solution to Tehran’s nuclear question. A report released by an American think-tank said Tel Aviv could use Jericho III missiles to try to destroy Iran’s nuclear plants at Natanz, Esfahan and Arak. According to the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies, a missile attack suits Israel because planes could be shot down, have limited payloads and the pilots could be lost. Jericho, on the other hand, has a higher payload and is accurate to a few metres. Still there are problems with its use, too, because experts say the Iranian nuclear plants are dispersed and well-fortified, and a first strike must be followed by a second at the same crack to burrow deep into the plant and cripple if not destroy it. These are, however, technical problems, and Israel — given its track record — may well be quite capable of overcoming them and achieving yet another of those ‘‘feats’’ it feels so proud of and wins plaudits from most western governments and the media. The issue, however, has deeper diplomatic and geopolitical implications.
There is no doubt Iran has the right to pursue a nuclear programme for peaceful purposes, and many western governments accept this. There are also indications that Iran has considerably slowed down, if not abandoned, its uranium enrichment programme. But apparently Tehran is not doing enough to ease western concerns, for even the International Atomic Energy Agency has been complaining against a lack of cooperation from Tehran. Some of President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad’s utterances, including those threatening Israel’s destruction, have evoked a storm of protests in the West. However, the solution to this diplomatic problem lies not in threatening Iran with attacks but in seeking a diplomatic way forward. At a time when America is in the process of re-examining its Iran policy, it is time the Obama administration made it clear to Tel Aviv that it must cooperate with Washington in seeking a diplomatic solution to Iran’s nuclear question rather than aggravate matters with war talk.