Through an amendment to the National Command Authority Ordinance which he re-promulgated along with a series of other laws from the Musharraf era hours before they expired, President Asif Ali Zardari has handed over control of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons to the PM. The move, it seems, is intended to symbolise a willingness to strip the presidency of powers. The president has also stressed that the 17th Amendment, which allows him to dissolve parliament, will be done away with by December. As in other matters, Mr Zardari has played his cards rather badly. Had the 17th Amendment gone earlier, the president could have claimed for himself status as some kind of saviour of democracy. Coming now, it seems quite evident that the decision to give up control of the National Command Authority is rooted in the need to release some of the mounting pressure. The president will be hoping his action will appease the forces alienated from him – and at least buy him some time. It is unlikely this will happen.

Too much time has gone by; too much has happened through the past weeks and months. Gestures are no longer enough. People seek genuine change and patience is fast running out. An immediate undoing of the 17th Amendment would make some impact. Merely fiddling with existing legislation means nothing. After all, command of the NCA, beyond a symbol of authority, means little in practical terms. However, the action on the eve of Eid does show us that the president is possibly panicking. The mounting pressure seems then to be taking its toll. Mr Zardari appears desperate to save himself. But unfortunately he still seems not to have realised that concrete measures will be required to do so. Flimsy, half-hearted actions will lead us nowhere at all.



The prime minister has suggested in an interview that an increase in US troop numbers in Afghanistan could bring problems for Pakistan because militants may escape across the border into the country. The comments point to the links between militancy in the two countries and the fact that the porous border which lies between them has made it relatively easy for the Taliban to come back and forth at will. They have indeed been using this ability since the earliest days of the operation against them as a strategy to avoid capture. But what both Islamabad and Kabul need to accept is that, for this very reason, the militants need to be tackled simultaneously in both places. The war should not be a question of driving the militants away but of ensuring they are defeated wherever they are based. At present, there is little doubt in the eyes of the world that it is in Pakistan and Afghanistan that the headquarters of militancy lie. There is a great deal to gain from altering this perception.

To achieve this Afghanistan and Pakistan need to work together. A joint strategy to defeat the Taliban is vital. Indeed there is simply no alternative. The Pakistan army’s brave battle against militants across the tribal territories has been remarkably successful. It is vital that the gains be consolidated. The key militants must not be able to move across the Durand Line and lie in wait until it is one day safe to come back. There is a real danger that this could happen. The only way to prevent it is to work with Kabul. Logic suggests action on both sides of the Frontier could trap many militants and thus bring both countries closer to that elusive goal of peace. It is possible that expanded US forces in Afghanistan will make it more probable that such a strategy can be planned. Pakistan needs to demand that this happen. It is true that in recent years Islamabad and Kabul have not always seen eye to eye, either on terrorism or on other issues. There have, from time to time, been accusations and counter-accusations. But both countries must realise that the need for combating terror must take precedence over all else.



The annual ritual of slaughter has taken place. Many of us have gorged on meat. Families unable to afford what is in our country a luxury have also benefited from the donations made to them. We must though also keep in mind that some have turned down meat handouts on the basis that they cannot afford the oil or spices to cook it in. These harsh economic realities are something we must face up to. There must also be some question as to how much we think about the sacrifice and what it represents beyond the bare basics. Certainly it is hard to find much holiness in the blood that lies spattered across pavements or the dumped remains of animals that litter roadsides. Even where civic authorities have made provisions to collect waste, citizens often make little effort to act with responsibility. We must wonder what this says about us as a nation and as a people.

It is also telling that the simple act of sacrifice has become a matter for competition or a display of wealth. People who can afford to do so have been bringing in cows from Australia to present as sacrifice. There is no way of knowing how far noble intentions go along with the enormous sums of money spent for this purpose. In some cases at least a quite obvious effort to outdo neighbours comes with the purchase of the animals. Even children boast about the beasts they will be slaughtering. We need to think harder about our religion. Over the years it has increasingly been observed simply by carrying out rites but forgetting the principles that lie behind them. There should be more discussion and debate on this. Occasions such as Eidul Azha act as a reminder of this need. Our media has in some cases acted to create awareness and to raise questions which are not usually asked. This effort needs to be encouraged and indeed pushed into the mainstream so we can make maximum gain from a religion which has an immensity to offer but the spirit of which is frequently neglected in a society given to ostentatious display and a love for ritual that takes precedence over all else.

__________________
Regards,
P.R.