June 5, 2016
 

[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]Spurring growth
[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]
THE budget for the next fiscal year is rightly changing gear and going from stabilisation to growth. The situation inherited by the government in 2013 was veering towards a large-scale crisis, although the latter was not exactly imminent at the time and the state of affairs was nowhere near as dire as the one that the previous PPP government inherited in 2008. Nevertheless, macroeconomic stability has indeed been restored, and with reserves at a record high, inflation falling, signs of a revival in industrial activity under way and the fiscal deficit coming down year after year, the government is right to claim that the macroeconomic fundamentals have been brought under control. For now anyway.

Now comes the hard part. Achieving macroeconomic stability on the back of an IMF programme is usually achieved by most countries in a couple of years. Transiting to growth is then a relatively simpler job because it means a return to a fiscal policy aimed at boosting industry through a combination of incentives and reforms. In Pakistan’s case, that transition is complicated by a number of factors. First is the growing role of informal-sector activities, evidenced in the centre of gravity of the present growth in areas such as construction and services. Second is the rigid base of our industrial sector, dominated by textiles and other low-tech products that are less responsive to government inducements than other industries. And third is the prospect of the return of political instability.

The growing informality in the economy can be seen in the government’s failed attempts to broaden the base of taxation and bring sectors such as retail and wholesale trade into the net. More than 80pc of the new money created in the current fiscal year has stayed in circulation as cash, rather than entering the banking system, showing the clout wielded by unregistered players and their resistance to government efforts at formalisation. Transiting towards growth in the face of large-scale and growing informality can be difficult if the inducements given to economic players have a way of landing up in informal activities such as property speculation. The government is aware of this, which is why it has introduced taxation measures to try and capture some of the transactions taking place in the booming property market and construction sector. But it is highly probable that the measures could backfire, like last year’s bank transaction tax, and lead to people understating the value of property transactions even further. These must shift though, and informality must be tamed. The right objective has been set for this year in the budget. But given the weak measures with which to pursue it, as well as the presence of a volatile opposition, the government will have to walk a tightrope to keep to its path — and walk it firmly.

[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]RIP Muhammad Ali[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]

IT is impossible to define the legacy of Muhammad Ali — ‘The Greatest’ — in a few lines. He was an athlete par excellence and a fine human being who transcended the status afforded by the boxing ring to be known the world over as a symbol of resistance. His style of play was reflective of a man who wanted to stand his ground, applying aggression only as a last resort. He was no dry disapprover imprisoning himself in a cocoon away from the world he had problems with. He loved life and knew that, with a spirited fight, it could be drastically improved. He loved the fun, the jokes, the poetry including the verses he came up with about boxing legend and his chief rival Joe Frazier. Muhammad Ali had a natural understanding of how to exploit the popular sentiment to achieve the goal he set himself. He was an icon whose example was cited to pursue all kinds of challenges. Not least amongst the latter was a drive aimed at deriding boxing as a non-sport by citing how Ali suffered from Parkinson’s — because of the barrage of punches he faced during a long career shaped after the famous fight with Sony Liston in the 1960s.

The greatest of entertainers usually got his deals right, except maybe for the bout with Antonio Inoki in June 1976. This very forgettable, unabashedly forced attempt at fusion had the Japanese wrestler ‘facing’ Muhammad Ali lying down, literally, for the entire duration of the contest. It was clear that time was finally approaching the man who teased his opponents with his ‘catch me if you can’ chant. One of the most glittering careers inside the ropes was heading towards a close. This was a sign of the changing world, and though Muhammad Ali continued to influence causes for the next 40 years of his life, he had already made a great impact. The 15 years from 1960 to 1975 belonged to him. He emerged as a champion of the less heard with his powerful dissent against the American war on Vietnam. It was not just what he said but the down-to-earth manner in which he said it which endeared him to those pursuing civil liberties. And even when he could not speak as frequently in the latter years because of his illness, his nod was most sought after to give movement and sting to any campaign he chose to support.

[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]Violence against nurses[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]

THERE are numerous recent examples of the police using brute force to stifle legitimate protest. Lady health workers, teachers, blind people, etc have all suffered violence of this kind. This time, the courts added another dimension to the disproportionate force meted out by the state against ordinary citizens. On Thursday in Peshawar, police beat up dozens of protesting nurses gathered in front of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly to demand improvement in their working conditions. They also took into custody around 20 male and two female nurses. While the women were soon released, the men were detained overnight after which a local court ordered that they be sent to jail on judicial remand for 14 days. While they were subsequently released on bail, the FIR filed against them lists rather exaggerated charges — including, among others, criminal intimidation, rioting and the misuse of loudspeakers.

When a state comes down so hard on peaceful protesters, it betrays its contempt for a means of democratic expression provided for in a system that is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people. The charges are also farcical: speaking against the government is part and parcel of a democracy, whether on loudspeaker or otherwise. And shouting slogans or causing a traffic jam does not constitute a riot. Moreover, when seen in the context of the kid-glove treatment reserved for religious extremists and self-appointed keepers of the nation’s morality who on numerous occasions have rampaged through the streets virtually unimpeded, this wanton aggression smacks of a state in retreat. The law should be applied to regulate the actions of citizens, rather than brandished as a weapon to silence weaker segments of society or else held in abeyance when it comes to those perceived as being powerful for various reasons. Admittedly, the provincial government had already announced some concessions for the nursing sector, but it should continue talking to the protesters so as to arrive at an equitable solution.

[B]Source:[/B] [URL="http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial"]Editorials[/URL]
[B]Published in Dawn, June 5th, 2016[/B]

June 12th, 2016
 

[B][SIZE="4"][CENTER]Hillary’s nomination[/CENTER][/SIZE][/B]

IN one of the toughest, and strangest, American presidential campaigns in memory, a bright spot is the first-ever nomination of a woman as the candidate of one of the two main political parties. Hillary Clinton has smashed the glass ceiling, and that is the singular fact to celebrate from the outcome thus far. Her journey has been an extraordinarily long and difficult one, a fact that testifies to her strength and determination to beat the odds. The race now moves towards the conventions in July, and her numbers at the polls should rise steeply as she emerges as the sole candidate — the Democrat votes, that had thus far been divided between her and Bernie Sanders, are expected to now largely come to her.

The race pits a sophisticated Washington insider against the controversial Republican contester Donald Trump whose campaign has been marked by aggressive rhetoric towards sensitive issues, something that has only served to deepen the divisions in American society. Thus far Ms Clinton has shown considerable mettle in meeting the unconventional challenges posed by Mr Trump, and is refusing to be cowed. As the campaign gathers pace in the run-up to the conventions, and beyond, her strength will be tested to the hilt as she attempts to tap the female vote as a counter to Mr Trump’s drive to secure his standing. In the days to come, she will also have to square her hawkish position on Israel and her support for American military adventures in the Middle East with her positions on refugees and immigration, as well as interfaith harmony within the US. Given the sheer magnitude of the challenges faced by the US, its waning power in the world, its crumbling economy and infrastructure at home, and the deep vein of disaffection with the politics of Capitol Hill, Ms Clinton will have to climb a steep and slippery slope to the White House as a conventional, mainstream politician facing unconventional challenges.

[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]Panama impasse[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]

SEVEN rounds of negotiations between the government and the combined opposition over the terms of reference for the Panama Papers judicial commission have yielded an impasse. While another meeting is scheduled, members of both sides in the parliamentary committee appear to be pessimistic about finding common ground. According to the opposition, the government is determined to avoid any inquiry that focuses on Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif alone. According to the government, the opposition has consistently backtracked on its public position and is ultimately seeking a witch-hunt against the prime minister. It is perhaps in the nature of politics for all sides to exaggerate and threaten the collapse of talks. Time and again, an alleged impasse is broken at the last minute and usually with the intervention of the party bosses themselves. With Mr Sharif still out of the country and convalescing, perhaps the government team does not have the authorisation to reach a deal immediately and the opposition is not keen on letting attention turn away from it and towards the slow grind of a judicial commission as yet.

However, there ought to be no doubt: the Panama Papers continue to hang like a dark cloud over the country’s politics. True, the government has recovered somewhat and the business of governance has been taken up to an extent, especially with the budget process, but the politics of the Panama Papers is still a clear and major distraction. While the opposition is wrong to the extent that it appears to be uninterested in any systemic change or investigation beyond the first family, the government has been wrong to suggest that the prime minister should be held to the same standard of conduct as everyone else. The Panama Papers continue to reverberate nationally precisely because the prime minister’s children have been ensnared in them — to deny that is deeply problematic and, now, politically unacceptable. Given that it is the government that must notify the formation of a judicial commission and it is the leader of the government itself under scrutiny, it is the government that must show both creativity and flexibility to break the impasse.

For the political opposition, the challenge remains to convert the public outcry over the Panama Papers into something meaningful for the overall tax and financial system in the country. If the Panama Papers have yielded prima facie illegalities, the opposition should be working on legislative proposals to close loopholes and improve financial oversight. That process can and should move alongside the judicial commission’s work. Sensible legislative action that dovetails with reasonable political discourse is a fundamental way of introducing incremental change in the democratic system. Yet, until now, the opposition has appeared more focused on the politics of the Panama Papers and inflicting damage on the government than fixing the system. Can a better kind of leadership prevail?

[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]Derogatory language[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]

IT seems that a competition is under way among our legislators to secure the most marks in the use of derogatory language. Following Minister for Water and Power Khawaja Asif’s outburst against PTI chief whip Shireen Mazari in the National Assembly on Thursday, JUI-F Senator Hafiz Hamdullah has sought to overtake the PML-N legislator by launching a tirade of verbal abuse against rights activist Marvi Sirmed on TV. On a pre-recorded talk show aired late Friday night, Senator Hamdullah rudely interrupted Ms Sirmed who was responding to a question on the rise in honour killings and the Council of Islamic Ideology’s reaction. Angrily storming off the set, the JUI-F legislator is accused of having attempted to strike Ms Sirmed. Such insupportable behaviour is hardly befitting of the chairperson of the Senate Committee on Religious Affairs and Interfaith Harmony; not only has the lawmaker brought the august upper house into disrepute, he has also shown his own party in a negative light. Will the Senate and the JUI-F take action against the errant senator, who is reputed to get riled on air?

Regrettably, this incident also underscores the failure of TV channels to fulfil their responsibility of promoting informed debate as opposed to regular marathon catfights. It is unethical for talk shows to knowingly provide a window for the use of expletives. In their bid to boost programme ratings, media owners — and by extension coerced news directors — disregard the electronic media’s code of conduct that bans hate speech and incitement to violence. True, freedom of speech is a basic right and all aspects of an argument must be heard, hence the need for invitees holding contrasting viewpoints. However, it is equally important to ensure the wise selection of participants especially when it comes to controversial discussions; the channels are aware that certain guests have a track record of aggressive behaviour on TV. There is no reason whatsoever to discard the rules, even if it is to raise ratings. And in such cases, if the fine imposed by Pemra on channels for violations hasn’t served as a deterrent, then the amount should be increased. Since the start of 2016, Pemra has issued 17 show-cause notices for abusive language and irresponsible incitement to violence. Ethical journalism is integral in front of the camera. Only when the current breed of anchors realise their power lies in conducting reasoned debate will they safeguard media credibility.

[B]Source:[/B] [URL="http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial"]Editorials[/URL]
[B][I]Published in Dawn, June 12th, 2016[/I][/B]

June 19th, 2016
 

[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]Economic inheritances[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]

FOR any government to have to invoke its economic inheritance in the twilight of its term is in part an admission of failure. Finance Minister Ishaq Dar began his term in 2013 by saying he was “inheriting a broken economy”, and this week during the budget debate, he once again invoked past regimes that had “ruined the national economy”. He is not alone in referring to his inheritance in this manner. The previous PPP government also invoked its inheritance during its final years in power, although there was probably greater justification for doing so at that time since the scale of the crisis that was passed on to it was of an order of magnitude beyond what Mr Dar picked up in 2013. When framing one’s departing narrative, it is natural for a government to refer to its inheritance and remind the country of all that it has accomplished. But Mr Dar is not framing his departing narrative just yet. This is a crucial year of delivery for him and his focus should remain on what parts of his agenda remain to be implemented and how that job will be done given the tight timelines from here on.

But since he has brought up the topic of what he inherited, it is worth asking how bad it really was. The worst situation the incoming government faced in 2013 was in the declining reserves and skyrocketing circular debt that had completely choked the power sector. Beyond this, the financial markets were functioning normally, large-scale capital flight was not under way, and an armed militia was not banging on the doors of Islamabad. Compared to the situation in 2008, this was a rather rosy state of affairs. All it really took was a massive dousing of government funds on the circular debt to jump-start the power sector, and approaching the IMF to rebuild reserves. That act of paying off the circular debt in one large payment of almost half a trillion rupees was cleverly done in the closing days of the 2013 fiscal year, allowing Mr Dar to claim that he reduced the deficit from 8.3pc of GDP to 4.3pc.

In the same session of the National Assembly where he tried to remind us of the legacy of the Musharraf and PPP governments, Mr Dar went on to claim that the future was bright because of CPEC. His invocation of the past could be overlooked if he had more than roads, highways and Chinese power plants to offer. Fact is this government has proved intellectually bankrupt and, driven by a few obsessions — the exchange rate, brick-and-mortar development projects, Chinese investment — has left the wellsprings of our future prosperity to their own devices. Mr Dar would be well advised to keep his focus on his current obligations and responsibilities to the future. The past can wait.

[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]Video ‘confessions’[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]

THE recorded ‘confession’ leaked to the news media and played breathlessly on TV news channels and shared furiously on social media appears to be here to stay. It is a dangerous, unwelcome and likely an illegal development — but few in the state apparatus or the news media appear to care. The identities of individuals whose recorded interrogations have made their way into the public domain tell a story of their own: Saulat Mirza, Khalid Shamim, Asim Hussain and Minhaj Qazi. All affiliated with political parties and all whose statements are meant to discredit the very apex of the leaderships of those parties. In this democratic era, the state apparatus — perhaps in this instance led by the military, but seemingly with the complicity of parts of the political government — has pioneered a thoroughly undemocratic technique to try and undermine the legitimacy of a section of the political class. Quite why the collective resource of the state involved in the Karachi operation cannot assemble investigative and prosecutorial teams that can ensure by-the-book convictions of allegedly patently guilty criminals is unknown — or at least those involved in the making of such decisions do not appear to consider it important to inform the public.

What is clear is that the practice needs to cease immediately. Farcical trials by public opinion could unleash effects that are both hard to predict and difficult to control. Clearly, the MQM and its leadership have serious questions to answer — no sensible denizen of Karachi can possibly believe the party has always stayed on the right side of the law. Similarly, the allegations of corruption in PPP ranks are so legion and so persistent that it is surely the case that the PPP leadership, especially party and public officials in Sindh, need to be thoroughly scrutinised by accountability bodies. But the allegations of crimes by the MQM and PPP cannot automatically become evidence of the existence of those crimes — at least not as far as the state is concerned. It is triply dangerous when it comes to political leaders because individual rights, the political process and the democratic system itself are imperilled when evidence that may have been collected under duress and under unlawful threat is tossed into the public domain as proven fact. Having failed to find kangaroo courts, the search appears to be on for kangaroo justice. The lawful elements of the state need to assert what is right here.

[B][CENTER][SIZE="4"]Gujarat verdict[/SIZE][/CENTER][/B]

A CONTROVERSIAL judgement relating to the 2002 riots in the Indian state of Gujarat has resulted in protests that threaten to grow louder. The case focused on the violence which left 69 Muslims dead in just one Ahmedabad locality (Gulberg Society) on Feb 28, 2002. Disbelief was expressed when only 24 of the 60 accused were found guilty. Of the 24 found guilty, 11 have been sentenced for life while 13 are deemed to have ‘escaped’ with lenient sentences by those who had been doggedly pursuing the case over the years. One of the main objectives of the campaigners was to demonstrate how Mr Narendra Modi, then chief minister of Gujarat, was linked to the massacre which had come in reaction to the Godhra train attack a day earlier. The train attack was blamed on Muslims, and led to frenzied Hindu mobs going on a killing spree in an act of revenge.

Over time, those who have demanded justice for the victims have faced all forms of harassment. A vilification effort against those on the complainants’ side, not dissimilar to the one that rights activists in Pakistan are often subjected to, has been on for quite some time. However, what appears to have hurt the victims’ families and their supporters most now is an assertion in the new ruling that holds one of the well-known Muslims among those killed on that dark February day responsible for angering the crowd which resulted in its going on a rampage. Ehsan Jafri, an ex-Congress MP whose family has been at the forefront of the case, was blamed for inviting the ire of the mob by firing on it — with evidence indicating events to the contrary being rejected. The ruling is just a routine reminder to pursuers of justice in India and elsewhere that once a few individuals decide to take up the cudgels on behalf of those who are less in number and who have little clout the fight becomes a never-ending one.

[B]Source:[/B] [URL="http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial"]Editorials [/URL]
[B]Published in Dawn, June 19th, 2016[/B]

26th June 2016
 

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Regional proxies[/SIZE][/CENTER]


GEN Raheel Sharif has warned that the “contours of future wars” in the region are changing, presumably referring to the potential for both state-sponsored and non-state terrorism to demoralise nations and destabilise states. The proxy game, however, is an old and dangerous one in this region. Pakistan may not have invented the genre, but it has certainly been an enthusiastic proponent. First, explicitly against the Soviets in Afghanistan and later, the support for militancy in India-held Kashmir being an open secret. But other countries have certainly played their part. In the regional context, there is no proxy fight with greater potential for disaster than the sectarian one between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Pakistan with its multi-ethnic, multi-sect population effectively became a giant battleground between Saudi-inspired intolerance and Iraninspired pushback. Even today, the scale of interference in the social fabric of Pakistan by Saudi Arabia and Iran can only be guessed at — there having been no attempt to either map or control external influences.


India, too, has played a significant role in Afghanistan and, as alleged by the security establishment, inside Pakistan, particularly in Balochistan but also in Fata and other parts. So Gen Sharif is timely and correct in stating that “Pakistan is opposed to using proxies against other countries and will also not allow any other country to use proxies against Pakistan”. Where Gen Sharif and the political government that has marginalised itself in matters of national security and foreign policy appear to be failing, however, is in providing broader solutions. While it may be necessary for the military to locate proxies on Pakistani soil and act against them lawfully, such actions do little to address the underlying conflicts fuelling proxy fights. Perhaps what the military and political leaderships should also be looking at is to bring together the relevant regional powers to discuss such matters frankly and in the spirit of putting an end to them.


Diplomacy has not lately been a strong suit of Pakistan, but a formula for the possible ratcheting down of regional proxy fights, at least those involving Afghanistan, India and Pakistan, may lie in Gen Sharif’s formulation: simultaneously pledge to not use proxies while demanding that others cease using their own proxies too. A verification mechanism can be developed to ensure all sides abide by the promises they make, but that is for later. The first step is to create goodwill. The security establishment is deeply concerned about the direction that regional power dynamics are headed in — just as Pakistan’s neighbours are concerned by the choices they perceive this country is making. Gen Sharif has established himself as an important figure who can both promise and deliver and who has a few legacy-creating months left in office. To prevent future wars, Gen Sharif could move to try and end present conflicts.



[CENTER][SIZE="6"]PTI chief’s threat[/SIZE][/CENTER]


IMRAN Khan has once again threatened to take to the streets. The reason this time, he says, is the government’s frustrating stance on the probe into the Panama Papers. The PTI chief’s warning, coming some 10 days before Eid, throws up the possibility of the country returning to the 2014 protest days after the festival — a protest that, though a democratic right, will be at great cost to the economy, while causing much inconvenience to the people. Soon there will be advice for the PTI leader to show restraint in the name of the national interest; there will be reminders about how his previous campaign had ended with him wasting crucial political capital. There will be calls — with considerable merit to them — insisting that Mr Khan use parliament to air his views, or take his case to court. These are all sane suggestions. But the problem is that the PTI leader is not convinced the matter should be left to either of these institutions. Maybe a general election that ends with the decimation of one side … short of that, there is little chance of the PTI giving up its protest.


There is a larger problem. In the democratic debate in Pakistan, there exist many fundamental questions crying out for quick answers. Not least of them is the one pertaining to politicians’ ability to instal a system that can help them find solutions to political disputes arising from time to time. What choices does an opposition have for running a campaign for dislodging a government that it finds incompetent or corrupt? In the past, the opposition would either appeal to the president to fire the prime minister and his government or ask the military chief to take over. The presidential sacking is now constitutionally not possible, whereas the knowledgeable insist that exercising the military option is not as easy as it once was. Pakistanis will have to be patient with politicians and their reactions. The new code will take lots of time to craft.


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Torture by the state[/SIZE][/CENTER]


CALL it ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’, as the Americans have notoriously done, or gloss over it entirely, the fact remains that torture has long been an integral part of the lawenforcement machinery in this country. On Friday, a consultation organised by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and the World Organisation Against Torture was held in Islamabad to review the state’s compliance with the UN Convention Against Torture which Pakistan signed in 2010. Among the points that emerged at the consultation was that despite Pakistan’s ratification of this convention, brutality at the hands of law-enforcement agencies is only considered torture when it involves extremely serious physical injuries. It was also mentioned that a private bill against torture passed by the Senate in March 2015 is pending in the National Assembly.


The use of torture is usually driven by the urge to extract information, intimidate individuals, or exact revenge for perceived transgressions, often a mix of all three. It is the first resort of an unsophisticated state with weak oversight mechanisms and a civil society unable to effectively protect citizens’ rights. In Pakistan’s increasingly militarised security environment, where individuals can be glibly labelled ‘jetblack terrorists’ even prior to their trial, where the end justifies the means, the use of torture as an instrument of law enforcement has become even more entrenched. In 2012, the horrific Adiala 11 case came to light when seven men detained by intelligence agencies appeared in court holding urine bags, their bodies brutalised and frail. More recently, there was the death of Aftab Ahmed, senior member of the MQM who died in
Karachi in the Rangers’ custody, his body bearing clear evidence of unmitigated savagery. While many former detainees — relieved to at least be alive — prefer to keep their agony private, dumped bodies of ‘missing’ people routinely display signs of sadistic violence. As if the obvious moral imperative were not enough, there are also practical reasons for international law against torture to be respected. A number of reports, including that of the US Senate about the CIA’s ‘enhanced interrogation’ of terrorism suspects post 9/11, have demonstrated that information gleaned through torture is highly unreliable. Much like practices such as slavery or genocide, torture falls in the lowest categories of human behaviour. It is time Pakistan honoured its commitments to put an end to this shameful open secret enacted in shadowy ‘safe houses’, police stations and internment centres across the country.

Published in Dawn, June 26th, 2016
[url]http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial[/url]

29th june 2016
 

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Brexit wake-up call for Pakistan[/SIZE][/CENTER]


ADVISER to the Prime Minister Sartaj Aziz and his interministerial panel are right to point out that no immediate impact is likely on Pakistan from the recent UK referendum fallout. But it would be a mistake to take comfort from this assessment. Britain’s exit from the European Union has not even started yet. The real game will begin after activation of Article 50 of the EU treaty which triggers the withdrawal process. Given the enormity of the event that is getting under way, it would be short-sighted to continue in the belief that the crisis will never land here. Perhaps Mr Aziz should recall the year 1998, when Pakistan was hit by sanctions and our foreign currency accounts were frozen. The official narrative at the time was that the decision was inevitable and triggered by nuclear sanctions. But there was more to the story. The great Asian financial crisis had just swept the world, and Pakistan was standing on increasingly weak legs with the heavily leveraged position of its foreign currency deposits. The economic emergency that appeared to break upon us so suddenly was not born out of a single event; it had been years in the making.

Due to thinking that refuses to focus on anything beyond the immediate, the country landed in the middle of a massive crisis with the government completely unprepared and reacting in panic. It took years to dig ourselves out of the consequences of that decision. The story repeated itself in 2008. Warnings about several weaknesses in the economy — the current account deficit, inflation and runaway domestic debt — had been sounded for well over a year. But the government of Pervez Musharraf was in denial, saying that the crisis developing in the Western world would have no impact on Pakistan, and the weaknesses being pointed out by the people were imaginary. Once again, when the crisis landed with its full ferocity, the stock market had to be frozen and an emergency appeal made to the IMF as reserves plummeted and the banking system began seizing up. One more time, it took years to emerge from the consequences of the decision to freeze the stock market and to rebuild reserves. Instead of repeating that there will be ‘no immediate impact’ on Pakistan, the government should learn from the past and at the very least start brainstorming with relevant bodies, such as the State Bank and stakeholders in the external sector, on the sources of vulnerability that exist in our economy, and how best we can anticipate the shape of the challenges the crisis will present as it plays out in the months ahead. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. At least this time we should take a more proactive approach in dealing with the inevitable fallout. Many other countries are doing exactly that.


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Reference against PM[/SIZE][/CENTER]


IT is a dangerous game that the PPP is playing. In a bid to keep the pressure on the PML-N and perhaps raise its own political profile — such are the times that the party has inflicted on itself — the PPP has drawn up a shambolic reference against the following: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif; Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif; Finance Minister Ishaq Dar; Mohammad Safdar, MNA and husband of Maryam Nawaz; and Hamza Shahbaz, MNA and son of the Punjab chief minister. The substance of the allegations is politically unproblematic. The PPP has claimed that, in the wake of the revelations in the Panama Papers and the explanations offered by the PML-N and the prime minister himself, Nawaz Sharif and his family members in parliament have mis-declared their assets to the Election Commission in their mandatory filings. But it is the recourse to religiously inspired clauses in the disqualification criteria set out in Article 62 and 63 of the Constitution — introduced through an amendment by the dictator Ziaul Haq three decades ago and which no parliament since has been able to revise — that is worrying and problematic. Politically and legislatively, the reference to “honest and ameen” in Article 62(f) is a slippery slope that over the decades has inflicted a great deal of harm on democratic politics.

The phrase is often invoked as a catch-all measure to trap political opponents and attack them in at least the court of public opinion. The PPP is surely aware of the history and sensitivity of the charge that has now been laid against the PML-N leadership. To invoke the spirit of a dictator who so persecuted the PPP in this manner and at this stage is doubly shameful: with the ECP effectively non-functional and the government and the opposition still needing to work together to elect the four members of the commission, the reference filed against the Sharif family members is purely for public consumption. It appears that the PPP leadership has all but given up on reorganising and reinvigorating its grass-roots politics in Punjab and is falling back on lazy opportunism to try and hold back the PML-N. To the extent that political parties need to engage in robust competition and that the PML-N has genuine and serious questions to answer about the wealth of the ruling family, the PPP is both entitled to and right in asking relevant questions. Surely, though, that should not involve the path the party has opted to take.


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Police recruitment[/SIZE][/CENTER]


THE proposal for the army to play a prominent role in the recruitment of 20,000 police personnel for Karachi is problematic in several respects. While the decision to recruit more personnel and have the army train them was taken in the apex committee’s meeting in May, the plan to involve the military in their recruitment as well as the proposal to induct 2,000 ex-servicemen in the force is a recent development. It was disclosed by Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali in his news conference on Monday in which he dilated upon the decisions taken a day earlier in a meeting to review law and order in the city. In Karachi’s present circumstances, the input of the military can certainly be useful to some extent, and has already proven so. And of course merit-based recruitment is key to a police force focused on fighting crime rather than pleasing its political masters. Inducting more police personnel for a city of Karachi’s size is also much needed. However, it is important that they be locally recruited. The Sindh Rangers, a federal force whose officers are from the army, has been repeatedly accused of a certain lack of ‘local’ sensitivity, a provocative element in the city’s already combustible ethnic mix.

It is also a fact that some exceedingly ruthless and corrupt lawenforcement officials thrive and survive only because of their close links with the security establishment.


All things considered, even though the provincial government by its own actions has created the space for federal powers to interfere in its workings, the process of recruitment must remain its responsibility, one that it should carry out with more competence and honesty than it has traditionally shown in this respect.

There has been of late a qualitative change for the better in the upper echelons of the Karachi police since the removal of the previous police chief. It would serve the city far better for the provincial government and senior police officials to assume their responsibilities without their ‘minders’ in khaki.

Published in Dawn, June 29th, 2016

[url]http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial[/url]

30th june 2016
 

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]India-Pakistan: hardening positions[/SIZE][/CENTER]


A familiar and unhappy trend is reasserting itself in the PakIndia relationship: the leaderships of both sides appear to be more interested in domestic posturing than genuinely seeking to engage each other. Yesterday, foreign affairs adviser Sartaj Aziz continued with his recent hardening line on India when he claimed that New Delhi was avoiding dialogue with Pakistan because dialogue would mean negotiating over difficult issues such as the Kashmir dispute. While Mr Aziz reiterated that Pakistan remains open to resuming dialogue with India, the theme of his remarks suggested that he is far from convinced that breakthroughs on the dialogue front are imminent.


Earlier, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi gave an interview to a hawkish Indian TV outfit in which he suggested that his government’s policies had created difficulties for Pakistan in the international arena. Mr Modi went on to claim that his government’s willingness to talk to Pakistan was complicated by the civil-military imbalance here. It was a quintessential performance by Mr Modi: claiming to be in favour of peace, while making peace the hardest possibility.


The emerging and familiar trend needs to be fought. Pak-India relations are too important for either side to allow old patterns to endlessly re-emerge and scuttle the hopes and aspirations of the two countries’ peoples. As ever, the answer remains in acknowledging that there is some merit to the arguments made by both sides. The bilateral dialogue that Mr Modi appears to have in mind is very different to the concerns Pakistan has. Pakistan has never rejected discussing terrorism-related issues; in fact, the country’s foreign policy architects have consistently argued that the Composite Dialogue, now the Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue, has within it the means to address terrorism concerns alongside the core issues that Pakistan wants discussed. Yet, just as Mr Modi and his government seem opposed to the very idea of negotiating over the Kashmir dispute, Pakistan downplays India’s terrorism concerns. Consider that after years of unresolved issues over the Mumbai attacks of November 2008, the Pathankot incident appears to be headed in the same direction. If it is unreasonable of India to not want to discuss the Kashmir dispute, it is unrealistic of Pakistan to believe that India will simply move on from major terrorist incidents with the passage of time. Amidst the cooling bilateral relationship, there remains at least one island of hope: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. The prime minister’s willingness and ability to personally reach out to Mr Modi is established.



Similarly, domestically Mr Sharif has shown a hitherto unknown capacity for restraint and a willingness to find ways to work with the military leadership. What remains to be seen is if the prime minister can pull off the ultimate balancing act between the complaints of Mr Modi and the demands of the military leadership.

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]
Istanbul carnage[/SIZE][/CENTER]


TUESDAY’s terrorist attack on Istanbul’s international airport highlights both Turkey’s worsening security situation and the militant Islamic State group’s strategy to destabilise the strategically located Nato country. Even though Ankara’s civilian airport had seen a minor terrorist attack last December, this is for the first time that Ataturk airport, one of the world’s busiest, has been subjected to a dual suicide bombing and gun attack that left over 40 people dead and some 240 injured. Separatist Kurds have also been involved in recent attacks, but Tuesday’s carnage seems to fall in line with IS’s strategy to cripple Turkey’s tourist industry — on Jan 12, a Syrian suicidebomber killed 12 German tourists in Istanbul. As Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, “much worse things could happen” unless “all governments and the entire mankind joined forces in the fight against terrorism”. With the five-year multilateral war in its south showing no signs of ending, the IS challenge is one of the many crises Turkey faces in a part of the world where terrorism, sectarian conflicts and civil wars have thrown into doubt the very survival of some states. Tuesday’s atrocity comes a day after Tehran reported the death of 14 Iranian troops and Kurdish militants in a clash.

The skirmish took place on the Iraq-Iran border; however, it highlights Turkey’s own decades-old Kurdish insurgency, which has not only revived but seems to have gained strength after Kurdish fighters occupied a sliver of Syrian territory along the Turkish border. Turkey has also been dealing with the flood of Syrian refugees with its consequent fallout on Ankara’s relations with the European Union. In this vortex of military, diplomatic and humanitarian crises, Turkey has to decide which side it is on. The Syrian war is a multilateral conflict, but it often appears President Erdogan’s government looks at it through its Kurdish prism and believes in a ‘get Assad first’ philosophy. What it must not forget is that President Bashar al-Assad’s ouster is no guarantee of a peaceful, ‘normal’ Syria and that the fall of the Baathist regime could find IS better positioned in Turkey’s underbelly. Also, Ankara is grossly mistaken if it thinks IS could help it sort the Kurds out; it should know that IS does not believe in any alliances; it believes in a kill-all philosophy which considers death and destruction an end in themselves. It is time Ankara clarified its thinking and made the right choice.

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]
Over the moon[/SIZE][/CENTER]


IT is a measure of just how complicated the affairs of this country have become when we are hopeful of a resolution to a problem in the temporary absence of one influential individual. Mufti Popalzai, we are told, is away in Saudi Arabia to perform umrah, which raises expectations that, this time round, we might be able to celebrate Eid on the same day all over the country. The mufti, who belongs to Masjid Qasim Ali Khan in Peshawar, has frequently been cast as the one-man force responsible for this country routinely having two Eids. There is a long history to this controversy which is highlighted most during the sighting of the moon for Ramazan and Eidul Fitr. So many years have gone into the dispute that now it appears as if it is no longer just a matter between the state-appointed Ruet-i-Hilal Committee and an individual who is routinely inclined to celebrate Eid a day earlier than the majority in the country. Reports indicate that even when Mufti Popalzai and one or more of his top aides may be away, there is a system in place to assert the evidence of moon-sighting if and when the Qasim Khan followers see it fit.


In sum then, the chances of disagreement and controversy are there even when the renowned mufti is not. It is quite clear that disagreement has to be addressed by confronting and discussing the issue rather than wishing for relief from the temporary removal of the dissenter. The chances of a durable answer are linked to all sides sitting down and finding a way to celebrate together, without their usual hang-ups — however impossible a proposition this may seem.

Let’s repeat it once more: science offers a way out, only if those in disagreement are willing to make use of it for the sake of clarity and cohesion. Others who have applied scientific formulae to deal with the matter are able to celebrate their Eids without the controversies that are common in Pakistan.

Published in Dawn, June 30th, 2016

[url]http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial[/url]

01 july 2016
 

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Afghan refugees[/SIZE][/CENTER]


AMIDST rising hostility towards Afghan refugees by elements in the state apparatus and sections of the wider population, the government has once again deferred a final decision on the status of Afghan refugees in Pakistan. The background to the latest six-month extension in the validity of the 1.5m Proof of Origin cards of Afghan refugees here is dispiriting. Last year, the federal government assembled a draft Comprehensive Policy on Voluntary Repatriation and Management of Afghan Nationals Beyond 2015, which, according to the UNHCR, recommended extending the validity of PoR cards until December 2017. But cabinet approval was left pending, so when the PoR cards expired last December, the prime minister used his executive authority in January of this year to grant a six-month extension. Six months later, with the prime minister convalescing in the UK and cabinet approval still pending, a further extension has been granted to PoR cardholders until the end of the year. Meanwhile, Pak-Afghan relations have plummeted and the political mood domestically has soured on Afghan refugees, leaving their status more tentative than ever. To be clear, forced repatriation — sending refugees back to Afghanistan without their consent — is not an option for
Pakistan. That would not only violate the moral responsibilities of the state, but also likely fall foul of our international commitments.


With integrating the refugees into Pakistan resisted by too many influential quarters and third-country resettlement not a realistic option either, the focus must turn to what the UNHCR itself states is the preferred option for refugees generally: voluntary repatriation. But the voluntary repatriation process has effectively stalled, likely because of a combination of security fears inside Afghanistan, lack of job opportunities there and the costs of repatriation. In the first four months of this year, fewer than 3,500 PoR cardholders opted to return to Afghanistan. Last year, a little over 58,000 PoR cardholders returned home. Reflecting the need to change incentives, the UNHCR announced earlier this week an increase in the assistance package for refugees voluntarily returning to Afghanistan. Perhaps the next six months will also provide the time and space for the federal cabinet to approve the government’s draft policy — surely, ad hoc arrangements are no longer desirable or feasible when it comes to managing the issue of Afghan refugees in Pakistan. Immediately, however, the government and the sensible among the political class need to fight against the rising tide of anti-Afghan sentiment inside Pakistan. To condemn an entire class of people, as some hawkish elements here have wantonly and disgracefully done in recent weeks, as criminals and terrorist sympathisers is to take the country further down the path of isolation.


Moreover, Pakistan and Afghanistan have a great deal of challenges to confront in the year or two ahead — and few of those challenges can be dealt with by either country alone. Humaneness and the national interest must go hand in hand.

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]
Karachi rain havoc[/SIZE][/CENTER]


TWO days of rainfall brought much misery to the hapless residents of Karachi. Though Karachi is often dubbed a metropolis and a megacity, it is shocking to see how a few millimetres of rainfall can paralyse this city of millions. The scenario witnessed on Tuesday and Wednesday was a familiar one that citizens of the city have experienced innumerable times. As the rain began to fall, streets and roads started to flood, electricity supply was suspended (in some cases for over 24 hours) while chaos was witnessed on almost all the main arteries as commuters tried to pass through unnavigable roads.

At least six deaths were reported in rain-related incidents. Citizens would be well within their rights to ask why their city must descend into chaos every time a few millimetres of rain falls — especially when other cities across the world that receive more rainfall are able to control urban flooding. The reasons for Karachi’s rain-related woes are numerous, but the main ones are bad planning and administrative neglect.
This week’s thunderstorms were not entirely unexpected; in fact, the weatherman had issued warnings in advance.

However, as is the norm in this country, officialdom’s performance is usually a reflection.


For example, the Sindh chief minister said that Rs476m had been released for de-silting the city’s 30 drains. Yet, as residents of Karachi would have witnessed, the ‘desilting’ in many parts consists of taking out garbage from the storm drains — and dumping it right beside the nullahs. It does not take a civil engineer to figure out that if solid waste is dumped next to a drain, instead of being disposed of properly, rainwater will carry it right back, choking the drain and exacerbating urban flooding. In fact, it seems that all of Karachi is floating on a sea of garbage, with mountains of stinking, putrid solid waste spread across the city. Sadly, the rain havoc and the lack of proper solid waste disposal are but by-products of administrative neglect — the provincial government, it seems, is not concerned with cleaning up this city and tending to its civic needs.

If the Sindh government were at all sympathetic to Karachi’s plight, this city would have a responsive local government in place, one that would be able to deftly handle civic problems.


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]CII’s existence[/SIZE][/CENTER]


IN a welcome development this week, the Senate Functional Committee on Human Rights took strong note of the antiwomen stance of the Council of Islamic Ideology. Holding the body responsible for the rise in violence against women, it called for the CII to be disbanded. It also urged the government to pass the Anti-Honour Killings Bill, 2015, and ensure ‘honour’ crimes were made un-compoundable offences. The committee’s recommendations come in the aftermath of the CII’s proposed ‘model’ for a women’s protection bill according to which errant wives can be ‘lightly’ beaten by their husbands. Although it is known to flood the airwaves with distorted interpretations of religious and cultural norms, the CII’s recommendations are not constitutionally binding. In a democratic polity, legislators must ensure laws impacting women are passed through parliamentary consensus.

Given the adequate constitutional provisions equipped to enact laws in accordance with religious tenets, the CII’s rulings are unnecessary, especially in the context of women. As the Senate committee observed, the CII is no longer constitutionally bound to send reports to parliament for legislation — its final report was filed in 1997.

It also suggested the CII’s Rs100m annual allocation be redirected to the National Commission for the Status of Women. Considering the CII’s litany of ‘advisories’, most of them humiliating to women, this is a useful suggestion. Just to recap its anti-women rulings: it ruled DNA tests were not acceptable as primary evidence in rape cases; then, it campaigned to lower the marriage age to 12 and nine for boys and girls; and its latest ‘bill’ prohibits the mixing of genders in schools, hospitals and offices.

Crucially, the upper house’s low tolerance for the CII serves as an example for provincial legislatures, especially that of KP. It should know better than to invite CII recommendations on pending legislation to protect women. That said, it remains to be seen if the Senate committee’s bold questioning of the CII’s validity will embolden the national parliament to disband this body.

Published in Dawn, July 1st, 2016

[url]http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial[/url]

03 July 2016
 

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]‘Good’ and ‘bad’ militants again?[/SIZE][/CENTER]


DECIPHERING the foreign policy and national security statements of the PML-N government is becoming an increasingly odd affair. There is the known, but unacknowledged, gap between the priorities and preferences of the political government and the military leadership. There is also the pressure that the civilian foreign policy advisers of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif appear to be under from the military to publicly articulate and defend policies that are crafted in GHQ. But vastly experienced civilians, like foreign affairs adviser Sartaj Aziz, appear to be adding to the confusion rather than trying to find a consistent and defendable line on vital issues. Consider Mr Aziz’s latest pronouncement: citing fears about so-called blowback from militant groups, the foreign affairs adviser appeared to defend the state’s lack of action against sanctuaries of the Haqqani network and the Afghan Taliban on Pakistani soil. While Mr Aziz made familiar reference to the state’s decision that action against militant groups should follow some kind of sequence, he appeared to suggest that decisions have yet to be made regarding “how far” and on “what scale” the state will eventually act against some groups. Has Mr Aziz backtracked on the state’s explicit commitment that there will no longer be a policy of differentiating between so-called good and bad Taliban? ‹ That would be an alarming and astonishing reversal made all the worse by the casual — almost careless — manner in which the remarks were given. Perhaps Mr Aziz was hoping to preempt pressure from a delegation of US senators visiting Pakistan. But the foreign adviser’s remarks to a wire agency require immediate and emphatic clarification — does the state of Pakistan adhere to a policy of not differentiating between socalled good and bad Taliban? And, if so, what is the strategy to progressively act against all militant groups that have found sanctuary on or are operating from Pakistani soil?

Surely, the remarks of a senior official such as Mr Aziz cannot simply be dismissed as a misstatement or a bungled attempt at explaining existing policy. The existing policy — reinforced time and again since the start of Operation Zarb-i-Azb and enshrined in the National Action Plan — is to treat all militant groups as a problem that must be solved by eventual elimination.

That policy clarity matters, even if operational and strategic choices so far do not immediately reflect that. To reiterate, the security of Pakistan and the region lies in an unambiguous policy against militancy and terrorism in all their manifestations by all countries. Pakistan’s pledge to try and deliver the Afghan Taliban to the negotiating table should not be allowed to become a reason to differentiate between militant groups over the long term. ‹ What threatens the stability of Afghanistan inevitably threatens the stability of Pakistan — the security establishment and political leadership here cannot lapse into old, damaging habits of denial and obfuscation.


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Tragedy in Dhaka[/SIZE][/CENTER]


ON Friday night, the mass casualty terror strike that many cities globally have experienced in the recent past came to the Bangladeshi capital, Dhaka. At least 20 people have been confirmed killed in the terrorist attack, claimed by the militant Islamic State group, targeting a restaurant in Gulshan, an upmarket locality of Dhaka popular with foreigners. Though most victims were foreigners, Bangladeshis were also killed in the assault. It has been reported that most victims of the outrage were hacked to death. Observers had long been warning of a growing militancy problem in Bangladesh; the restaurant attack painfully brings home the fact that religiously inspired militants in the country are well organised to stage large-scale atrocities.


Though this particular attack stands out because of the high death toll and the brutality involved, killings believed to have been carried out by such militants have been occurring with some frequency in Bangladesh over the past few years. More than a dozen people have been hacked to death since April, while over the last three years, 50 victims have been murdered. Liberal and secular Bangladeshis have been among the victims, as have Christians, Buddhists, Hindus and Ahmadis. Sufi and Shia Muslims have also not been spared. In fact, earlier on Friday, a Hindu man in the western part of the country was hacked to death. The Awami League-led government’s response has been a mix of denial — saying IS has no presence in Bangladesh — and knee-jerk reactions — such as cracking down on the opposition. For example, the ban on the opposition Jamaat-i-Islami, and the hangings of its leaders in connection with the tragic events of 1971, have been said to have pushed some opposition supporters and sympathisers towards extremism. Moreover, a round-up of suspects by police last month was said to have disproportionately focused on opposition activists. To prevent further terrorist atrocities, Bangladesh must clamp down on the infrastructure of militancy; the local supporters of IS, and similar groups, must be investigated and prosecuted if found guilty. However, crushing all dissent — including that of non-violent opposition groups — will be counterproductive and violate democratic norms. Dhaka must be clear in its counterterrorism strategy: those planning and supporting acts of terrorism must be targeted, not any and all opposition groups. A myopic strategy to lump together political opponents with suspected militants will fail to tame the beast of militancy in the country.


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Ramazan in Xinjiang[/SIZE][/CENTER]


THERE is some controversy surrounding reports that the Chinese government enforces strictures upon those who observe Islamic rituals, especially during the month of Ramazan, in Xinjiang, a region with a Uighur Muslim majority. Reports of tensions in the sensitive region between Uighurs and Han Chinese are not new. However, with the advent of Ramazan, some news stories had stated that the authorities in Xinjiang had banned government servants and students in the region from fasting and entering mosques. The Chinese government responded by saying that it does not force Muslim citizens not to fast. Interestingly, Pakistan has also become involved in this controversy; media reports state that a team of Pakistani clerics, led by an official of the religious affairs ministry, has just returned from Xinjiang. Invited by Beijing, members of the team claimed that Muslims in Xinjiang faced no restrictions. While the issue is a serious one, we must ask if it is the responsibility of our worthy clerics to ascertain the truth of the matter. The trip seems, as per descriptions, to have been a junket, and the clerics would have only observed what their government handlers wanted them to see.


Religious freedom is a right that should be inviolable, and Muslims in China and elsewhere, as well as members of any other faith, should have complete freedom to live according to their religious beliefs. However, it is definitely not the responsibility of our religious affairs ministry to certify levels of religious freedom in foreign lands. If anything, the state should be working overtime to ensure that all citizens — especially members of the minority communities — do not face any harassment while practising their respective faiths in Pakistan. Clearly, the high levels of sectarianism, bigotry, and anti-minority attitudes in our society suggest that much work needs to be done to rectify matters. Rather than enjoy foreign junkets and joyrides, our state functionaries should focus their energies on creating an atmosphere of confessional harmony and tolerance in Pakistan.

Published in Dawn, July 3rd, 2016

[url]http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial[/url]

04 July 2016
 

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]US senators’ visit[/SIZE][/CENTER]


IS it a repair job or recognition that an important relationship needs to be reset somehow amidst continuing and serious differences? Several US senators and the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan shuttled between Islamabad and Rawalpindi over the weekend, but only the most perfunctory of details have been offered so far by Pakistani officials. Perhaps once the Senate delegation returns to the US, there will be some comment from the American side that may shed more light on what was discussed and what, if anything, was agreed. What can be assumed, from the identities of the visitors, is that Pakistan is trying to reach out to friendly or even businesslike elements in the US Congress, a centre of power that has become progressively more hostile towards Pakistan and its policy concerns. That is a sensible approach, given the hurdles Congress can create when it comes to a stable and relatively normal bilateral relationship between Pakistan and the US.

Yet, is Pakistan prepared to answer the questions that the outside world is asking of it? In terms of policy, the US once again appears to be seeing greater benefit in engaging India and a greater need to keep Afghanistan on side. Of Pakistan, the questions are familiar, though noticeably more insistent. Essentially, is Pakistan willing to take on anti-Afghan and anti-India militant groups that have found sanctuary and operate on Pakistani soil? When it comes to the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani network, the space that Pakistan had while dialogue between the Afghan government and the Taliban appeared imminent is gone. While Pakistan can rightly point to the drone strike that killed Taliban leader Akhtar Mansour as the moment talks were undeniably scuttled, nothing has come to light since to suggest that Pakistan was near convincing the Taliban leader of the necessity and inevitability of talks. The US policy in Afghanistan may be muddled, but is the perceived Pakistani policy defensible? Foreign affairs adviser Sartaj Aziz’s willingness to differentiate between the so-called good Taliban and bad Taliban will not have gone unnoticed; and it is telling the can have repercussions for what the country’s national security architects are trying to achieve vis-à-vis Afghanistan. Border management and ending antiPakistan sanctuaries in Afghanistan are essential to regional stability and Pakistan is correct to highlight those issues in talks with whoever has influence in Kabul with the Afghan government. But how sympathetic and inclined to cooperate will Afghanistan or the outside world really be without clarity of policy and firmness of action by Pakistan?


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Death by drone[/SIZE][/CENTER]


FOLLOWING President Obama’s pledge in May 2013 to introduce more transparency and oversight in drone strikes, the White House has finally released figures pertaining to casualties caused by such attacks. Between Jan 20, 2009 and Dec 31, 2015, according to the report, there were 473 drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, Libya and Somalia which killed between 64 to 116 civilians while fatalities of combatants numbered between 2,372 to 2,581. These figures are certain to be vigorously contested by independent organisations tracking data from drone strikes. Reprieve, for one, has scathingly described the report as a “cooked book of numbers”. The figures are also at considerable variance from those collated by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, according to which drones have killed between 492 and 1,100 civilians since 2002 in the aforementioned countries. Amnesty International, however, has welcomed the move to release the statistics as a step in the right direction.

While one can agree this is at least a much-needed starting point, in that it is a tacit admission of the number of occasions when ‘precision technology’ has gone horribly wrong, it falls far short of real transparency even within the constraints of confidentiality warranted by conflict situations. We remain in the dark as to what are the criteria whereby ‘civilians’ and ‘militants’ are distinguished from each other. There is clearly no uniform standard — this can be extrapolated from the fact that although the estimate of the minimum total deaths in drone strikes tabulated by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism is very similar to that disclosed by the US, their respective estimates of civilians within that vary greatly. And the lack of detail such as names, circumstances, etc sustains a deeper problem — perhaps the very foundational one — which is the dehumanisation of the ‘enemy’. This was starkly illustrated after a drone strike on the Pak-Afghan border in January 2015 inadvertently killed Dr Warren Weinstein, an American citizen held hostage by militants since 2011. ‹ Obama’s expression of “profound regret” was the first time that a civilian fatality in a drone strike had elicited such a response from the US. The irony was unmistakable. It must also be said that the argument for more transparency — within reason — in times of war, remains valid even where the Pakistan Army is actively party to the conflict such as in Operation Zarb-i-Azb. Information that is unverifiable and tightly controlled by the military is perceived more as propaganda than fact.


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Growing cash economy[/SIZE][/CENTER]


OF all the trends that define the fiscal year just ended, the growth of currency in circulation is one of the most important. For years it has been a feature of our economy that somewhere around 20pc of all fresh money creation in any given fiscal year stayed in circulation as cash and the rest went into bank ‹ deposits. That proportion has been rising for the last two years, but, in the outgoing fiscal year, it registered a spike unheard of in recent decades. More than 66pc of fresh money creation stayed in circulation as cash, showing a reversal of the ratio. The trend is troubling because it shows a massive defection of economic activity towards informal and ‘black’ sectors of the economy. In addition, it throws up large challenges for the conduct of policy — both fiscal and monetary — and creates a powerful latent reservoir of undetected funds that can play havoc with the economy if they return as sources of speculative demand, like they did in the latter years of the Musharraf regime.


Along with this, we have seen similar spikes in the property markets as well as stocks, the two traditional destinations for black money. It is not a leap of faith to see a connection. What adds to the sense of foreboding that this trend evokes is that government borrowing from the banking system also increased instead of coming down. So out of the Rs1tr in fresh money creation till mid-June, if only Rs355bn landed up as deposits, how did the banks finance the government’s borrowing of Rs1.18tr in the fiscal year just concluded? The answer, according to the recently released third quarterly report of the State Bank, is that the central bank “stepped up its liquidity injections”, meaning the funds were provided by the State Bank itself. The trend is a disturbing one and merits far greater attention than it has been getting thus far — especially from the State Bank itself.

Published in Dawn, July 4th, 2016

[url]http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial[/url]

05 july 2016
 

[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Illegal organ transplants[/SIZE][/CENTER]


THE spectre of illegal organ transplants is once again rearing its head in the country, threatening to reverse the gains made on this front in the last few years. The National Assembly Standing Committee on Human Rights in its meeting on Saturday took up the issue based on anecdotal evidence from cases that they had personally encountered. Hard data is difficult to come by ever since the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act 2010 made the sale of organs illegal. But in the absence of strong implementation of the law — particularly difficult given the nonexistence of a functioning federal oversight body — the activity seems to be making a comeback. The unethical aspect of this trade is very obvious, for it is leveraged on exploiting the poor who are induced by their circumstances into selling their organs — often finding out later that they have instead paid a high price for ignorance.

Aside from usually not even receiving the amount they are promised, they are saddled with unforeseen expenses and work-related consequences in case of post-surgery complications.

In a business where profit is the bottom line, they are left to fend for themselves because by then they are of little use to those who put them in that predicament. That is not to deny there is a dire need for organ donations: every year, an estimated 50,000 people in Pakistan die of end-stage organ failure, including 15,000 who succumb to kidney failure. That vastly outnumbers those who receive legal transplants. As per information given to the standing committee by an official from Islamabad’s Human Organ Transplant Authority, nearly 5,000 patients have undergone kidney transplants and 300 have received liver transplants since 2010, while bone marrow and cornea transplant recipients number 325 and 80, respectively.

Nevertheless, that cannot negate the argument that organs must be ethically sourced, either from living related donors or deceased donors. In the case of the latter, the state can, and should, do far more to promote the concept.


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Baghdad massacres [/SIZE][/CENTER]


EVEN by Iraq’s volatile standards, Sunday’s truck bombing targeting a market in Baghdad was massive. Various news sources are quoting different death tolls, from 165 to over 200. The scale of the atrocity can be judged by the fact that Iraqi officials have said it will take a number of days to recover the bodies. The militant Islamic State group has claimed responsibility for the slaughter, which occurred in the capital’s Karrada area, packed with families busy shopping for Eid. ‹ While violence in Syria, and more recently Turkey, has grabbed the headlines, the fact is that Iraq has been experiencing a wave of mass-casualty militant attacks. A rough tally of acts of terrorism in various Iraqi cities since January shows that hundreds have been mowed down — in cafes; in markets; during religious events etc. The Iraqi government may have wrested Fallujah from the clutches of IS, but clearly, the militant outfit remains a lethal threat to the safety of this shattered country’s population. Thirteen years since the American invasion toppled strongman Saddam Hussein, Iraq remains a broken state, torn apart by sectarian and ethnic differences, suffering from inept governance, and preyed upon by militant gangs such as IS.

While the liberation of Fallujah was a breakthrough, significant ground remains to be covered until the country is cleansed of the menace of terrorism. Of course, freeing the city of Mosul — still under the militants’ control — remains a major goal. But in the longer term, the defeat of IS requires coordinated action in Syria and Iraq, the two states that have suffered the most because of the militant group. For this to happen, the civil war in Syria needs to be wound down, which means the external backers of the government and the rebels, respectively, must make greater efforts to convince their Syrian clients to cease fire and head for the negotiating table. Treating the IS problem in Syria and Iraq separately will not deliver effective results. This is effectively one theatre and, unless coordinated action is taken, once driven out of one country, the militants can sneak across the border and easily find refuge and regroup. ‹ A greater effort is required to dismantle IS’s infrastructure, including its finances. For the security of the region and beyond, local and foreign actors must work with the governments in Damascus and Baghdad on a joint counterterrorism strategy to uproot IS and rebuild this devastated region.


[CENTER][SIZE="6"]Monsoon mayhem[/SIZE][/CENTER]


ALMOST on cue, an unforeseen cloudburst above Chitral has devastated a district, left some 30 people dead at the time of writing, and served up a grim reminder on the eve of Eid that in spite of years of ferocious monsoon weather, Pakistan remains as vulnerable as it ever was to the ravages of climate. No lessons have been learnt, no preparations have been made, and no capacity to forecast such events has been added. It has been repeated all through the past few years: the preparation for extreme weather events begins with improving our early warning capability, followed by building a meaningful response plan.

Yet villagers in Ursoon were caught completely unawares when a cloudburst unleashed flash floods, wiping away their hamlet and loved ones, while Bannu and Dera Ismail Khan were hit by ferocious winds and rains that caused widespread damage.

The same episode was witnessed last year, when a cloudburst caused torrential rains which triggered multiple simultaneous glacial lake outburst floods that left the whole of Chitral district devastated. That episode ought to have taught us that Pakistan is susceptible to weather patterns coming from the west as well as the east, and that our weather radars — outdated as they are — that face westward are either not operating or unable to track the development of adverse weather patterns above the mountains.

Currently, the majority of our weather radars are pointed eastward to monitor the arrival of monsoon clouds, which only show up on the radars once they are above Rajasthan. Most floods receive less than 48 hours of warning, woefully inadequate for our times and requirements.


If there is one thing that successive monsoon seasons since 2010 have taught us, it is that each season brings extreme weather events in some shape or form, from the west or the east, and sometimes also from the Arabian sea in the south. Over these years, it is unfortunate that our weather forecasting system has remained outdated and dilapidated. The Met office, meanwhile, has been left standing on the door of the government asking for the funds to upgrade the equipment so as to be able to warn the country with more accuracy and better lead times once storm clouds begin to gather. But given the priorities of our government — roads, bridges and highways — the funds have not been released throughout this time period, nor has the government taken any serious note of climate-related vulnerabilities over almost half a decade.


The result is that we find ourselves flying blind into yet another monsoon season, which predictably enough, has opened with ferocious rains causing the loss of life and widespread damage one more time. What will it take for the government to wake up from its fevered obsession with visible infrastructure projects to realise that strengthening the country’s defences against the ravages of weather is also an overriding priority?

Published in Dawn, July 5th, 2016
[url]http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial[/url]