Pakistan’s ‘no’ to war

EVEN though it did not constitute a full enunciation of Pakistan’s policy on the Iraq crisis, Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali’s speech in the National Assembly on Monday does give an indication of Islamabad’s position. In spite of the fact that the uproarious scene created by the opposition over the Legal Framework Order had drowned out part of the speech, the broad outline of the government’s Iraq policy came out quite clearly. In doing this, Mr Jamali kept his promise that his government would take the nation and parliament into confidence on this highly sensitive issue. Fully aware of the sentiments of the people of Pakistan on the threats of war against Iraq, he made it plain that his government would not support any move that authorized war. He declared categorically, “I want to ... tell the parliamentarians that Pakistan will not become a party to any decision which leads to bloodshed in Iraq.”

Even if it had not been a member of the Security Council at this time, Pakistan would have been on the horns of a dilemma on the Iraqi crisis; its membership of the council has only made the situation doubly difficult. To decide which way to vote in the Security Council calls for a careful consideration of the options available to Pakistan. Indeed, given Pakistan’s own security concerns — the situation in Afghanistan, the unresolved Kashmir dispute, and the perpetual tension with India — Islamabad’s policy options are rather limited. What complicates matters further is Pakistan’s membership of the US-led war on terror and its position as the “front-line” state.

Obviously, the fate of the resolution would not hinge on Pakistan’s vote. Whichever way Islamabad and other non-permanent members of the UN Council vote, it is the permanent members of the council who would decide the issue. America felt confident that it would be able to secure a majority. Nevertheless, this would be a technical majority, because Paris and Moscow made it abundantly clear that they would use their veto power to kill any resolution that closed the door on peace. Pakistan as a member of the Organization of Islamic Conference and as a key Muslim country cannot afford to support any resolution that seeks to inflict further human suffering and devastation on Iraq. In this Pakistan must be guided by the fact that the cause of peace is just and must be upheld under all circumstances. An attack on Iraq will be morally and legally unjust.

Those who were supposed to find Baghdad guilty — the UN inspectors — have found no “smoking gun” in Iraq. The other agency that has been monitoring Iraq — the International Atomic Energy Agency — agrees with the inspectors. The IAEA has also said the Anglo-American “evidence” about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction was not authentic. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan also thinks there is no case for war. This is the opinion which America’s own allies share. This is in addition to world opinion which has unnerved the war lobby, which now seems in a hurry to move in for the kill, because it is not sure whether it would be able to cope with defections within its own ranks. The Jamali government is, thus, on the right track and in right company. Those opposed to war are in tune with the tide of world opinion which says it cannot support any move that authorizes war on Iraq.

‘Digging’ for evidence

UNDER orders from the Allahabad High Court, a team of Indian archaeologists is digging the site in Ayodhya where the Babri Masjid once stood. The ruling came after years of a tussle between Hindus and Muslims, the former claiming the existence of a temple there which was built to mark Ram’s birthplace and was razed to the ground by the Mughal emperor Babar who built the Babri Masjid in its place. The 16th century mosque was destroyed by Hindu zealots in 1992 after a number of extremist organizations led a march to the site, touching off communal violence across India that killed over 2,000 people. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad, the Rashtrya Sevak Sangh and extremist elements within the now ruling Bharatya Janata Party — collectively called the Sangh Parivar — then got together and pushed for the construction of a Ram temple. The Supreme Court of India was able to restrain the Parivar from pursuing its agenda, maintaining that the status of pre-partition places of worship cannot be altered. The lack of will on the part of the politicians to resolve the issue politically, has now led the Allahabad High Court to issue the edict allowing excavations to ascertain the veracity of the Hindu claims.

Babri Masjid was not the only mosque in India about which Hindu nationalists claimed as being the site of a destroyed temple. Since partition, the number of such claims has mounted dramatically. In the 1960s, for instance, there were a total of 300 such controversial mosques in India; today the number has risen to over 3,000. This clearly presents a dilemma for a country whose secular and democratic credentials come in for scrutiny every time its minorities are attacked or the government resorts to excessive use of power to curb political dissent under the garb of special laws. Surprising as it may seem, such laws have never been applied to rein in Hindu extremists — in the aftermath of Indira Gandhi’s murder when Hindu mobs burnt Sikhs alive in Delhi, destroyed the Babri Masjid, or, more recently, carried out massacres of Muslims in Gujarat. In the case of Ayodhya, Muslims have categorically said that they would abide by the decision of the court based on the findings of the on-going excavations. It may be pertinent to ask whether the Parivar would also abide by the court’s decision.

Islamabad roads

ISLAMABAD’s carefully designed road network has long been the pride of the city’s residents. Not only has extreme care been exercised to maintain the straight lines of the roads but an effort has also been made to ensure that the road profiles conform with the natural topography and contours of the land to preserve the scenic beauty of the city. However, the condition of large parts of this road network has deteriorated over the years, and it has worsened since the recent rains. The head of the Capital Development Authority’s road directorate has admitted that most of the city’s roads no longer had the required viscosity and bandage strength. He claimed that most of the roads were 25 to 35 years old and needed recarpeting. He has also admitted that the CDA staff had not been carrying out proper maintenance on the damaged portions but have instead been performing patch-up jobs which hardly last a few weeks before their condition deteriorates. The bad condition of roads leads to the rapid deterioration in the condition of vehicles. Financial constraint has always been CDA’s excuse for the lack of road maintenance in Islamabad. But residents are no longer buying this argument. They say they have been paying their taxes regularly and expect the CDA to ensure that the city’s road network is not only kept in good shape but also continues to do the city proud.