Confusing talk

Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi's plea that President Pervez Musharraf should continue to remain army chief for another five years is quite astonishing. After being elected chief of the provincial Muslim League on Sunday, the Punjab chief minister said the president's continuation as chief of the army staff was vital for the country's security.

Coming from any other politician, the plea could have been dismissed as little better than a show of loyalty. After all, the PPP Patriots too have expressed similar views, but they are not taken seriously because they come from a group that broke away from their party and got prized posts in the federal government. However, Mr Pervaiz Elahi's views must be taken seriously because they have been expressed by a man who is chief minister of Punjab.

For all practical purposes, Pakistan is already run by the army. Whether President Musharraf doffs his uniform or not, the National Security Council will call the shots in politics.

It is headed now by the president-cum-army chief, but even if Gen Musharraf chooses to retain only his civilian office, as he should, the next COAS as well as the chiefs of the navy and the air force and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff committee will be in the NSC. That fact alone subordinates the elected civilian government to the military and ensures continuation of policy. The NSC may not be part of the Constitution - the move was successfully thwarted - but it has already come into being as a statutory body.

Its effect on the body politic will continue to be felt until the bill is repealed. That would be possible only when the electoral process is not manipulated, there is no "king's party" and a truly sovereign national assembly does away with the NSC. This being the case, one wonders why Mr Pervaiz Elahi should insist on President Musharraf continuing to wear two hats.

The reasons given by the Punjab chief minister for his plea are many. President Musharraf's position as army chief was vital, he said, not only for the many reforms he had undertaken but also for the country's security. Security linked to an individual would at best be considered tenuous.

A country is truly secure only when it develops and maintains strong democratic institutions with roots among the masses. Without a principled and strong political base, security can mean one thing to one group and something else to another.

Ultimately, it is the nation which decides what constitutes security and how it can best be safeguarded. Basically, it is through a free play of democratic forces that nations develop a consensus on security concerns.

These concerns are tackled by the people's elected government and the armed forces are entrusted by them to act accordingly. Where generals define security, the armed forces become an end in themselves and security itself becomes secondary.

Where continuity of reforms is concerned, it is odd for a politician to confess that he or his colleagues would be unable to continue with the reforms or implement them.

If the reforms are in the right direction and accepted by the people, they will prove durable. It is evident that the deliberate ambiguity being fostered on the uniform issue is only encouraging loose and frivolous talk. The Constitution is clear on the point and must be respected.

Voiceless & indifferent

An 'international hijab solidarity day' was observed in several cities here and abroad over the weekend under the aegis of various organizations opposed to the French hijab ban in schools.

The ban went into effect on September 1, apparently without meeting any strong resistance from schoolchildren or their parents. France's insistence on imposing the headgear restriction has been the subject of much debate.

The argument that the odd 'hijab' or turban or skull cap in a classroom can endanger the French republic's secular character has been countered by many critics of the decision by pointing out that France's much respected and cherished secular tradition is too embedded to be affected by such small assertions of religious or cultural identity.

On the other hand, the French government sees them as symbols of creeping extremism that cannot be encouraged in a society that prides itself on its liberalism.

The debate may continue, but what is a little disturbing is to see the effort put in by the pro-hijab lobby to mobilize public opinion on the subject while remaining virtually indifferent to more fundamental issues.

The cruel hostage-taking and killing of hundreds of schoolchildren in Beslan, Russia, has seen no public demonstration of anger or protest from religious or civil society organizations.

No women's organization has come out in the streets to declare that as mothers and sisters, they are outraged by militancy and terrorism that target innocent children. The pictures that have come out of Beslan are truly shattering. Even if the Russian security forces botched up the rescue effort, the act of the terrorists in making children hostage was vile and vicious.

It calculatedly put the children at risk. Countless children have also been killed and maimed in Israeli attacks on Palestinian civilians, attacks that do not discriminate between military targets and the homes and hearths of ordinary Palestinians.

Many children have been killed in US bombings and air strikes in Iraq. Whether it is religious militancy or state brutality, there can be no excuse for the murder or maiming of children, and we should all speak out more forcefully and clearly against all instances of such mindless terrorism instead of remaining trapped in peripheral matters.

Access to basic services

In spite of the visible decay in the water and sanitation situation, Pakistan has not done too badly in its attempts to meet the UN goal of improving services in this area.

A recent report by the world body shows that the country has made considerable progress towards fulfilling its part of the commitment to halve the number of people without access to drinking water and basic sanitation facilities by 2015.

According to it, Pakistan saw a rise in access to drinking water from 83 per cent in 1990 to 90 per cent in 2002, and improved sanitation from 38 per cent in 1990 to 54 per cent today.

However, with its population increasing at a high rate, efforts to further improve and expand the services will have to be expedited. Otherwise, even with better facilities, large sections of the population will continue to be deprived of these essential services and remain susceptible to a host of debilitating, potentially fatal diseases caused by polluted water and insanitary living conditions.

The figures also show that Pakistan needs to focus more on its rural areas where 66 per cent of the population lives. Here, the statistics for those provided with access to drinking water in their homes are depressing.

As against 50 per cent of urban households with water connections, in the rural areas only nine per cent of homes have this facility on their premises - a drop from 13 per cent registered in 1990.

Correcting the urban bias by making more provisions for the rural areas must then become part of any strategy aimed at improving basic facilities and services in the country.