Troubled times

THE monster of terrorism stalks the land as Pakistan celebrates the 58th anniversary of its independence today. This evil has hurt Pakistan in more ways than one: it has given the country a bad name abroad; and at home, it has posed a challenge to the very fabric of our society by fomenting hatred and sectarian violence. On a political level, because of its global dimensions, terrorism has attempted to weaken Pakistan’s state structure and create political chaos by attacking security forces and targeting important personalities. Terrorist groups have also undermined Pakistan’s relations with friendly countries and created serious doubts among friends about the security of its nuclear assets. How much of the militancy is our own creation, in the sense of having been patronized by state agencies, remains a subject of debate. But there can be no two opinions that extremism and militancy are destabilizing factors that have domestic, regional and international dimensions. The absence of a genuine political and democratic process has provided room for violent forms of expression to assert themselves.

An equally serious issue that remains a source of constant anxiety is centre-province relations. The failure to work federalism in letter and spirit has been the cause of many of our problems. In the ’70s, it led to army action in Balochistan and spawned discontent in the NWFP. Balochistan has once again been in the news, and its grievances against the federal government point to the flawed working of the federal system. The federating units do not trust each other. The failure to agree on a National Finance Commission award and the lack of a consensus on the Kalabagh dam go against the very spirit of federalism. This is also essentially a reflection on our ability to develop democratic traditions over the last 58 years.

Then there is the all-pressing economic question. Will the people of Pakistan ever have their rainbow? Nearly six decades after independence, a majority of Pakistanis still miss the basics of a civilized existence. Contrary to government claims, poverty seems all-pervasive. The gains of development have yet to reach the lower-income groups even as growing consumerism indicates an expanding middle class. Feudalism, the single biggest cause of our economic and social backwardness, remains well-entrenched in both society and politics. This rules out the formulation of policies that could aim at the gradual abolition of privileges and foster the development of an egalitarian and educated society. Industrialization has not been evenly spread and is confined to pockets. Small towns and villages present a picture of neglect with a shockingly poor infrastructure; in the major urban centres, slums are growing and becoming ever more crowded, leading to social pressures and crimes.

The nation looks forward to the promised 2007 election with hope. Unlike the 2002 polls, which were characterized by manipulation, the next electoral exercise could be a milestone in our political history if it is truly fair and free. Democracy does not solve problems by itself, but it creates a mechanism for debating and deciding national issues. Decisions may not be perfect, for democracy is slow and produces delicate arrangements that are often based on compromises. But a compromise by consent is better than arbitrary decisions that often lead to catastrophes — going by our 1971 experience. The sooner the military and bureaucracy grasp this truth the better.

Bush’s threat to Iran

AS the impasse between Iran and the European Union on uranium enrichment intensifies, President George Bush has jumped into the fray with an implicit warning to Tehran. In an interview with Israeli television, Mr Bush said that use of force against Tehran could not be ruled out though it would be the last option. Given the fact that the president has on previous occasions spoken about targeting Iran in a preemptive strike — it was denounced along with North Korea and Syria as constituting the “axis of evil” — the latest statement cannot be dismissed as a casual observation. In the present context, when talks between Tehran and the EU have broken down and Iran has unilaterally removed the IAEA seals on the nuclear reactor at Isfahan, President Bush is only exacerbating the crisis by issuing bellicose statements. This approach is provocative since it reinforces the perception in Iran that the greatest threat to its security comes from Washington. Small wonder, Iran has been demanding assurances that neither the US nor Israel would attack it.

The American posture vis-à-vis Iran will not help in easing the present crisis. There is a general belief that the US has not forgiven Iran for the hostage crisis of 1979-80. The NPT impasse is not the only contentious issue between them. They still don’t have normal diplomatic relations and the Bush administration has voiced its opposition loudly to the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline deal. It is plain that America is finding it hard to bury the past and its policies towards Iran are determined more by an animus rather than objective geostrategic considerations. The war in Iraq, also of America’s making, calls for a stable and peaceful Iran. If to settle old scores, the Bush administration decides to treat Iran with an iron fist, it will destabilize the whole region. US interests demand that the strategic and political balance is not upset. Besides, the Iranian nuclear programme, which may not be the ideal option, is not in violation of the NPT and does not constitute a threat to the US either.

Above the law?

THE reported incident of the son of the federal law minister physically assaulting a passenger at the Karachi airport a few days ago is shocking and a reminder that law in the country stops at the doorsteps of the powerful and the privileged. The minister’s son thought that he was above the law. According to reports, on seeing that the minister and his son were being allowed entry into the departure lounge without being searched, a fellow traveller asked the airport security guards to do their duty and carry out a search of the minister’s son as required by the law. This was said to have incensed the young man to the extent that he beat up the passenger, who then had to be given first aid by a doctor called in by the Civil Aviation Authority. All this is reported to have happened in the presence of the minister. Details of the incident have been carried by national newspapers and have not been denied so far by the minister or his family.

As usual, the role of the law-enforcers in this particular case appears to be to ignore the whole episode. The head of the security contingent on duty that day has told a newspaper that he was not aware of any such incident and only read about it in the press while the police say that no action can be taken against anyone unless an FIR is registered. It is important that the government investigate the matter thoroughly; its veracity should not be difficult to ascertain since it happened in a public place. If his involvement is proved, the minister’s son should be prosecuted and held answerable for his wanton conduct. That is the only way that the high and mighty of this land can be made to realize that no one is above the law.