Power crisis & response

THE Asian Development Bank has offered $1.45 billion over the next three to five years for upgrading power transmission and distribution networks that would, hopefully, help provide uninterrupted electricity supply, cut abnormal line losses and reduce the cost of electricity for consumers. On the power generation side, a major development expected soon is an agreement with China for building six nuclear plants of 300MW each, in addition to the one with the same capacity being built now. The two existing nuclear plants at Karachi and Chashma produce 390MW of power and meet 0.8 per cent of national energy requirements. For the short-term, Wapda is executing its own projects to generate 1,250MW of electricity and the KESC is planning to set up a thermal power plant of 750MW. The emerging power scenario may bring some relief to consumers hard hit these days by load-shedding. But the problem is more complex. The root cause of a looming power crisis is ad hoc decision-making at the official level and the failure to tackle long-term problems. The power policy has failed to induce private independent power producers to deliver. Except probably in one case, no progress has been made on any fast-track projects, sponsored by some leading industrial groups and with a total capacity of 540MW.

The situation has forced the government to allow Wapda, so far debarred, to take up new projects, including a 450MW combined cycle power plant at Chichoki Malian, Sheikhupura. The government has also decided to acquire rented energy at 3.133 cents/KWH (excluding fuel cost) at a 92 per cent capacity, criticised by many as too expensive. These emergency measures run counter to the Energy Vision 2005-2030 providing for additional power generation mainly from indigenous sources. Thermal power plants are being set up on an emergency basis with imported furnace oil consumption already going up by 115 per cent over a year ending July 2006. The government is working on the development of alternative energy sources such as wind power, solar energy, coal-based power generation and hydroelectricity projects. But things are moving at a snail’s pace. The federal government is seeking funds from international financial institutions for the construction of the Daimer-Bhasha dam. Since hydropower is the cheapest source of energy, it should receive high priority, not so much in the case of big dams but for setting up a network of small and medium hydro projects, particularly for over 30,000 villages which have to be provided electricity by 2007. Small hydro projects can be set up in a short span of time by various tiers of local governments, depending on their size and cost, with active community participation as has successfully been done in the NWFP and northern areas.

In most cases, no dams or water reservoirs are required for the small hydropower plants which can also be set up on irrigation canals. The power generated from such sources would be much more affordable for the rural population. For power supply and demand to be balanced on a sustainable basis, energy generation cannot be left to the private sector; the gaps have to be filled in by state-run institutions and, if possible, also through public-private partnerships. The sources of power need to be diversified to include renewable sources of energy. For this, the Asian Development Bank has offered $500 million which should serve as seed money to kick-start an effective programme.

In violation of rules

THE so-called agreement reached between the LDA, Lahore’s building control authority, and Shahalam Market traders — two of whom are advisers to the Punjab chief minister — over the reopening of commercial plazas declared unsafe and sealed by the authority is another indication of how political influence can overrule the writ of law. Last Monday, the henchmen of the traders forcefully removed the LDA seal, beat up its officials and reopened the buildings in question for business activity — in flagrant violation of rules. The city nazim was made to bite the dust after he had ordered the closure of the dangerous buildings, following the collapse of a commercial plaza in the vicinity which left three people dead and many injured only a week ago. This is nothing new, as the cynical may observe, but the latest episode epitomises the melee in the prevailing socio-political order in which the influential manage to remain above the law — even if that entails endangering lives. The agreement reached between the authorities and the violating traders defies all norms of good governance, and of enforcing the law.

The problem of illegal buildings, many of them dangerous for occupants, plagues all our big and small cities. Rules are bent all the time for those wielding political influence or filling the pockets of corrupt officials, with no regard for the potential threat that the unscrupulous builders pose to the life of citizens. For instance, if building control rules had been enforced, the ill-fated section of the high-rise housing complex in Islamabad would not have collapsed following last October’s earthquake and the dozens of lives lost could have been saved. Karachi, too, is notorious for illegal and hazardous construction; no one seems to pay any attention to the hundreds of illegally built multi-storey plazas that can be likened to time bombs ticking away unobserved. Unless a uniform urban building code is formulated and enforced across the country, there is little hope for curbing the malpractice, political influence-peddling and corruption that have come to define the working of the various building control authorities.

Police apathy & rising crime

On Wednesday, the Afghan consul-general in Karachi got a taste of the seamier side of the city when his car was waylaid by armed men in Gulshan-e-Iqbal. Travelling like an ordinary person without official protocol and protection, the consul-general and his family were reportedly relieved of a few thousand rupees, roughly three hundred dollars, some jewellery and an unspecified number of cellphones. In no time the CG succeeded where others routinely fail and managed to lodge an FIR with the police. Given the victim’s diplomatic status, this was only to be expected. But what followed was truly remarkable. An instantly invigorated Karachi police managed to track down the culprits the very next day — one from as far a place as Kotri near Hyderabad — and promptly recovered the stolen property.

Also on Wednesday, at least 29 cellphones and 32 vehicles were stolen or snatched at gunpoint from various parts of Karachi. Nine citizens informed the police that they were deprived of over 940,000 rupees in currency and prize bonds, in addition to jewellery and other valuables. Two people suffered gunshot wounds while resisting car- and phone-snatchers. Alarming as they are, in some cases these figures are well below the daily average for crime in Karachi. Reports of arrest and recovery, meanwhile, are few and far between. Bandits roam the city while an apathetic, poorly trained and under-motivated police force looks the other way for the most part. Even high-profile cases of mass murder and terrorism remain unresolved, while routine crime has been reduced to little more than a daily statistic that is entered in a ledger and then simply ignored. A little pressure from above, however, can work miracles. The speedy service provided to the Afghan CG is clearly in keeping with his stature as a guest and cannot be faulted. There must be no restrictions, however, on access to justice.

Jinnah’s vision of Pakistan

JINNAH was not a mere political leader, but also a statesman. Indeed, his statesmanship streak influenced and determined his political leadership role increasingly as he negotiated the tortuous road to Pakistan in the 1940s.

For the most part, a politician deals with matters of the moment. Since his focus is rivetted to short-term goals, he is bound to be severely constrained by a rather limited vision. In contrast, a statesman looks at problems and developments on a long-term basis. This is not only in terms of immediate goals only, but, more importantly, how they could be fitted in, and could be integrated, with the long-term aspirations, larger perspectives and more enduring goals.

Hence a statesman constantly and continuously tends to prognosticate and keep in view the long-term consequences of day-to-day developments he is confronted with. Above all, a statesman looks at events and problems through the prism of a grand vision.

Jinnah developed the demand for Pakistan with a vision. It is not merely that a Muslim homeland in the subcontinent had to be created, but also how it should be structured, what orientation it should opt for, what ultimate goals it should pursue. All this to make its establishment meaningful and significant for the masses.

Political independence from both the British rule and Hindu domination was, of course, the immediate goal, the short-hand metaphor, as it were. But what was to make it meaningful was a process of quests that would change the face of the Muslim homeland for a better tomorrow, a brave new world.

Quests for ideological resurgence, cultural renaissance, economic betterment and social welfare. And this is precisely how Jinnah spelled out the rationale for the Pakistan demand in his epochal March 23, 1940, address in Lahore. He said, “... we wish our people to develop to the fullest our spiritual, cultural, economic, social and political life in a way that we think best and in consonance with our own ideals and according to the genius of the people”.

Thus, his numerous pronouncements from 1940 to 1948 provide guidelines in a full measure that, when taken together, portray his vision of Pakistan.

First, in his August 11, 1947, address he called for an indivisible Pakistani nationhood — a concept by which all the inhabitants, no matter what their race, colour or religion, would be full-fledged citizens of Pakistan, with equal rights, equal privileges and equal obligations.

Second, on February 21, 1948, he stressed the need for “the development and maintenance of Islamic democracy, Islamic social justice and equality of manhood”. Earlier, in his June 18, 1945, message to the Frontier Muslim Students Federation, he had talked of “the Muslim ideology which”, he said, “has to be preserved, which has come to us as precious gift and treasure and which, we hope, others will share”.

In his broadcast to the United States in February 1948, he was sure that the Pakistan constitution would be of “a democratic type, embodying the essential principles of Islam”. At the same time, he reaffirmed unequivocally that “Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state ... to be ruled by priests with a divine mission”. Thus, he stood for a democratic face of Islam — a pluralist face of Islam.

It is significant that this version of an Islamic democracy was in accord with the view of Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, the foremost religious leader of the day.

The Maulana had strongly supported the Objectives Resolution of March 1949 which ruled out theocracy as the structural framework of Pakistan’s constitution. He argued cogently that “an Islamic state does not mean the government of the ordained priests. How could Islam”, he asked pointedly, “countenance the false idea which the Quraan so emphatically repudiated in Sura Tauba verse 37?”

The Quaid stood not only against theocracy, but also against sectarianism. “Islam”, he said, “does not recognise any kind of distinction of caste, and the Prophet [PBUH] was able to level down all castes and create national unity among Arabs. Our bedrock and sheetanchor is Islam. There is no question even of Shias and Sunnis. We are one and we must move as one nation, and then alone we shall be able to retain Pakistan.”

Unfortunately, though, sectarianism has raised its ugly head in Pakistan during the last fifteen years, creating serious problems for Pakistan. Curbing religious extremism and marginalising jihadi and terrorist groups are, indeed, among the most critical challenges confronting Pakistan today. The future face of Pakistan depends for the most part on how we go about tackling these critical problems.

Jinnah had invoked Islam because, as he had repeatedly said, “Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. Islam has taught equality, justice and fair play to everybody. What reason is there for anyone to fear democracy, equality, freedom on the highest standard of integrity and on the basis of fair play and justice for everyday?

Let us make it [the future constitution of Pakistan]. We shall make it and we will show it to the world.”

At the political level, Jinnah stood for undiluted democracy, constitutionalism, for autonomy of the three pillars of the state (executive, legislative and judiciary) and for a free press, for civil liberties and a civil society, rule of the law, accountability, and a code of public morality. It is in the formulation of such a code that Islamic ethical principles would come in handy, and that ideology would play a pivotal role in Pakistan’s body politic, but, of course, with the consent of the general populace.

He stood for moderation, gradualism, constitutionalism and consensual politics all through his public life. He believed in building up a consensus on an issue, step by step. He believed that controversies should be resolved through debate and discussion in the assembly chamber and not through violence in the streets, through sheer muscle power. He believed in democracy and not mobocracy.

He believed on the lines of Disraeli who laid down the axiomatic rule for the birth and maintenance of a stable and self-propelling democracy when he said, “We must educate our masters, the people, otherwise we would be at the mercy of a mob masquerading as democracy”. This is tragically what has been missing in Pakistan since the early 1950s. More often than not, most of our political leaders succumb to wild rhetoric, weakening the democratic temper of the masses and strengthening the trend towards mobocracy or dictatorship.

On the economic front, Jinnah stood for a welfare state. Among others, this calls for structural changes in the economy, ensuring a balanced and mixed economy with an equitable distribution of wealth. He stood for full employment opportunities for one and all, for a contented labour, for a fair deal to the farmer, and for human resource development at all levels. Finally, his call for an Islamic economic system should not be misinterpreted to equate with the riba question. It is essentially meant to ensure economic equity and social justice to one and all, without any discrimination whatsoever.

Jinnah stood for enforcing law and order, for the elimination of nepotism, bribery, corruption and blackmarketing, for wiping out distinction of race, religion, colour and language, for providing equal rights and opportunities to one and all and for the economic betterment of the masses. “Why would I turn my blood into water, run about and take so much trouble? Not for the capitalists surely, but for you, the poor people”, he told his audience at Calcutta on March 1, 1946.

He counselled the first Constituent Assembly on August 11, 1947. “Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous, we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and especially of the masses and the poor”. He also stood for the emancipation of women for conceding them their due rights, and for taking them along with men side by side in all spheres of national life.

In short, he wanted Pakistan to be progressive, forward-looking, modern and welfare-orientated but firmly anchored to the pristine principles of Islam, since these principles are firmly rooted is the enduring traits of equality, solidarity, freedom and emancipation of the marginalized sections of society.

This, then, represents Jinnah’s vision of Pakistan. And unless and until we translate his guidelines into public policy and ground reality, Pakistan would not become the sort of country that the Quaid had envisioned.

The writer is a former director of the Quaid-i-Azam Academy.