The next round

ALTHOUGH Shah Mehmood Qureshi’s stay in India was brief for unavoidable reasons, its significance will not be lost on observers on both sides. The Pakistan foreign minister’s visit has set the tone for relations between the two countries in the coming days. Going by the reports emanating from New Delhi, one can expect the next round of the composite dialogue scheduled to begin in July to be positive and cooperative. Some of the issues to be addressed will have profound implications for ties between the two South Asian neighbours. In fact a beginning has already been made in the quest for bilateral cooperation in some sectors and one hopes that we shall now see greater progress. For instance, the two governments hope to have on their agenda peace and security as well as confidence building measures in the context of Kashmir, economic ties, a joint approach to issues of common interest, the work of the judicial committee on prisoners and the operation

of the anti-terrorism joint commission. Considerable progress has been achieved in the composite dialogue once it dawned on the two governments that there was greater wisdom in negotiating their problems than going to war. When seen against the backdrop of their earlier confrontationist stance which traditionally characterised India-Pakistan relations, the current phase of negotiation is to be welcomed.

There are, however, some aspects of India-Pakistan relations that should be addressed on a priority basis. The first is in the context of peace and security in South Asia. The need is for the two governments to keep relations on an even keel to minimise the chances of new crises erupting and escalating into a conflict. So far the two governments have exercised considerable restraint on sensitive issues — a sensible approach that has eased tensions. Their policy of opening channels of communication and adopting confidence building measures rather than getting deadlocked on knotty core issues has visibly improved the political climate. It is however important that a modus vivendi be found on the human rights dimension of this problem. It will facilitate cordial relations and would promote understanding on lowering the level of militarisation in the Valley.

There is also the need to realize how détente between India and Pakistan will impact positively on global politics. With no signs of Islamabad winning the ‘war on terror’ in the immediate future and the militants recognising no borders, a wise strategy demands that India and Pakistan join hands in their security endeavour. In that context their agreement in New Delhi to hold meetings of their anti-terrorism mechanism regularly is encouraging. It would also reduce Islamabad’s dependence on Washington in world politics.

Afghan opium trade

HAMID Karzai of Kabul may have his concerns, some of them valid, about Pakistan’s role in combating militancy. That said, he is doing little to tackle a major insurgency-related problem that is entirely Afghan in nature. His country saw a record poppy harvest in 2007 that accounted for as much as 92 per cent of global opium production. Worth an estimated $4bn in the international market, Afghanistan’s opium output last year was equivalent to 53 per cent of the country’s licit GDP and another ‘shockingly high’ harvest is expected in 2008, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. True, more than 80 per cent of Afghanistan’s opium is supplied by the Taliban-controlled southern provinces but surely parts of his own country ought to fall under Mr Karzai’s jurisdiction. While the military might of the Taliban may be a factor, Kabul’s hesitancy in cracking down on opium production is also influenced by the systemic corruption plaguing the country. If drug lords sit in parliament, as many allege, is it likely that Mr Karzai will allow meaningful and decisive action against people whose support he needs to stay in power? But then this is just one of many areas where Mr Karzai’s rhetoric, if not vitriol, doesn’t quite match his actions on the ground.

Besides lining the pockets of tribal chiefs and politicians of criminal bent, the Afghan drug trade is fuelling the very insurgency that the country’s government and Nato troops are attempting to quell. By taxing poppy farmers and extorting protection money from operators of morphine and heroin laboratories, the Taliban are estimated to have earned more than $100m last year from Afghanistan’s thriving opium trade. The connection between insurgency and drug trafficking is well established not only in Mr Karzai’s country but across the world, Colombia and its narco-fuelled Farc rebels being a prime example. The Afghan president needs to sever the opium lifeline that feeds home-grown militants and has turned over a million of his people — nearly 3.5 per cent of the country’s population — into heroin addicts with little hope of recovery. He would be doing the rest of the world a favour too, particularly neighbours like Pakistan and Iran. Heroin addiction not only destroys individual lives, it shatters families and perpetuates poverty. It also fuels crime and contributes to the spread of potentially fatal diseases that are transmitted through sexual contact or sharing of needles. Afghanistan, with its monopoly on opium production, needs to get its act together, for its own benefit as well as that of others.

Desperate acts

THE country is in a grim situation: price hikes and inflation have coincided with severe shortages of essential commodities and falling employment rates. Worst hit are urbanites, particularly those from the modest or under-privileged economic brackets. Against this backdrop, the rising numbers of poverty-driven suicides across the country speak volumes of the average citizen’s desperation. A case in point is the death in May of Umar Deen, an ice-cream vendor who shot himself in Islamabad because he was unable to repay a Rs80,000 loan. In his suicide note Umar blamed ‘the system in this country’ for his death. Sadly, he was not the only person to be driven to such extreme measures. According to the Edhi Foundation, the number of reported suicide cases across the country has seen a sharp increase since early this year — four to five cases a day as opposed to two or three last year — with most of the unfortunates belonging to the 25-40 year age bracket and virtually all from very low income brackets. Edhi’s spokesperson believes that these deaths can directly be attributed to growing unemployment and rising prices of essential food items, and points out that the figures represent merely the tip of the iceberg since nearly 60 to 70 per cent of suicides go unrecorded in police files.

The needless deaths of desperate citizens indicate the need for the coalition government to address related issues on a war footing. While the new budget claims to be ‘pro-poor’, the fact remains that prices continue to escalate while the removal of subsidies on various goods has worsened the situation. Moves such as the food ration card and the ‘Free Food’ project are welcome, but safety-nets must also be devised to help those who are driven to desperation. A debate on this subject with psychiatrists and psychologists may prove beneficial in terms of setting up help-lines that offer counselling and depression-alleviation therapy — suicides being linked to the inability of the mentally ill to cope. Similarly, the government must explore the option of setting up an emergency fund to provide immediate relief to those facing the choice between starvation and death.

OTHER VOICES - North American Press

A welcome decision

The New York Times

IT has been nearly two years since the United Nations ordered Iran to stop enriching uranium. Tehran continues to defy that order, and its scientists are getting closer to mastering a process that is the hardest part of building a nuclear weapon. So we welcome the European Union’s decision — after much foot-dragging — to impose new sanctions on Iran that go beyond what the United Nations Security Council has mandated.

That means that 61 Iranians or companies — all with alleged links to Iran’s nuclear or ballistic missile programmes — will now be subject to a European visa ban, a freeze on assets or both. European states must lose no time in rigorously implementing these penalties.

Coming after Tehran again cold-shouldered a package of economic and diplomatic incentives offered by the major powers, the European Union’s decision reinforces the only strategy that might have a chance of peacefully persuading Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions.

The strategy — initiated in 2006 by Britain, France, Germany, the United States, Russia and China — offers Iran a reasonable choice: suspend nuclear fuel production and cooperate with international inspectors in exchange for rewards from the West, or continue down the current road and face harsher penalties and deeper isolation.

Tehran has until now played a weak hand brilliantly. Even as it defies the United Nations, it has staved off significant international penalties by showing occasional interest in negotiations and deftly leveraging its economic power as an oil-and-gas producer.

Europe’s patience, we hope, is finally wearing thin and the tightening financial squeeze may yet have an impact. It would be foolish for the Senate to threaten this cooperation by passing a bill, now under consideration, that could force sanctions on European companies doing business with Iran.

The major powers also must improve on the incentives offered to Iran. Specifically, the Bush administration must make a more credible offer of security guarantees and improved relations if Iran abandons its nuclear ambitions.

We strongly urge the administration to follow through on a proposal now being floated to open an American-interests section in Tehran.

There is no assurance that Iran’s leaders would accept the offer, nor do we know if there is any mix of incentives or punishments that would change Tehran’s behaviour. The Iranian people need to know that the United States is serious about reconciliation — and who is responsible for their isolation. — (June 28)

Gender bias in film, theatre

FILMS and theatre are supposed to simulate real life situations and enact the potential social life on screen and stage. In the subcontinent, we have a rich tradition of mobile stage theatres.

These theatres, in the absence of modern day cable television and films, were a great source of entertainment. We then see a phase of silent movies where life was emulated in the form of motion pictures. But the real revolution came when the walky talky took over and, with the passage of time; India became a centre of film making.

Now every year in India hundreds of movies are produced, which are shown in thousands of cinemas to millions of people in and outside the country. A large number of people in India and Pakistan watch these movies on CDs. In Pakistan, the film industry is relatively not very active but theatre is doing relatively well especially in big cities like Karachi and Lahore.

The popularity of film and theatre in the subcontinent suggests a vital role they play in the construction of social realities such as gender. Gender, unlike sex, is a social construct that varies from context to context and is learnt by the masses through various social institutions. These institutions include family, places of learning, centres of religious congregation, judiciary, etc. A more powerful source of gender construction is the media. Here I shall focus on the role of films and theatre in the process of gender construction with special reference to the use of language in the subcontinent.

Before we look at the triangular relationship of language, gender and films and theatre, it is important to understand that language is not a neutral and passive tool of communication. It is also important to realise that the reflection of outer happenings is not the only function of language. Language is in fact involved in the construction of social reality and it also plays an important part in perpetuating the stereotypes prevalent in a society.

A number of gender-related stereotypes have been constructed, popularised, advocated, legitimised, and perpetuated by films and theatre and since they are very popular media, their impact travels fast. In the movies of the sixties we see a submissive prototype of women whose docility is their virtue. On the other hand, men are presented as strong, brave, and patronising.

The so-called active role for women can be found in ‘dances’ where women are portrayed as sex symbols. Indian films are different from western cinema in terms of the number of songs and dances. The dances, on most occasions, have nothing to do with the context of the story line. They are there to meet commercial needs as it is believed that the main attraction for the masses that come to the cinemas are provocative dances with scant clothing and ‘creative’ camera angles.

Another ingredient to enhance the desired impact of a dance is inevitable rain that creates the requisite environment. Here, women are presented as objects of display. In a number of film scenes, women dance to entertain men. The dances have become such an integral part of films that huge funds are invested in the setting and costumes prepared for the dances. The vulgarity of theses dances is more obvious in the cheap theatre where the masses come for entertainment.

The choice and use of words in movies underwent a tremendous change over a period of time. In the early fifties and sixties we see the use of formal language which was literary in nature. This Hindi/Urdu language used in movies was highly persianised. The female characters had to strictly behave according to the prevalent cultural norms. The heroines in the movies were required to speak in a soft, low melancholic tone with a tinge of coyness. The language became simpler and more direct with the passage of time.

The flavour of Persian diminished and English words became common in the dialogues. If we look at the titles of some contemporary Indian movies we see a blend of English and Hindi words. The image of the heroine changed from a coy woman to an outgoing girl. But in both these roles exploitation of a different nature was evident. The heroines of present day films are Phoolan Devi, Miss Hong Kong, Miss Colombo, Jano Kapatti, and others. This is another kind of misrepresentation of women.

Some songs employ dual meanings and manifest obscenity. This is very common in the stage plays where dialogues cross the limits of decency and women are put in an embarrassing position. The female characters are often presented as dumb and are made the butt of jokes. The language of theatre plays is usually so obscene that they can hardly make for family entertainment.

Most of the stereotypes about women, for instance, are: women are weak, cowardly, dependent, emotional, dumb, capricious, talkative, etc. These are perpetuated and promoted by film and theatre. Conversely, some positive stereotypes about men are depicted in these movies. For instance, men are strong, brave, independent, stable, and smart. All this is done in such a playful and subtle manner that the audience takes them as reality. A large number of people who watch these movies in cinema or on CDs are influenced by them in an unconscious way.

Who is responsible for the misrepresentation of women in films and theatre? They may include film financiers, directors, story writers, dialogue writers, and song writers. The majority of them are men. Men try to represent women with their own biases and desires. Consequently it is not an honest representation. Some female directors tried to bring some changes but others opted to move with the tide.

Is it possible to bring a change in terms of themes, language, and representation of women? The answer is a definite yes but for that a more creative approach is required. We do find some good movies that tackled some social issues by using the crutches of songs and dances and misrepresentation of women. For this change we need a more educated, talented, and creative group of people.

We also need more women in the fields of scriptwriting, song-writing and direction. It is time that films and media were used to challenge some of the taboos of this society instead of strengthening and perpetuating them.

The writer is director of Centre for Humanities and Social Sciences at Lahore School of Economics and author of Rethinking Education in Pakistan.

shahidksiddiqui@yahoo.com

Row over trade talks

The explosive clash of personalities, and policies, between the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, and the European Union’s trade commissioner, Peter Mandelson, is threatening to detonate another European crisis. France, which takes over the EU presidency for six months on Tuesday, announced on Friday that it has convened an unscheduled meeting of the 27 governments to — in effect — call into question Mr Mandelson’s negotiating position in the stalled world trade talks.

Although M. Sarkozy will not be present at the meeting in Paris, it will inevitably be overshadowed by his outburst at the Brussels summit last week when he accused Mr Mandelson of provoking the Irish “no” vote in the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty on EU reform because his proposals for freeing world trade were so unpopular.

President Sarkozy said that “only” Mr Mandelson thought that it was sensible to offer a 21 per cut in European food production when “a child dies of starvation every 30 seconds” in the Third World.

The meeting called by Paris signals an attempt by M. Sarkozy to impose his own more protectionist approach to global trade, and especially trade in food. It also signals a wider drive by the French President to abandon the “abstract, distant, technocratic” approach of Brussels in favour of policies closer to the concerns, and prejudices, of ordinary people.

The foreign ministers’ meeting in Paris — to be chaired by Bernard Kouchner of France — will take place in the week before the WTO meeting of 30 leading countries in Geneva on July 21. The Geneva talks, which could last a week, are intended to make one last heave to attempt to break the trade deadlock.

The French minister for European affairs, Jean-Pierre Jouyet, said: “Europe cannot be inactive on the WTO [talks], which were a great cause of trouble [with farmers] in Ireland, as they are in France.”

The European Commission says any weakening of Europe’s offers on food trade would provoke the collapse of the negotiations — with serious consequences for the world economy.

One Brussels official accused M. Sarkozy of adopting a “simplistic, populist approach”.

— ©The Independent, London