The News, April 15, 2005
How Leghari dismissed Benazir government
Rauf Klasra
ISLAMABAD: Former Army Chief General Jahangir Karamat had leaked the news of the impending dismissal of her government to prime minister Benazir Bhutto in 1996 a day earlier, after agencies bugged a conversation of the then-opposition leader Nawaz Sharif, who had received the confirmation to this effect from the Presidency.
This startling disclosure was made to The News by former Speaker Yousaf Raza Gilani in Adiala, where he is serving a sentence awarded by NAB for unlawfully giving jobs to people of his area during his tenure as speaker from 1993 to 1996.
The composed Gilani is busy writing a book covering important political aspects of his life. Having been a part of three governments since 1985, he says he has many startling events to share with the people of Pakistan to enable them to take a peek into the secret world of politicians, army generals, bureaucrats and others, who decide their fate without people having any knowledge of the same.
Unraveling the nine-year-old political secret, Gilani said on November 4, 1996 the-then army chief General Jahangir Karamat hosted a dinner in honour of the visiting Turkish army chief. He also invited Gilani and ensured he was seated besides him on the table. During the dinner, the general told Gilani that he wanted to send a message to Benazir through him (Gilani) that Leghari had decided to dismiss her government and the deed was about to be done. Karamat said he had already informed the-then secretary defence Salim Abbas Jilani to meet Benazir and tell her that Leghari would dismiss her government in a day or two.
The general told a puzzled and inquisitive Gilani that he had received a tape of conversation held between the opposition leader Nawaz Sharif and a big Saudi government authority in Jeddah. In the tape, Nawaz was heard telling the Saudi authority that "Rais (President Leghari) had agreed to dismiss the government of Benazir and hold new elections."
Karamat told Gilani that in the light of this development, he was ready to play the role of a guarantor between Benazir and Leghari so that the government was not dismissed and some kind of arrangement could be arrived at.
He also told Gilani that Leghari had given a hostile briefing to the IMF delegation against the fiscal policies of Benazir, which clearly showed Leghari's intent to dissolve the assembly.
Gilani rushed to the Prime Minister House at about 12 midnight but was told that she had already gone to sleep. There was thus no option for him but to wait till the next morning. In the meanwhile he rang up secretary defence Salim Jilani to confirm whether he had conveyed Karamat's message to Benazir. Jilani confirmed that he had told her what the general had told him and also about his offer to become a 'guarantor' between Presidency and PM House.
This information relaxed Gilani who went to sleep with the satisfaction that BB had got the message and must have taken some measures in the light of the same. Gilani was one of the few people in Benazir government who defended Leghari before her. He was of the view that Leghari would not dismiss the government. However, the same night around 2am, he received a telephone call from Benazir who told Gilani that he had been proved wrong as his friend Leghari had dissolved the assembly.
After some time, Gilani asked Benazir as to why she had not accepted the offer of Karamat to become guarantor to save her government. Benazir said that she did not want to embarrass a civilian president to take cover of a military general. Moreover, she could not convince herself to accept the role of General Karamat as a guarantor between a civilian prime minister and a civilian president.
Gilani also gave details of another important meeting he had with the-then chief justice of Pakistan Sajjad Ali Shah, who also did not have good terms with Benazir those days.
Before the assemblies were dissolved, the chief justice rang up Gilani and said that he wanted to spend some time with him. Sajjad visited Gilani and within only five minutes of his departure Benazir made a call to Gilani and asked about 'what his friend had told him'. Gilani understood that intelligence agencies were monitoring the movement of Sajjad.
Gilani informed BB that the CJ had come to know from him about the possible reaction of cabinet members and other party leaders in case Leghari dismissed the government. Gilani also told BB that CJ was not happy with the attorney general of Pakistan Qazi Jamil.
Next morning she made another call to Gilani and asked if he had read the newspapers. Gilani replied that he had read the news of the resignation of AG Qazi Jamil. Qazi had been asked by Benazir to resign to appease the furious Sajjad. Gilani picked up the phone and informed the CJ that Benazir had removed Qazi as he wished. But, the chief justice in his dry voice said, 'Sorry Mr Speaker. It is too late now.'
Thursday, April 14, 2005
'Talibanization' fears in Pakistan
The Christian Science Monitor
April 13, 2005 edition
'Talibanization' fears in Pakistan
Activists blocked a co-ed road race last week, as religious parties geared up for local elections in July.
By Owais Tohid
ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN - More than five years since President Pervez Musharraf's coup, religious extremists are moving to the forefront in challenging Pakistan's political order.
Last week, hundreds of extremist demonstrators armed with bamboo sticks blocked a 10K road race near the finish line to protest the participation of women runners. A gun battle with police ensued, leaving several people wounded.
In a surprise to many here, the incident took place not in the conservative tribal areas, but in the country's Punjab heartland. In reaction, protesters picketed Parliament Monday, calling on the government to "save the society from Talibanization."
Through strikes, protests, and the passage of strict local ordinances, Pakistan's religious parties have grown more brazen in their challenge to the secularization central to President Musharraf's rule. Political analysts are concerned that the sidelining of mainstream parties under may be aiding the radicals in the run-up to local elections in July.
"There is a perception among the think tanks in Washington and Pakistan that both the main opposition parties should be given some room, as their absence would strengthen politically the extremist parties," says Ayesha Haroon, editor of Pakistan's The Nation newspaper. "We may see a more radical path if democratic outlets are not relaxed."
Pakistan's two previous prime ministers, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, live in exile. But in a move widely seen as a positive step toward restoring democracy, Ms. Bhutto's husband was recently released from prison and plans to run her party's affairs in Pakistan.
Mr. Sharif, meanwhile, by some accounts remains barred from politics for another five years. But he still acts as leader of his mainstream party. To prevent losing his conservative constituency to the religious parties, he has thrown his backing behind a nationwide strike called this month by the religious parties.
'Enlightened moderation'
The strikers are protesting President Musharraf's "enlightened moderation" program aimed at bringing liberal values to the society and improving the image of Pakistan.
"Pakistani people are Islamic and they will not allow the government to contradict Islamic teachings," says Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, central leader of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), an alliance of religious extremist parties. "The enlightenment and moderation are to promote Western culture."
The religious parties gained political victories in the wake of the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The MMA now rules the Frontier Province and emerged as a major coalition in the southwestern Balochistan Province.
"The mullahs have already gained political power after attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq by capitalizing anti-US sentiments and are now flexing their muscles on social issues to capture the society," says Shafqat Mehmood, a Lahore-based analyst and a columnist with the English-language newspaper, The News.
In some areas, strict Islamic laws have introduced gender segregation in schools, banned music, and prevented male medical technicians from examining women.
Activists have also defaced billboards that show women models. Religious political leaders also have plans to implement a hisba law, which would set up a religious police force along the lines of the ousted Taliban.
Now Pakistan's religious parties want to extend their gains nationwide through the local government elections scheduled for July.
"They just want to gain political mileage by distorting religion and its values, and are aiming for the local government polls to get hold of administrative control of the society," says Aamir Liaquat, the state minister for religious affairs.
The clean-shaven, young minister also hosts a popular religious TV program, ALIM ONLINE. "Musharraf's vision is to promote moderate thinking and help build a society according to Islamic values where these extremists cannot impose their archaic ideas at gunpoint."
Reform, then reversal
But Musharraf's vision of enlightened moderation has many hurdles to clear in a country where extremists long enjoyed the support of successive governments and the powerful military establishment.
And Musharraf's government has been criticized by rights activists and the media for backing off previously announced reforms, including the abolishment of the draconian Hudood Ordinances, a blasphemy law, and a separate column for religion in passports.
Some argue that the "flip-flops" further strengthen extremists.
"The mullahs have been getting more powerful, partly because of anti-US sentiments and also due to the government's backtracking on liberal stances that it took on social issues. It exposes the chinks in the vision of enlightened moderation," says analyst Mehmood.
For protesting rights activists, Musharraf needs to come down hard on the extremists to cleanse the society.
"The time has come for Musharraf to take the mullahs by the beard," says activist Ambreen. "If he wants our support then he should not come under the pressures of mullahs. Only then can he steer his ship out of the currents of fundamentalism towards enlightened shores."
April 13, 2005 edition
'Talibanization' fears in Pakistan
Activists blocked a co-ed road race last week, as religious parties geared up for local elections in July.
By Owais Tohid
ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN - More than five years since President Pervez Musharraf's coup, religious extremists are moving to the forefront in challenging Pakistan's political order.
Last week, hundreds of extremist demonstrators armed with bamboo sticks blocked a 10K road race near the finish line to protest the participation of women runners. A gun battle with police ensued, leaving several people wounded.
In a surprise to many here, the incident took place not in the conservative tribal areas, but in the country's Punjab heartland. In reaction, protesters picketed Parliament Monday, calling on the government to "save the society from Talibanization."
Through strikes, protests, and the passage of strict local ordinances, Pakistan's religious parties have grown more brazen in their challenge to the secularization central to President Musharraf's rule. Political analysts are concerned that the sidelining of mainstream parties under may be aiding the radicals in the run-up to local elections in July.
"There is a perception among the think tanks in Washington and Pakistan that both the main opposition parties should be given some room, as their absence would strengthen politically the extremist parties," says Ayesha Haroon, editor of Pakistan's The Nation newspaper. "We may see a more radical path if democratic outlets are not relaxed."
Pakistan's two previous prime ministers, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, live in exile. But in a move widely seen as a positive step toward restoring democracy, Ms. Bhutto's husband was recently released from prison and plans to run her party's affairs in Pakistan.
Mr. Sharif, meanwhile, by some accounts remains barred from politics for another five years. But he still acts as leader of his mainstream party. To prevent losing his conservative constituency to the religious parties, he has thrown his backing behind a nationwide strike called this month by the religious parties.
'Enlightened moderation'
The strikers are protesting President Musharraf's "enlightened moderation" program aimed at bringing liberal values to the society and improving the image of Pakistan.
"Pakistani people are Islamic and they will not allow the government to contradict Islamic teachings," says Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, central leader of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), an alliance of religious extremist parties. "The enlightenment and moderation are to promote Western culture."
The religious parties gained political victories in the wake of the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The MMA now rules the Frontier Province and emerged as a major coalition in the southwestern Balochistan Province.
"The mullahs have already gained political power after attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq by capitalizing anti-US sentiments and are now flexing their muscles on social issues to capture the society," says Shafqat Mehmood, a Lahore-based analyst and a columnist with the English-language newspaper, The News.
In some areas, strict Islamic laws have introduced gender segregation in schools, banned music, and prevented male medical technicians from examining women.
Activists have also defaced billboards that show women models. Religious political leaders also have plans to implement a hisba law, which would set up a religious police force along the lines of the ousted Taliban.
Now Pakistan's religious parties want to extend their gains nationwide through the local government elections scheduled for July.
"They just want to gain political mileage by distorting religion and its values, and are aiming for the local government polls to get hold of administrative control of the society," says Aamir Liaquat, the state minister for religious affairs.
The clean-shaven, young minister also hosts a popular religious TV program, ALIM ONLINE. "Musharraf's vision is to promote moderate thinking and help build a society according to Islamic values where these extremists cannot impose their archaic ideas at gunpoint."
Reform, then reversal
But Musharraf's vision of enlightened moderation has many hurdles to clear in a country where extremists long enjoyed the support of successive governments and the powerful military establishment.
And Musharraf's government has been criticized by rights activists and the media for backing off previously announced reforms, including the abolishment of the draconian Hudood Ordinances, a blasphemy law, and a separate column for religion in passports.
Some argue that the "flip-flops" further strengthen extremists.
"The mullahs have been getting more powerful, partly because of anti-US sentiments and also due to the government's backtracking on liberal stances that it took on social issues. It exposes the chinks in the vision of enlightened moderation," says analyst Mehmood.
For protesting rights activists, Musharraf needs to come down hard on the extremists to cleanse the society.
"The time has come for Musharraf to take the mullahs by the beard," says activist Ambreen. "If he wants our support then he should not come under the pressures of mullahs. Only then can he steer his ship out of the currents of fundamentalism towards enlightened shores."
Pakistanis involved in Terrorism in Spain
Daily times, April 14, 2005
Eleven Pakistanis charged with Spanish terror plot
MADRID: Spanish authorities have charged 11 Pakistanis over suspected links with Al Qaeda sympathisers who carried out the Madrid train bombings a year ago, judicial sources said on Wednesday.
One of the 11, Shahzad Ali Gujar, is suspected of having transferred funds to members of Al Qaeda, including Amjad Farooqui, who Pakistani security forces killed last September and who was implicated in the murder of US journalist Daniel Pearl. In all, investigators believe Al Qaeda members in Pakistan received some $1 million in funds from Spain. Muhammad Afzaal, believed to have headed the Pakistani cell in question, is suspected of sending money last September to Rabei Usman Sayed Ahmed, alias “Mohammed the Egyptian”, who is currently in custody on suspicion of involvement in the train bombings which killed 191 people. Two of the 11, Shahzad Gujar and Adnan Aslam, are thought to have met “Mohammed the Egyptian” in Brescia, Italy, in May 2003.
Shahzad Gujar is suspected of meeting Othman el Gnaout, another March 11 suspect, three days before Spain’s worst ever terrorist attack, while he is additionally suspected of meeting Saed el Harrak, also in Spanish detention, the day after the blasts. The judge overseeing the case said that “a group was constituted in Barcelona with a view to supporting global jihad from Spanish territory (via) the financing of concrete terrorist acts and people recruited to carry them out”.
The judge considered there is hard evidence to suggest that Muhammad Afzaal travelled to Dubai in early 2004 where Al Qaeda operatives instructed him to create terrorist cells in Spain and Norway or Denmark to finance the terrorist network’s activities. The Pakistanis are further charged with preparing an attack in Barcelona, having been found to be in possession of films and detailed maps of several major buildings in the eastern Spanish metropolis. One of the maps depicted a shopping mall in the city’s port area.
Spanish authorities named the 11-strong group as Muhammad Afzaal, Shahzad Gujar, Nasser Ahmad Khan, Masud Akhtar, Shafqat Ali, Mahmud Anwar, Adnan Aslam, Farhat Iqbat, Irfan Khan, Zaman Qamar and Muhammad Chaudhry Aslam. afp
Eleven Pakistanis charged with Spanish terror plot
MADRID: Spanish authorities have charged 11 Pakistanis over suspected links with Al Qaeda sympathisers who carried out the Madrid train bombings a year ago, judicial sources said on Wednesday.
One of the 11, Shahzad Ali Gujar, is suspected of having transferred funds to members of Al Qaeda, including Amjad Farooqui, who Pakistani security forces killed last September and who was implicated in the murder of US journalist Daniel Pearl. In all, investigators believe Al Qaeda members in Pakistan received some $1 million in funds from Spain. Muhammad Afzaal, believed to have headed the Pakistani cell in question, is suspected of sending money last September to Rabei Usman Sayed Ahmed, alias “Mohammed the Egyptian”, who is currently in custody on suspicion of involvement in the train bombings which killed 191 people. Two of the 11, Shahzad Gujar and Adnan Aslam, are thought to have met “Mohammed the Egyptian” in Brescia, Italy, in May 2003.
Shahzad Gujar is suspected of meeting Othman el Gnaout, another March 11 suspect, three days before Spain’s worst ever terrorist attack, while he is additionally suspected of meeting Saed el Harrak, also in Spanish detention, the day after the blasts. The judge overseeing the case said that “a group was constituted in Barcelona with a view to supporting global jihad from Spanish territory (via) the financing of concrete terrorist acts and people recruited to carry them out”.
The judge considered there is hard evidence to suggest that Muhammad Afzaal travelled to Dubai in early 2004 where Al Qaeda operatives instructed him to create terrorist cells in Spain and Norway or Denmark to finance the terrorist network’s activities. The Pakistanis are further charged with preparing an attack in Barcelona, having been found to be in possession of films and detailed maps of several major buildings in the eastern Spanish metropolis. One of the maps depicted a shopping mall in the city’s port area.
Spanish authorities named the 11-strong group as Muhammad Afzaal, Shahzad Gujar, Nasser Ahmad Khan, Masud Akhtar, Shafqat Ali, Mahmud Anwar, Adnan Aslam, Farhat Iqbat, Irfan Khan, Zaman Qamar and Muhammad Chaudhry Aslam. afp
Pakistan unwilling to be used by US against Iran
The News, April 14, 2005
Pakistan unwilling to be used by US against Iran
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: Pakistan is unwilling to become involved in the American containment of Iran, according to Pakistani academic Dr Riffat Hussain.
Speaking at the Middle East Institute on Tuesday, Hussain, a professor at the Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, said President Pervez Musharraf’s remark about Pakistan remaining neutral in the event of a US invasion of Iran had been widely reported and criticised in Iran. He said there were differences between the two countries on several issues. They supported different sides in Afghanistan and Pakistan felt aggrieved by Iranian disclosures about receiving nuclear centrifuges from the Dr AQ Khan network. Pakistan felt that Iran should have informed it of these supplies. Iran, on its part, felt that by dispatching centrifuges to the IAEA for inspection, Pakistan may have contributed to the tightening of the punitive noose around its neck.
Pakistan, he said, felt much unease about Iranian-Indian relations, while Iran views the development of the Gwadar port with apprehension as it would undermine the importance and economic potential of its Chah Bahar port. The US was opposed to the proposed gasline to India as it did not want Iran to break out of its isolation. If Pakistan went along with US wishes, it would be another negative input into relations between Pakistan and Iran. He said the US had military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq and in case it decided to move against Iran, it would not need Pakistan’s help, a test Pakistan would be relieved to be spared.
In answer to a question, Dr Hussain said a nuclear Iran would be a “nightmare” for Pakistan because in case Pak-Iran relations took an adverse turn in the future, Iran could well join hands with India to pressure Pakistan. As for Iran, it felt threatened by the United States and were it to acquire nuclear weapons, it would feel safe, the assumption being that a country with nuclear weapons was not attacked. North Korea was not attacked by the US because it had nuclear weapons. He said the more pressure Washington put on Iran, the closer will it bring Tehran to the acquisition of nuclear capability.
Turning to Afghanistan, Dr Hussain said when the Taliban were in power, on no critical issues were they willing to listen to Pakistan. Pakistan never controlled the Taliban, as some believed. He said the rise of “narco economy” in Afghanistan is a threat to Pakistan because of its spillover effect. Today 87 percent of the world’s opium is being produced by Afghanistan. Warlordism is also rampant for which the US has to accept some responsibility. He said a stable Afghanistan is in Pakistan’s interest. He also felt that the Durand Line issue should be settled. The proposed gasline, if it becomes a reality, would benefit both Afghanistan and Pakistan. He found the presence of Hamid Karzai at the March 23 Pakistan Day parade in Islamabad as a sign of improving relations. He stressed that the destinies of the two countries were linked. He was of the view that the concept of “strategic depth” had now been given up by Pakistan. He said the Afghanistan bureau in the ISI had been merged with the South Asia bureau which was significant. The Afghan policy was not being run by the ISI, as in the past, but by the Foreign Office and General Musharraf. He did not think Pakhtunistan was an issue any longer or would be one in the future.
Pakistan unwilling to be used by US against Iran
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: Pakistan is unwilling to become involved in the American containment of Iran, according to Pakistani academic Dr Riffat Hussain.
Speaking at the Middle East Institute on Tuesday, Hussain, a professor at the Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, said President Pervez Musharraf’s remark about Pakistan remaining neutral in the event of a US invasion of Iran had been widely reported and criticised in Iran. He said there were differences between the two countries on several issues. They supported different sides in Afghanistan and Pakistan felt aggrieved by Iranian disclosures about receiving nuclear centrifuges from the Dr AQ Khan network. Pakistan felt that Iran should have informed it of these supplies. Iran, on its part, felt that by dispatching centrifuges to the IAEA for inspection, Pakistan may have contributed to the tightening of the punitive noose around its neck.
Pakistan, he said, felt much unease about Iranian-Indian relations, while Iran views the development of the Gwadar port with apprehension as it would undermine the importance and economic potential of its Chah Bahar port. The US was opposed to the proposed gasline to India as it did not want Iran to break out of its isolation. If Pakistan went along with US wishes, it would be another negative input into relations between Pakistan and Iran. He said the US had military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq and in case it decided to move against Iran, it would not need Pakistan’s help, a test Pakistan would be relieved to be spared.
In answer to a question, Dr Hussain said a nuclear Iran would be a “nightmare” for Pakistan because in case Pak-Iran relations took an adverse turn in the future, Iran could well join hands with India to pressure Pakistan. As for Iran, it felt threatened by the United States and were it to acquire nuclear weapons, it would feel safe, the assumption being that a country with nuclear weapons was not attacked. North Korea was not attacked by the US because it had nuclear weapons. He said the more pressure Washington put on Iran, the closer will it bring Tehran to the acquisition of nuclear capability.
Turning to Afghanistan, Dr Hussain said when the Taliban were in power, on no critical issues were they willing to listen to Pakistan. Pakistan never controlled the Taliban, as some believed. He said the rise of “narco economy” in Afghanistan is a threat to Pakistan because of its spillover effect. Today 87 percent of the world’s opium is being produced by Afghanistan. Warlordism is also rampant for which the US has to accept some responsibility. He said a stable Afghanistan is in Pakistan’s interest. He also felt that the Durand Line issue should be settled. The proposed gasline, if it becomes a reality, would benefit both Afghanistan and Pakistan. He found the presence of Hamid Karzai at the March 23 Pakistan Day parade in Islamabad as a sign of improving relations. He stressed that the destinies of the two countries were linked. He was of the view that the concept of “strategic depth” had now been given up by Pakistan. He said the Afghanistan bureau in the ISI had been merged with the South Asia bureau which was significant. The Afghan policy was not being run by the ISI, as in the past, but by the Foreign Office and General Musharraf. He did not think Pakhtunistan was an issue any longer or would be one in the future.
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Education and unemployment
Dawn, April 13, 2005
Education and unemployment
By Zubeida Mustafa
According to the Labour Force Survey for 2003-04 nearly 3.48 million people are without a job in Pakistan. This is said to be over eight per cent. While this is bad enough, a more serious cause of concern is that of those unemployed, 59.2 per cent are educated - and their ratio has been growing. In 2001-02 the educated comprised 55.1 per cent of the jobless.
This report reflects adversely on the economic planning of the government and its education policy. Most importantly such a high rate of unemployment has grave implications for social stability.
If those without a job are educated, the frustration is even greater. Besides, it robs education of the incentive it should provide to the people generally: they can no longer be assured of a good job if they learn the literacy and numeracy skills.
The message that goes out is that if you don't opt for education you have better chances of finding a job. As for the educated youth who fail to get employment it impresses on them the futility of education.
It may not be easy to confirm but the impression is that among those committing suicide out of desperation caused by joblessness, most had acquired a degree of education.
How does one interpret these figures? The fact is that our economy and educational planning are not linked together. Each operates in isolation. This is strange because the idea of educating people is to train them for some skills so that they are absorbed in the national economy. Conversely, the failure to produce appropriately trained people leaves various sectors under-staffed or staffed with people without the right training.
It is not just lack of coordination between education and the industrial/service sectors. It is also the poor standards of education being imparted to the young students that leaves them unfit to be entrusted with any responsible job even in the field in which they have been trained.
Then, there are the unemployed who are highly trained but cannot find a job because all of them flocked to the institutions teaching a particular discipline that was the craze at the time thus creating a glut.
Remember how there was an over-abundance of physicians and engineers several decades ago when the number of seats in the medical and engineering colleges were increased manifold while sufficient jobs were not created for them accordingly?If a solution has to be found to the problem of the educated unemployed it is necessary that a job bank/directory be created by the government.
The idea would be to monitor the employment market. By asking the employers to send in data regarding the job positions they have and expect to produce, a description of the qualifications needed, and assessing its own needs, the government would be able to determine the job market trends.
By issuing advisories to educational institutions the government would be able to give guidelines about which subjects are in greater demand. Moreover, some intelligent career counselling may also guide the students in respect of job openings which would be available by the time they graduate. It is also important that a close link be created between industry and education.
The industrial/professional associations should be associated with the educational institutions especially in drawing up the syllabi and also giving some practical training to the students. At one time it was mandatory for industrial organizations to provide internships for a specified number of people every year.
There is so much scope for providing job-targeted education to students. In the early nineties, when business administration was attracting students in large numbers, there was no provision for specific training for would-be-bankers. Realizing the problems the banks faced, they cooperated with the Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, to start courses in banking.
Other professional bodies have regrettably not been so proactive. Today, publishers are facing an acute problem in getting efficient and trained editors to help them produce quality books.
They complain about this scarcity but the Pakistan Publishers and Booksellers Association has never considered setting up a training institute or starting a course in publishing, book selling and editing which would ultimately help the book publishing sector.
This is the age of life-long education. Gone are the days when a person who had completed his college/university education could sit back and look at his career as the road he had to travel on for the rest of his life until his retirement.
With new technology rapidly replacing the old and new concepts coming up, a worker has to continuously keep abreast with his knowledge and training. That is why training workshops, conferences to update knowledge and seminars to reorient peoples skills are becoming so essential.
In spite of such continuous education, workers are inevitably retrenched when rationalization and streamlining of industries take place. When this happens on a large scale and jobs are lost in big numbers, the redundant labour can be retrained for other related sectors where new openings have been created.
The government and industry should focus on retraining in the labour market when such a situation arises. Sweden, Germany and Britain, among others, have adopted training programmes to inject mobility in the labour market.
One problem with our education system, especially the higher education sector, is that it is churning out graduates in science, humanities and commerce who are not trained for any specific job.
For instance, many of the graduates who end up teaching in schools have no idea of what pedagogy is. We produce more doctors than nurses although the ratio should be the other way around. The country has more than 108,000 registered doctors and only 46,000 registered nurses.
The professional colleges have a much higher intake of students (163,000) than the vocational and trade schools (94,000). As a result, a strange anomaly exists in the employment sector. You will get a very highly qualified architect to build a house but it would be difficult to find a good plumber to fix a leaking tap.
It is the same elitist psyche which characterizes our outlook on life. With little dignity being attached to labour, every one wants to go into a white collar job, even if one is not really qualified for it and remains unemployed for months.
It is a pity that we have still not understood the social and psychological dimension of unemployment. The economic aspect has really devastating consequences because a person without any means of livelihood cannot support his family.
Unemployment leads to poverty and hardship. But there is also the social exclusion, the lowering of self-esteem and dejection that are the lot of the unemployed. It can lead to depression and eventually the suicide as has happened in many cases.
Education and unemployment
By Zubeida Mustafa
According to the Labour Force Survey for 2003-04 nearly 3.48 million people are without a job in Pakistan. This is said to be over eight per cent. While this is bad enough, a more serious cause of concern is that of those unemployed, 59.2 per cent are educated - and their ratio has been growing. In 2001-02 the educated comprised 55.1 per cent of the jobless.
This report reflects adversely on the economic planning of the government and its education policy. Most importantly such a high rate of unemployment has grave implications for social stability.
If those without a job are educated, the frustration is even greater. Besides, it robs education of the incentive it should provide to the people generally: they can no longer be assured of a good job if they learn the literacy and numeracy skills.
The message that goes out is that if you don't opt for education you have better chances of finding a job. As for the educated youth who fail to get employment it impresses on them the futility of education.
It may not be easy to confirm but the impression is that among those committing suicide out of desperation caused by joblessness, most had acquired a degree of education.
How does one interpret these figures? The fact is that our economy and educational planning are not linked together. Each operates in isolation. This is strange because the idea of educating people is to train them for some skills so that they are absorbed in the national economy. Conversely, the failure to produce appropriately trained people leaves various sectors under-staffed or staffed with people without the right training.
It is not just lack of coordination between education and the industrial/service sectors. It is also the poor standards of education being imparted to the young students that leaves them unfit to be entrusted with any responsible job even in the field in which they have been trained.
Then, there are the unemployed who are highly trained but cannot find a job because all of them flocked to the institutions teaching a particular discipline that was the craze at the time thus creating a glut.
Remember how there was an over-abundance of physicians and engineers several decades ago when the number of seats in the medical and engineering colleges were increased manifold while sufficient jobs were not created for them accordingly?If a solution has to be found to the problem of the educated unemployed it is necessary that a job bank/directory be created by the government.
The idea would be to monitor the employment market. By asking the employers to send in data regarding the job positions they have and expect to produce, a description of the qualifications needed, and assessing its own needs, the government would be able to determine the job market trends.
By issuing advisories to educational institutions the government would be able to give guidelines about which subjects are in greater demand. Moreover, some intelligent career counselling may also guide the students in respect of job openings which would be available by the time they graduate. It is also important that a close link be created between industry and education.
The industrial/professional associations should be associated with the educational institutions especially in drawing up the syllabi and also giving some practical training to the students. At one time it was mandatory for industrial organizations to provide internships for a specified number of people every year.
There is so much scope for providing job-targeted education to students. In the early nineties, when business administration was attracting students in large numbers, there was no provision for specific training for would-be-bankers. Realizing the problems the banks faced, they cooperated with the Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, to start courses in banking.
Other professional bodies have regrettably not been so proactive. Today, publishers are facing an acute problem in getting efficient and trained editors to help them produce quality books.
They complain about this scarcity but the Pakistan Publishers and Booksellers Association has never considered setting up a training institute or starting a course in publishing, book selling and editing which would ultimately help the book publishing sector.
This is the age of life-long education. Gone are the days when a person who had completed his college/university education could sit back and look at his career as the road he had to travel on for the rest of his life until his retirement.
With new technology rapidly replacing the old and new concepts coming up, a worker has to continuously keep abreast with his knowledge and training. That is why training workshops, conferences to update knowledge and seminars to reorient peoples skills are becoming so essential.
In spite of such continuous education, workers are inevitably retrenched when rationalization and streamlining of industries take place. When this happens on a large scale and jobs are lost in big numbers, the redundant labour can be retrained for other related sectors where new openings have been created.
The government and industry should focus on retraining in the labour market when such a situation arises. Sweden, Germany and Britain, among others, have adopted training programmes to inject mobility in the labour market.
One problem with our education system, especially the higher education sector, is that it is churning out graduates in science, humanities and commerce who are not trained for any specific job.
For instance, many of the graduates who end up teaching in schools have no idea of what pedagogy is. We produce more doctors than nurses although the ratio should be the other way around. The country has more than 108,000 registered doctors and only 46,000 registered nurses.
The professional colleges have a much higher intake of students (163,000) than the vocational and trade schools (94,000). As a result, a strange anomaly exists in the employment sector. You will get a very highly qualified architect to build a house but it would be difficult to find a good plumber to fix a leaking tap.
It is the same elitist psyche which characterizes our outlook on life. With little dignity being attached to labour, every one wants to go into a white collar job, even if one is not really qualified for it and remains unemployed for months.
It is a pity that we have still not understood the social and psychological dimension of unemployment. The economic aspect has really devastating consequences because a person without any means of livelihood cannot support his family.
Unemployment leads to poverty and hardship. But there is also the social exclusion, the lowering of self-esteem and dejection that are the lot of the unemployed. It can lead to depression and eventually the suicide as has happened in many cases.
Gas pipeline talks
Dawn, April 13, 2005
Gas pipeline talks begin
ISLAMABAD, April 12: Pakistani, Turkmen and Afghan ministers met on Tuesday to discuss a multi-billion gas pipeline, the size of Turkmen gas reserves and security in volatile Afghanistan.
The long-delayed project envisages a $3.3 billion 1,600-km pipeline running through Afghanistan to Pakistan, providing Kabul with transit revenue and Pakistan with much needed energy.
Among reasons for the delay have been worry about security in Afghanistan and questions over the size of the reserves in Turkmenistan's Daulatabad gas field. Pakistan's Petroleum Minister Amanullah Khan Jadoon said progress was being made in this direction.
"The Afghan minister has given quite some surety and it appears to us, too, that there is a lot of improvement in the situation over there," Jadoon told reporters after the ministers met in Islamabad.
"They are clearing the land mines and, as the minister said, it would improve considerably," he said. According to Turkmen estimates Daulatabad has reserves of 1.7 trillion cubic metres, making it the world's fourth largest gas field, but Pakistan wants to be sure about that.
Mr Jadoon said the Turkmen delegation presented some figures but had asked for another month to give a complete picture and Pakistani experts would visit the site to conduct some technical and geological checks.
He said Pakistan was under tremendous pressure to speed up pipeline projects to meet growing energy needs. "It is our compulsion," he said, adding that the country had to work simultaneously on pipeline projects from Iran and Qatar.
He said the route of the Turkmen pipeline had also been discussed, with the southern Afghan province of Kandahar seen as the most suitable route for geographical reasons, despite security problems.
"It is more feasible, the one from Kandahar, because there are no mountains there, " he said. Afghan officials want India to join the project but Indian officials have shown only cautious interest. -Reuters
Gas pipeline talks begin
ISLAMABAD, April 12: Pakistani, Turkmen and Afghan ministers met on Tuesday to discuss a multi-billion gas pipeline, the size of Turkmen gas reserves and security in volatile Afghanistan.
The long-delayed project envisages a $3.3 billion 1,600-km pipeline running through Afghanistan to Pakistan, providing Kabul with transit revenue and Pakistan with much needed energy.
Among reasons for the delay have been worry about security in Afghanistan and questions over the size of the reserves in Turkmenistan's Daulatabad gas field. Pakistan's Petroleum Minister Amanullah Khan Jadoon said progress was being made in this direction.
"The Afghan minister has given quite some surety and it appears to us, too, that there is a lot of improvement in the situation over there," Jadoon told reporters after the ministers met in Islamabad.
"They are clearing the land mines and, as the minister said, it would improve considerably," he said. According to Turkmen estimates Daulatabad has reserves of 1.7 trillion cubic metres, making it the world's fourth largest gas field, but Pakistan wants to be sure about that.
Mr Jadoon said the Turkmen delegation presented some figures but had asked for another month to give a complete picture and Pakistani experts would visit the site to conduct some technical and geological checks.
He said Pakistan was under tremendous pressure to speed up pipeline projects to meet growing energy needs. "It is our compulsion," he said, adding that the country had to work simultaneously on pipeline projects from Iran and Qatar.
He said the route of the Turkmen pipeline had also been discussed, with the southern Afghan province of Kandahar seen as the most suitable route for geographical reasons, despite security problems.
"It is more feasible, the one from Kandahar, because there are no mountains there, " he said. Afghan officials want India to join the project but Indian officials have shown only cautious interest. -Reuters
Monday, April 11, 2005
F-16 sale a business decision, says Washington
Daily Times, Lahore
April 12, 2005
F-16 sale a business decision, says Washington
WASHINGTON: The US clarified on Monday that selling F-16 aircraft to Pakistan was a business decision and should not hurt India, which was still on the list for F-16s. Stephen Blake, director of the US State Department’s South Asia bureau, said, “The F-16 sale is purely a business decision. We are open to selling the aircraft to India as well.”
Asked if the aircraft sale might start an arms race between India and Pakistan, Blake said, “Both countries have their security needs. Once they decide on a particular system, they request it. This is not a threat to South Asia.” He did not agree to a possibility of nuclear war still existing between both countries, saying, “Right now, it is not smart to speculate. Right now, we encourage the way things are going (about improving relations between India and Pakistan).” sana
April 12, 2005
F-16 sale a business decision, says Washington
WASHINGTON: The US clarified on Monday that selling F-16 aircraft to Pakistan was a business decision and should not hurt India, which was still on the list for F-16s. Stephen Blake, director of the US State Department’s South Asia bureau, said, “The F-16 sale is purely a business decision. We are open to selling the aircraft to India as well.”
Asked if the aircraft sale might start an arms race between India and Pakistan, Blake said, “Both countries have their security needs. Once they decide on a particular system, they request it. This is not a threat to South Asia.” He did not agree to a possibility of nuclear war still existing between both countries, saying, “Right now, it is not smart to speculate. Right now, we encourage the way things are going (about improving relations between India and Pakistan).” sana
Sunday, April 10, 2005
IAEA chief says Al Qaeda tried to acquire N-weapon
IAEA chief says Al Qaeda tried to acquire N-weapon
OSLO, April 10: The head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog said in an interview that Al Qaeda and other extremist groups had sought to obtain a nuclear weapon, Norwegian television reported on Saturday.
"They were actively looking into acquiring a nuclear weapon and other weapons of mass destruction," Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said in the interview in Vienna with Norway's commercial TV 2 channel.
TV 2 said that ElBaradei's remarks referred to the Al Qaeda network, blamed for the Sept 11, 2001 attacks in the United States. Its website quoted ElBaradei as saying that proof had been found in Afghanistan, where US-led-troops toppled the Taliban government in 2001 after it refused to hand over Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.
"I would be surprised if they did not try to acquire nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. That would be the most horrible scenario because these extremist groups - if they have the weapon, they will use it," ElBaradei said.
He said there was a "race against time" to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and plug gaps in the security of atomic weapons and materials. "The more nuclear weapons that exist, the more threat we are facing. And the more countries that have nuclear weapons, the more danger we are facing," ElBaradei said. "We can't afford one single lapse in the system of security of nuclear material or nuclear weapons," he said. -Reuters
OSLO, April 10: The head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog said in an interview that Al Qaeda and other extremist groups had sought to obtain a nuclear weapon, Norwegian television reported on Saturday.
"They were actively looking into acquiring a nuclear weapon and other weapons of mass destruction," Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said in the interview in Vienna with Norway's commercial TV 2 channel.
TV 2 said that ElBaradei's remarks referred to the Al Qaeda network, blamed for the Sept 11, 2001 attacks in the United States. Its website quoted ElBaradei as saying that proof had been found in Afghanistan, where US-led-troops toppled the Taliban government in 2001 after it refused to hand over Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.
"I would be surprised if they did not try to acquire nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. That would be the most horrible scenario because these extremist groups - if they have the weapon, they will use it," ElBaradei said.
He said there was a "race against time" to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and plug gaps in the security of atomic weapons and materials. "The more nuclear weapons that exist, the more threat we are facing. And the more countries that have nuclear weapons, the more danger we are facing," ElBaradei said. "We can't afford one single lapse in the system of security of nuclear material or nuclear weapons," he said. -Reuters
Pakistan's Bureaucracy and Democracy
Dawn, April 10, 2005
Bureaucracy's role in a democratic system
By Zafar Iqbal
MS Condoleezza Rice has exhorted or possibly admonished General Musharraf to hold free and fair elections in 2007. The only free and fair elections in Pakistan were in 1970 under Yahya Khan - who, incidentally, was no champion of democracy but for some reason decided to go through this process. One does not know why he refrained from managing the results of the elections but it seems that he probably did. Perhaps he was certain that no party would emerge with a majority.
What induced him to change the parity formula to one man one vote, giving a majority to East Pakistan for the foreseeable future, still remains a profound mystery. However, all subsequent elections have been managed by the executive, the worst being the 1977 elections, which were rigged and gave Mr. Bhutto's opponents a chance to mount a major agitation, possibly with support from the CIA. Mr. Bhutto himself acknowledged this by offering the Opposition a certain number of seats. Negotiations, however, broke down.
After General Ziaul Haq took power, his referendum and subsequent elections appear to have been managed by the ISI and MI. Being more circumspect, they have generated less controversy compared to the civil administration under Mr. Bhutto.
If one assumes that we are trying to become a democracy - and it is a wild assumption given our previous track record - the higher civil service should be selected on merit, be apolitical, so that it is impartial in its conduct and is respected and has enough confidence in itself to be committed to the public good. Perfection will never be achieved but there are certain prerequisites, which can make such an outcome more likely. The most important is that the government in power has to decide that it wants free and fair elections which cannot be held without a neutral administrative system. So far, all governments, after 1958, have acted otherwise.
General Jehangir Karamat, in his ill-fated speech at the Navy Staff College in October 1998, recommended a "neutral, competent and secure bureaucracy and administration at the federal and provincial levels." However, no attempt has been made by the present (military) government to do anything about improving the performance of the civil service. Their answer seems to be to infiltrate it with as many military personnel as possible. As the military is the party in power - this is just patronage. How can they be expected to be neutral? They are also not likely to be an improvement on civilians.
In the early years of Pakistan, many of the best and the brightest opted for government service. The exceptions were often the Oxbridge educated and well-connected who preferred service with multinationals, mainly because of the salary differential. Also, because the multinationals probably preferred important connections over the ability to pass exams. There were, of course, exceptions either way. With the passage of time, the salary differential between the public and private sectors increased and young men began to look for careers elsewhere, especially after the IBA at Karachi was set up.
The system was structured in parallel with the arrangements across the border, which means there were two elite groups: the so-called administrative service or civil service personnel and those of the foreign service. The other superior services performed rather limited functions and their pay and prospects were also somewhat lower. there are pros and cons of such an arrangement.
The main argument in favour was that a society prone to sycophancy, nepotism and ethnic considerations, an elite initially selected on merit was likely to perform better than a free-for-all amongst a large number of competing individuals. The downside is that the elite chosen in this manner may not be uniformly the best because people do get left behind in the examinations and selection process who may otherwise be more competent. Besides, if the elite remain a little too exclusive, there is disaffection among other employees, which leads to another set of problems.
In the Bhutto reforms of 1973, the elite nature of the two services was abolished and everyone brought at par. With regard to promotion and prospects, the political government had the right to do more or less what it pleased. Senior civil servants could be retired at will and the jurisdiction of the High Court was removed. In its place an administrative tribunal was created, for all practical purposes, under the control of the Establishment Division.
This arrangement offered complete control over all public servants. Even upright and dignified senior civil servants were reduced overnight to errand boys. This bore its bitter fruit in the elections which, in turn, resulted in extremely unpleasant consequences for Mr. Bhutto.
In view of present attitudes how is General Musharraf going to ensure free and fair elections? Possibly, he will ask the ISI and MI to do this although their experience has been exactly the opposite. The Election Commission, generally headed by an important representative of the Supreme Court, has not covered itself with glory during the last thirty years. How do we get a strong and independent Election Commission?
To add to the complications, the present arrangement of devolution will further muddy the election process as the nazims will do their best to support their political affiliates. To say that the nazims are elected on a non-party basis and, therefore, have no party political affiliations, is a delusion. In today's political dispensation the number of independents have declined and will probably continue to do so.
Something could have been saved from the wreckage if a competent and upright management had been put in place. Unfortunately, the NRB seems to have had a deep dislike for the deputy commissioner; one doesn't know whether it was motivated by ideology or because of some unpleasant personal indignity suffered at the hands of one or more pompous DCs.
Given the process through which people succeeded in the CSS exam, this could easily happen. The successful candidates were usually the bright boys who, after passing out, were more often than not offered teaching jobs i their colleges or universities. They continued to lead a sheltered life. When inducted into the service, they had had no contact with the real world.
The entrants into the CSP felt that they had achieved nirvana. They probably thought they already knew everything and there was nothing left to learn. The greatest achievement in life was to become a DC/DM. This was incidentally not true of the British ICS where a long serving district officer was derisively called a "clodhopping collector" - dull, diligent, dedicated, unimaginative, distant and pompous towards natives, as required by imperial policy.
The Pakistan CSP officer tended to model himself on the same lines forgetting the fact that he was also a native. It was the result of a serious lapse in the training process. We were taught criminal law, civil law, revenue law, the Evidence Act, etc. But there was no discussion of how the framework within which the civil service operated after independence had changed.
We were no longer merely servants of the government but employees of that abstraction known as the state which was sovereign and was supposed to be democratic. I came face to face with this problem when I took over my first subdivision. My predecessor had left a confidential note for me.
Amongst other things it had a section on prominent citizens. They were divided into three categories: (i) unreliable, (ii) to be used with caution and (iii) reliable. I was mystified by this classification. Since one wasn't supposed to have any political affiliation, what were citizens supposed to be used for? However, it didn't take longer me to realize where such thoughts had originated. It was how to deal with the "natives." It was what a British officer would do when passing on the baton of rule to his successor.
I have mentioned the CSP because they and the DMG were the people who came most in contact with the public. Members of other services have rather more limited and specific operations - but in their own way they are not necessarily any better in their attitudes.
However, whatever their shortcomings, the summary elimination of the DC is likely to result in worse governance. Of course, some adjustments would have been necessary in view of the new local government set-up. Given our social conditions, it was belatedly realized that law and order could not be handed over to the nazims. As a result, the police have been given complete independence. Since police brutality is practically an international phenomenon, various toothless committees to look into complaints against the police have been formed to take care of their excesses. The DC being the man on the spot generally had a restraining influence.
Free and fair elections are not possible without a neutral administrative infrastructure. The system can be put on the path of improvement without major changes. It is the intent which will be decisive. The critical issues as General Karamat pointed out, are security, competence and (political) neutrality. These are determined by conditions of service, including financial and non-financial incentives, together with selection procedures for entrance and promotion. They have to be substantially independent of political influence, which the Indians appear to have achieved, but which we obviously do not like.
The writer is director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, US.
Bureaucracy's role in a democratic system
By Zafar Iqbal
MS Condoleezza Rice has exhorted or possibly admonished General Musharraf to hold free and fair elections in 2007. The only free and fair elections in Pakistan were in 1970 under Yahya Khan - who, incidentally, was no champion of democracy but for some reason decided to go through this process. One does not know why he refrained from managing the results of the elections but it seems that he probably did. Perhaps he was certain that no party would emerge with a majority.
What induced him to change the parity formula to one man one vote, giving a majority to East Pakistan for the foreseeable future, still remains a profound mystery. However, all subsequent elections have been managed by the executive, the worst being the 1977 elections, which were rigged and gave Mr. Bhutto's opponents a chance to mount a major agitation, possibly with support from the CIA. Mr. Bhutto himself acknowledged this by offering the Opposition a certain number of seats. Negotiations, however, broke down.
After General Ziaul Haq took power, his referendum and subsequent elections appear to have been managed by the ISI and MI. Being more circumspect, they have generated less controversy compared to the civil administration under Mr. Bhutto.
If one assumes that we are trying to become a democracy - and it is a wild assumption given our previous track record - the higher civil service should be selected on merit, be apolitical, so that it is impartial in its conduct and is respected and has enough confidence in itself to be committed to the public good. Perfection will never be achieved but there are certain prerequisites, which can make such an outcome more likely. The most important is that the government in power has to decide that it wants free and fair elections which cannot be held without a neutral administrative system. So far, all governments, after 1958, have acted otherwise.
General Jehangir Karamat, in his ill-fated speech at the Navy Staff College in October 1998, recommended a "neutral, competent and secure bureaucracy and administration at the federal and provincial levels." However, no attempt has been made by the present (military) government to do anything about improving the performance of the civil service. Their answer seems to be to infiltrate it with as many military personnel as possible. As the military is the party in power - this is just patronage. How can they be expected to be neutral? They are also not likely to be an improvement on civilians.
In the early years of Pakistan, many of the best and the brightest opted for government service. The exceptions were often the Oxbridge educated and well-connected who preferred service with multinationals, mainly because of the salary differential. Also, because the multinationals probably preferred important connections over the ability to pass exams. There were, of course, exceptions either way. With the passage of time, the salary differential between the public and private sectors increased and young men began to look for careers elsewhere, especially after the IBA at Karachi was set up.
The system was structured in parallel with the arrangements across the border, which means there were two elite groups: the so-called administrative service or civil service personnel and those of the foreign service. The other superior services performed rather limited functions and their pay and prospects were also somewhat lower. there are pros and cons of such an arrangement.
The main argument in favour was that a society prone to sycophancy, nepotism and ethnic considerations, an elite initially selected on merit was likely to perform better than a free-for-all amongst a large number of competing individuals. The downside is that the elite chosen in this manner may not be uniformly the best because people do get left behind in the examinations and selection process who may otherwise be more competent. Besides, if the elite remain a little too exclusive, there is disaffection among other employees, which leads to another set of problems.
In the Bhutto reforms of 1973, the elite nature of the two services was abolished and everyone brought at par. With regard to promotion and prospects, the political government had the right to do more or less what it pleased. Senior civil servants could be retired at will and the jurisdiction of the High Court was removed. In its place an administrative tribunal was created, for all practical purposes, under the control of the Establishment Division.
This arrangement offered complete control over all public servants. Even upright and dignified senior civil servants were reduced overnight to errand boys. This bore its bitter fruit in the elections which, in turn, resulted in extremely unpleasant consequences for Mr. Bhutto.
In view of present attitudes how is General Musharraf going to ensure free and fair elections? Possibly, he will ask the ISI and MI to do this although their experience has been exactly the opposite. The Election Commission, generally headed by an important representative of the Supreme Court, has not covered itself with glory during the last thirty years. How do we get a strong and independent Election Commission?
To add to the complications, the present arrangement of devolution will further muddy the election process as the nazims will do their best to support their political affiliates. To say that the nazims are elected on a non-party basis and, therefore, have no party political affiliations, is a delusion. In today's political dispensation the number of independents have declined and will probably continue to do so.
Something could have been saved from the wreckage if a competent and upright management had been put in place. Unfortunately, the NRB seems to have had a deep dislike for the deputy commissioner; one doesn't know whether it was motivated by ideology or because of some unpleasant personal indignity suffered at the hands of one or more pompous DCs.
Given the process through which people succeeded in the CSS exam, this could easily happen. The successful candidates were usually the bright boys who, after passing out, were more often than not offered teaching jobs i their colleges or universities. They continued to lead a sheltered life. When inducted into the service, they had had no contact with the real world.
The entrants into the CSP felt that they had achieved nirvana. They probably thought they already knew everything and there was nothing left to learn. The greatest achievement in life was to become a DC/DM. This was incidentally not true of the British ICS where a long serving district officer was derisively called a "clodhopping collector" - dull, diligent, dedicated, unimaginative, distant and pompous towards natives, as required by imperial policy.
The Pakistan CSP officer tended to model himself on the same lines forgetting the fact that he was also a native. It was the result of a serious lapse in the training process. We were taught criminal law, civil law, revenue law, the Evidence Act, etc. But there was no discussion of how the framework within which the civil service operated after independence had changed.
We were no longer merely servants of the government but employees of that abstraction known as the state which was sovereign and was supposed to be democratic. I came face to face with this problem when I took over my first subdivision. My predecessor had left a confidential note for me.
Amongst other things it had a section on prominent citizens. They were divided into three categories: (i) unreliable, (ii) to be used with caution and (iii) reliable. I was mystified by this classification. Since one wasn't supposed to have any political affiliation, what were citizens supposed to be used for? However, it didn't take longer me to realize where such thoughts had originated. It was how to deal with the "natives." It was what a British officer would do when passing on the baton of rule to his successor.
I have mentioned the CSP because they and the DMG were the people who came most in contact with the public. Members of other services have rather more limited and specific operations - but in their own way they are not necessarily any better in their attitudes.
However, whatever their shortcomings, the summary elimination of the DC is likely to result in worse governance. Of course, some adjustments would have been necessary in view of the new local government set-up. Given our social conditions, it was belatedly realized that law and order could not be handed over to the nazims. As a result, the police have been given complete independence. Since police brutality is practically an international phenomenon, various toothless committees to look into complaints against the police have been formed to take care of their excesses. The DC being the man on the spot generally had a restraining influence.
Free and fair elections are not possible without a neutral administrative infrastructure. The system can be put on the path of improvement without major changes. It is the intent which will be decisive. The critical issues as General Karamat pointed out, are security, competence and (political) neutrality. These are determined by conditions of service, including financial and non-financial incentives, together with selection procedures for entrance and promotion. They have to be substantially independent of political influence, which the Indians appear to have achieved, but which we obviously do not like.
The writer is director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, US.
Saturday, April 09, 2005
US-India Relations
Dawn, April 9, 2005
Rice's remark about India
By Kuldip Nayar
If India's wishes were to come true, it would have the best of equation with America. This is obvious from the mood prevailing in top government quarters in New Delhi. One sentence attributed to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice - America wants to help India become a major world power in the 21st century - has sent hopes soaring.
The observation may sound patronizing, as one BJP leader has said, but not many have lent him ears. In fact, Rice's remark has practically erased the past bitterness against the US.
What will be the contours of the bilateral relationship is on the top of an unending discussion in the military, economic and political circles. Now the civil nuclear technology is taken for granted. But many more goodies are expected.
The importance attached to Washington's next move can well be imagined that New Delhi is paying it a lot of attention even in the midst of the long-awaited visit by Chinese Premier Wen Jaibao to India.
With Beijing it has been an on-going dialogue which New Delhi had begun more than two decades ago. It is now nearing the post; there is very little worry of any failure. What remains is the last lap which will cover the principles to settle the boundary dispute, expand economic ties and reach an arrangement whereby the two giants do not come into each other's way as they did in 1962.
But with America, the real relationship is yet to be built up. The cold war and Washington's distance even after that did not give New Delhi any hope for normality. President Clinton was inclined to initiate the process to draw India nearer, but then it exploded the bomb.
Relations became worse. After the remark by Rice, New Delhi is beginning to believe that America's attitude is changing and it has only to wait for Washington to open up its gates.
This may explain why the proposed supply of the F-16s to Pakistan has not created the furore that it would have done otherwise. The very mention of F-16 would make New Delhi furious in the past 15 years.
Washington had to pigeonhole the purchase although Islamabad had paid out in cash. Even a proposal of sale or transfer of US weapons to Islamabad irritated us. We still believe that such a move fuels arms race in the two countries. But America's offer to make India "a major world power" is too tempting to stoke old objections.
True, New Delhi's spokesman voiced India's protest against the sale of F-16s to Pakistan. But it was more to go on record than to upbraid Washington. Even the Left, the main prop of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government, was not really angry. This might be because when it came to reaping the benefits all - Left, Right or Central - converged to become the same establishment.
Does this attitude indicate a change in India's perception that America tends to tilt towards Pakistan? Or, does it mean the beginning of a new type of understanding between New Delhi and Washington where there is a realization that the two largest democracies in the world are realizing that their interests are common? It is too early to find answers to these questions. But by the time President Bush visits India in January next, New Delhi or, for that matter, the world would have known the reply.
Experts have not forgotten that the induction of the US arms in the region has been invariably followed by hostilities between India and Pakistan. Nor has New Delhi ignored the fact that Islamabad is using the opportunity to obtain as many as 70 F-16s. Yet, what has made India as bland and mute as possible is the dream to become a "major world power" with Washington's help.
There is nothing wrong in it. But the ground realities do not give any indication that America means what Rice said. The US media paid little attention to her observation. Practically, no Congressman or Senator spoke in favour of what she said.
If anything, the remark by Rice was taken as part of rhetoric, not worthy of any specific attention. This will be the inference drawn in any part of the world because a policy statement by the US Secretary of State is followed by a categorical announcement by the White House, if not the State Department.
President Bush did convey to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on phone about the sale of F-16s to Pakistan. But Bush did not say anything on America's help to build India into "a major world power." It was only Rice's observation and that too when she was juxtaposing the supply of F-16s to Pakistan against what America was having in mind regarding India.
New Delhi is reportedly thinking of buying F-16s or the later version and also acquiring the technology to manufacture them. The step is not without risks. Russia, India's main supplier, may lift the ban on selling weapons to Pakistan. Moscow has persistently said 'no' to Islamabad's request for arms in the past.
The visit of the US officials from the Department of Energy does not suggest anything big. Even if this is the beginning, it is at a low level. America will have to go out of the way to release latest technology in different fields and offer a long-term generous credit.
What probably is true is that America is worried over India's growing relations with Iran on the one hand and China on the other. A long-term deal which New Delhi has signed with Tehran for gas, with the possibility of the pipeline through Pakistan, has irritated Washington.
Rice minced no worlds when she met government leaders in New Delhi. America does not like any country, much less India, to foster closer relations with Iran which may well be Washington's next target despite Europe's pressure on Tehran to give up its nuclear programme.
As far as China, India's equation with it may not be to the liking of America. Beijing still remains the most recalcitrant capital that Washington faces in the world. In America's scheme of things, the democratic India is supposed to counter the doctrinaire China.
If the two were to sink their differences, what answer does Washington have to Beijing's defiance? America has seen how China has passed Anti-Secession Act to occupy some day Taiwan which Washington swears to keep independent.
The report that China wants a free-trade area with India on the lines Beijing has contracted with Islamabad cannot be to the liking of Washington. If the markets of India and China are to be limited to the US, it is bound to suffer. Tomorrow's two economic giants are India and China. How can America sit back and watch the developments that are against its interests?
The writer is a leading columnist based in New Delhi.
Rice's remark about India
By Kuldip Nayar
If India's wishes were to come true, it would have the best of equation with America. This is obvious from the mood prevailing in top government quarters in New Delhi. One sentence attributed to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice - America wants to help India become a major world power in the 21st century - has sent hopes soaring.
The observation may sound patronizing, as one BJP leader has said, but not many have lent him ears. In fact, Rice's remark has practically erased the past bitterness against the US.
What will be the contours of the bilateral relationship is on the top of an unending discussion in the military, economic and political circles. Now the civil nuclear technology is taken for granted. But many more goodies are expected.
The importance attached to Washington's next move can well be imagined that New Delhi is paying it a lot of attention even in the midst of the long-awaited visit by Chinese Premier Wen Jaibao to India.
With Beijing it has been an on-going dialogue which New Delhi had begun more than two decades ago. It is now nearing the post; there is very little worry of any failure. What remains is the last lap which will cover the principles to settle the boundary dispute, expand economic ties and reach an arrangement whereby the two giants do not come into each other's way as they did in 1962.
But with America, the real relationship is yet to be built up. The cold war and Washington's distance even after that did not give New Delhi any hope for normality. President Clinton was inclined to initiate the process to draw India nearer, but then it exploded the bomb.
Relations became worse. After the remark by Rice, New Delhi is beginning to believe that America's attitude is changing and it has only to wait for Washington to open up its gates.
This may explain why the proposed supply of the F-16s to Pakistan has not created the furore that it would have done otherwise. The very mention of F-16 would make New Delhi furious in the past 15 years.
Washington had to pigeonhole the purchase although Islamabad had paid out in cash. Even a proposal of sale or transfer of US weapons to Islamabad irritated us. We still believe that such a move fuels arms race in the two countries. But America's offer to make India "a major world power" is too tempting to stoke old objections.
True, New Delhi's spokesman voiced India's protest against the sale of F-16s to Pakistan. But it was more to go on record than to upbraid Washington. Even the Left, the main prop of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government, was not really angry. This might be because when it came to reaping the benefits all - Left, Right or Central - converged to become the same establishment.
Does this attitude indicate a change in India's perception that America tends to tilt towards Pakistan? Or, does it mean the beginning of a new type of understanding between New Delhi and Washington where there is a realization that the two largest democracies in the world are realizing that their interests are common? It is too early to find answers to these questions. But by the time President Bush visits India in January next, New Delhi or, for that matter, the world would have known the reply.
Experts have not forgotten that the induction of the US arms in the region has been invariably followed by hostilities between India and Pakistan. Nor has New Delhi ignored the fact that Islamabad is using the opportunity to obtain as many as 70 F-16s. Yet, what has made India as bland and mute as possible is the dream to become a "major world power" with Washington's help.
There is nothing wrong in it. But the ground realities do not give any indication that America means what Rice said. The US media paid little attention to her observation. Practically, no Congressman or Senator spoke in favour of what she said.
If anything, the remark by Rice was taken as part of rhetoric, not worthy of any specific attention. This will be the inference drawn in any part of the world because a policy statement by the US Secretary of State is followed by a categorical announcement by the White House, if not the State Department.
President Bush did convey to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on phone about the sale of F-16s to Pakistan. But Bush did not say anything on America's help to build India into "a major world power." It was only Rice's observation and that too when she was juxtaposing the supply of F-16s to Pakistan against what America was having in mind regarding India.
New Delhi is reportedly thinking of buying F-16s or the later version and also acquiring the technology to manufacture them. The step is not without risks. Russia, India's main supplier, may lift the ban on selling weapons to Pakistan. Moscow has persistently said 'no' to Islamabad's request for arms in the past.
The visit of the US officials from the Department of Energy does not suggest anything big. Even if this is the beginning, it is at a low level. America will have to go out of the way to release latest technology in different fields and offer a long-term generous credit.
What probably is true is that America is worried over India's growing relations with Iran on the one hand and China on the other. A long-term deal which New Delhi has signed with Tehran for gas, with the possibility of the pipeline through Pakistan, has irritated Washington.
Rice minced no worlds when she met government leaders in New Delhi. America does not like any country, much less India, to foster closer relations with Iran which may well be Washington's next target despite Europe's pressure on Tehran to give up its nuclear programme.
As far as China, India's equation with it may not be to the liking of America. Beijing still remains the most recalcitrant capital that Washington faces in the world. In America's scheme of things, the democratic India is supposed to counter the doctrinaire China.
If the two were to sink their differences, what answer does Washington have to Beijing's defiance? America has seen how China has passed Anti-Secession Act to occupy some day Taiwan which Washington swears to keep independent.
The report that China wants a free-trade area with India on the lines Beijing has contracted with Islamabad cannot be to the liking of Washington. If the markets of India and China are to be limited to the US, it is bound to suffer. Tomorrow's two economic giants are India and China. How can America sit back and watch the developments that are against its interests?
The writer is a leading columnist based in New Delhi.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)