Editoral-Russia to have a free press

RUSSIA is rightly under constant criticism for suppressing free speech. Yet a resolution of its supreme court indicates a strikingly positive trend to develop the legal conditions for journalistic freedom.

Court resolutions routinely explain statutory norms on topical legal issues to the country’s lower courts. Last week the supreme court unanimously adopted a resolution on the mass media. Its novelty is not just in being the first such to directly interpret media law: it is extraordinary, too, in its content — directing all courts to provide free conditions for political journalism. It does so by detailing and interpreting journalistic privileges in gathering and reporting news and by ensuring certain freedoms for online media.

For instance, the court’s interpretation makes media outlets immune from liability for the content of a candidate’s campaign statements, which they are obliged to disseminate by electoral law. Interviews with public officials and leaders of political parties (along with their press officers) are now also protected in the same way.

The resolution discusses at length the media statute and civil code that allow reporting on a person’s private life if “necessary to protect the public interest”. The notion of such necessity has rarely been used in courts and never explained in Russian law. The supreme court challenges this stalemate by holding that the judges should make that fundamental distinction. It points to a difference between reporting facts — even controversial ones — contributing to democratic debate about politicians in the exercise of their official functions, for instance, and reporting details of the private life of an individual with no such role. While in the former case the press exercises its public duty by imparting information on matters of public interest, it does not do so in the latter. In this, the supreme court closely followed the arguments of the European court of human rights.

The supreme court also takes note of a provision in the statute obliging journalists to protect the confidentiality of sources, except when a competing demand comes from a judge in a court case. In that circumstance a court may indeed demand disclosure of a source, but only when all other means of discovery have been exhausted and “there is an overriding public interest in the disclosure of the confidential source”.

The resolution deals with an interpretation of the norms that allow media outlets to be closed down: the Supreme Court states that a court of law should take into account the context, such as the “aim, genre and style of a publication [or] a programme”. In particular the resolution refers to the declaration on the media’s freedom of political debate by the Council of Europe that says: “The humorous and satirical genre ... allows for a wider degree of exaggeration, and even provocation, as long as the public is not misled about facts.”

In the context of numerous cases in which journalists have been thrown out of courtrooms by overzealous judges for “overcrowding” them and “obstructing justice”, it is important indeed that the resolution explains that closed-door court sessions (unless directly stipulated by law) are unconstitutional.

— The Guardian, London

Read More

Editoral-The Chashma deal

PAKISTAN’S nuclear programme is once again under fire. This time the legality of its deal with China for two nuclear reactors ostensibly for civilian purposes is being questioned.

The US has demanded an explanation from Beijing and has asked for details of the accord it concluded with Islamabad three months ago. It wants to be sure that China is not violating the international obligations it undertook when it joined the 46-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). The NSG is a regulatory body to oversee trade in nuclear fuel and technology to ensure that material for civilian energy is not used for manufacturing weapons.

China claims that the 650-megawatt Chashma-3 and Chashma-4 are part of the original deal of 2004 under which Chashma-1 and Chashma-2 were supplied. In other words the new agreement does not violate the NSG’s guidelines, it is said. As an extension of the earlier projects, the new reactors will operate under the watchful eye of the International Atomic Energy Agency as is the case with the existing civilian nuclear reactors that Pakistan has.

Ever since the Bush administration entered into a nuclear deal with India in 2005 and procured a waiver from the NSG, Pakistan has been angling for a similar deal. When Washington refused to oblige, Islamabad turned to its long trusted all-weather ally, China. In April Beijing agreed to lend $207m to Pakistan to pay for two new reactors that would be supplied to Islamabad.

As could be expected the pro-nuclear lobby in the country is ecstatic about the move to enhance the nuclear power generation capacity. The hawks have attacked the US for questioning the latest deal. Here some cautious reflection would be in order. Is the policy to blindly pursue nuclear power justified?

It is important to be clear about the purpose of acquiring more nuclear reactors that are like a double-edged sword which can be used for manufacturing atom bombs or generating electricity. The government insists that no military motives are attached to the Chashma reactors.

Does the government really mean what it says? We do not need any more nuclear weapons. What we have developed after the explosions of May 1998 — 50 bombs perhaps — have not really strengthened us strategically. Today our nuclear status has only made us more vulnerable. On the one hand we are accused of irresponsibly proliferating nuclear technology to other Third World countries. On the other, our allies in the war on terror doubt our ability to prevent our nuclear arms falling into the hands of militants.

Given this international perception of Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities, the move to acquire new reactors — even for the generation of electricity — betrays a lack of understanding of the implications of the nuclear geopolitics of the region.

This is a sensitive area and Pakistan must tread carefully. It is no use taking a step that gives the impression that Pakistan is trying to secretly enter into a nuclear race with India. The fact is that for decades Pakistan denied that its nuclear programme had military goals. But that is exactly how it turned out to be when it sprung a surprise on the world by exploding a series of nuclear devices and announcing its debut in the nuclear club.

Given this record, will our assurances that we are observing the NPT guidelines and working only for civilian power generation carry credibility? When nuclear programmes lack transparency, governments come under suspicion and it is really not worth incurring a new charge of cheating on the nuclear front. We have already had enough on our plate with allegations of supporting the Taliban and sponsoring terrorism and a nuclear black market.

Pakistan is already a proclaimed nuclear state though that has hardly enhanced our security. Given the nature of the security threats we face and the war the army is required to fight against the Taliban, it is inconceivable that a nuclear weapon could be used by the army to achieve its war aims. It would amount to bringing a slow and painful death by radiation to our own people.

If we believe Islamabad’s contention that the Chashma reactors are only for power generation, then we can logically ask if nuclear energy is the only ideal solution to our power crisis. Nuclear power is expensive and the most demanding in terms of technological skills. At present nuclear energy constitutes only two per cent of Pakistan’s electricity generation mix.

Even this small quantum has not been handled as well as it should have been. Take our first reactor in Karachi, Kanupp, that became operational in 1971. It has a designed life of 30 years which ended a decade ago and now Kanupp is operating on an extended life of 15 years which will expire in 2015. It has generally not operated at full capacity and has very often had to be shut down for ‘maintenance’. Chashma-1 began operation in 2000 while C-2 has failed to meet its deadline of becoming operational in 2009. It is now expected to be ready next year.

Is it wise to concentrate on nuclear energy? At present the country’s energy supply comes mainly from hydel and thermal generation — 33 per cent from the first and 65 per cent from the second. Thermal power generation can be enhanced quite easily by installing more thermal plants. Instead of going in for imported fuel, it is important that indigenous supplies of oil and coal both should be developed.

The country has 3,362 million short tons of proven recoverable reserves of coal. Pakistan’s proven oil reserves have been estimated in the CIA World Factbook at 395.6 million barrels in 2009 when production stands at only 60,000 barrel per day. Why not invest in this sector?

It is also difficult to understand why transmission losses of 30 per cent should be tolerated and the problem should not be addressed in earnest. Does it make sense to install new generation capacity while allowing 5,000MW of electricity to be lost in transmission or be stolen by power thieves?

zubeidam2@gmail.com

Read More

Editoral-OTHER VOICES - Middle East Press EU curbs

…RUSSIA has slammed the United States and European Union for bringing in fresh, unilateral sanctions against Iran. President Dmitry Medevdev, whose country had, under intense pressure from the United States, voted for the punitive international sanctions against Iran earlier this month at the United Nations, is upset that the new US-EU sanctions go beyond what had been sanctioned by the world body and target investments in Iran’s crucial oil industry and trade with the Islamic republic. …Russia and China … had decided to go with the US-sponsored sanctions … because they had been assured that the sanctions would persuade Iran to “cooperate” with the IAEA and not hurt Iran’s … economic and commercial interests.

The new US-EU sanctions … dramatically change all that. The new punitive measures not just threaten Iran’s vital oil industry and financial sector but also undermine Russian and Chinese economic interests in Iran and the Middle East. …Since this campaign against Iran was kicked off under President George W Bush, egged on by the Israelis and the neocons at home, the Middle East … has looked to Europe for leadership, reason and balancing the hawkish US policies. … — (June 21)

Rejuvenation

SINCE the … elections for its new chairman, Al Wafd Party … has managed to attract a number of notable new members. Al Wafd … hasn’t come up with a new programme to attract these people.

Instead, they’ve joined Al Wafd because they believe it’s strong enough to compete with the ruling National Democratic Party in the next … elections. What they would like to see is a real rotation of power, something that Egypt has lacked since the emergence of the multi-party system….

These new members hope Al Wafd will … run a strong candidate…. Al Wafd wants society to know that it is ready … to breathe new life into the political process with the help of these new members. ... The fair election of its new chairman shows that it has successfully espoused the notion of rotation of power.

Al Wafd has given its new members a warm welcome, while the new chairman, el-Sayyed el-Badawi, has stressed that Al Wafd’s candidate in the presidential election won’ t necessarily be he. …Things have changed since the days of Al Wafd’s former chairman, Mahmoud Abaza, who refused to let any ‘convert’ to the party run as its candidate … — (June 22)

Read More

Editoral-Poor police performance

IT is generally assumed that the less than satisfactory performance of the police in protecting the lives and property of citizens is caused by the scarcity of human and financial resources. However, the budget books tell an entirely different story so far as the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) police is concerned.

According to 2009 estimates, the total population of Islamabad was 1.21 million. In 2009-10, the total strength of the Islamabad Capital Territory Police was 10,700. This included 238 officers and 10,462 staff. The ratio of one policeman per 113 persons is far better than the one-policeman-per-600 citizens ratio that law-enforcement experts recommend.

Similarly, the dearth of resources does not seem to be a plausible argument if we take into account the exponential raise witnessed in the budget allocated for ICT police. For example, the total budget allocated for the Islamabad police was Rs3.65bn in 2009-10, as compared to Rs0.6bn in 2003-04. This means that, over these years, the budget allocation for the Islamabad police went up by 508 per cent!

For the financial year 2010-11, a hefty amount of Rs4.13bn has been allocated for the ICT police. The question is: whether this increase has really resulted in improved public safety conditions for the residents of Islamabad. This question is not restricted to the ICT police as the police budget has also been raised in the other provinces.

As a nation, we wait for push to come to shove and then start the process of rectifying the wrongs. Such a push came for the inspector-general of police, ICT, last year when he counted his men in the wake of deadly terrorist attacks in the capital and found to his displeasure that over 150 orderlies assigned to the inspectors were tilling the fertile plains of Punjab or driving taxis on the roads of Islamabad. The privilege was withdrawn and the men were called back to active duty — a commendable act for which the IGP should be congratulated.

However, one would respect him more if the disproportionately high number of policemen deployed for the protection of the elite that is unwilling to pay its taxes is recalled to protect the common people. The logic for such action lies in the fact that it is the common man that fills the government coffers through direct taxes. It is because of the common people and not the elite of this country that from 2003-04 to 2009-10, the total increase in staff-related allocations for the Islamabad police was 542 per cent, which amounts to 90 per cent per year on average.

Furthermore, the disproportionate deployment of junior police staff is playing havoc with both the quality of life enjoyed by the policemen as well as the level of protection enjoyed by the citizens. After being robbed in F-10 Markaz last July, when I went to the police station to lodge an FIR, I felt sorry for the inspector on duty despite being the victim myself. I knew there and then that I had a lost case. How could you expect your case to be solved by a man on duty for the last 12 hours and dozing on his makeshift bed?

It is about time that the police bigwigs start treating their junior staff as human beings, give them eight-hourly shifts and get the best out of them by giving them breathing space. As a starting point, the IGP needs to know how official letters from one police station to the other are delivered. He would come to know that for this very basic and important operation, the assigned constables either take lifts from the public or drive their own taxis as travel expenses are not reimbursed.

We have brave men working for our protection and their services can be better utilised by reforming the system. The recent salary increase is implemented through an increase in allowance which might not benefit police employees in terms of annual increments or post-retirement benefits. Their pay structure needs to be improved. As things stand, the top-down approach is adopted while making the budget for the police. As a result, there are either no allocations for basic functions like communication and travel for junior police staff or else the process is so cumbersome that they find it easier to get things done by extorting money from the citizens.

That is why it is important that the police budget be prepared in a way that has benefits for the lowest levels, while ensuring the input of all ranks. This process will ensure that senior officers in the concerned ministries at least know what the staff at the lowest level needs and demands, and the extent of the gap between needs and the availability of funds. Furthermore, in each police station, there should be appointment of accounts staff to manage accounts locally. After all, if the accounts can be managed at the school level, why can they not be managed at the police station level?

Therefore, Station Head Officers (SHOs) should be given drawing and disbursing powers in the interest of the delegation of authority and efficiency. Only then would junior police staff be given equal access to resources allocated for travel and communications. Lastly, effective protection of life and property of citizens is only possible if the police stay one step ahead of criminal elements. This is only possible if adequate funds are allocated to computerise the police department and organise it on modern lines, so that it could use modern techniques to protect the people and investigate crimes.

The writer works for the Centre for peace and Development Initiatives

zahid@cpdi-pakistan.org

Read More

Editoral-Descartes letter found

THE name Guglielmo Libri will mean little to anyone outside the inner circles of academia. But a mere mention of the 19th-century Tuscan noble and polymath to European scholars still has the power to provoke hand-wringing and despair.

Count Guglielmo Libri Carucci dalla Sommaja was more than a respected scientist and a decorated professor of mathematics. He was also — and more notoriously — a book thief, guilty of intellectual larceny on an international scale.

In the mid-1800s, Libri pilfered tens of thousands of precious manuscripts, tomes and documents from Italian and French libraries, including 72 letters written by the great French philosopher and mathematician René Descartes.

Now, in an emotional ceremony, one of the letters has been handed back to France after collecting dust in a library at a small American college since 1902.

The letter, described as “a wonderful discovery for science”, is dated May 27, 1641 and concerns the publication of Descartes’s treatise, Meditations on First Philosophy — subtitled In Which the Existence of God and the Immortality of the Soul Are Demonstrated — that year. It was written to Father Marin Mersenne, who was overseeing the book’s publication. Academics had known of the letter’s existence for more than 300 years but not its contents as nobody, apart from a Haverford College undergraduate, had examined it. As scholars pore over the contents, its discovery has once more put the infamous Libri under the spotlight.

Born Jan 1, 1803 in Florence, he was a precocious academic who, at the age of 20, was appointed professor of mathematical physics at Pisa, and had a fascination with ancient books and manuscripts.

Threatened with arrest for his political activities, he fled to France, where he was elected to the French Academy of Sciences and awarded the Legion d’Honneur. His love and knowledge of books were recognised when he was appointed inspector of libraries, tasked with cataloguing valuable works. Instead of documenting them, however, he began stealing them.

Tipped off about his imminent arrest, Libri fled once more — to England, bringing with him around 30,000 books including works by Galileo and Copernicus. He returned to Italy to die in 1868. Learning of his death, the French government requested the return of some of the manuscripts and offered to buy back those that had been sold. Some were returned, but tens of thousands of other precious stolen works simply disappeared.

— The Guardian, London

Read More

Editoral-A law unto themselves

It is unfortunate that a community that won public admiration during the 2007 lawyers’ movement for its efforts to restore the deposed judiciary should now be drawing criticism because of the irresponsible behaviour of some of its members. From the 2008 beating up of a former federal law minister in Lahore to subsequent incidents of thrashing policemen in Lahore and Islamabad, the behaviour of a number of lawyers has gone far beyond what is socially acceptable. Their actions have been tantamount to a wilful defiance of the law and violation of human rights.

In the latest incident which occurred on the premises of the Lahore High Court, a group of lawyers, including a senior member of the Lahore Bar Association, beat up a policeman who was acting in response to a court decision to reject a suspected murderer’s bail application. By beating up the policeman, not only were the lawyers obstructing the law-enforcement force from performing its function, they were also disobeying the court’s decision by helping the accused to escape.

In another recent incident in Islamabad, lawyers vented their anger on senior policemen by beating them and ransacking their offices after the authorities demolished the chambers of some members of the Islamabad Bar Association as they were built on encroached land. It is ironic that the role of lawyers as defenders of the fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution should now be in serious doubt because the legal fraternity appears to have a growing predilection for unruly behaviour. The lawyers’ movement may have given the judiciary new strength. But the success of the legal community should not lead to arrogance of the sort we are witnessing today. Senior members should actively rein in their errant brethren before they cause greater harm to their own image and to that of their profession.

Read More

Editoral-Terrorist watch list

That the US State Department has still not designated the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan as a ‘foreign terrorist organisation’ may seem astonishing. After all, whatever the legal and procedural steps involved, it seems inconceivable that any legitimate process for designating groups as terrorist organisations would not include the TTP on such a list. If it can be assumed that the Obama administration is dragging its feet on the issue — several senators wrote to Secretary Hillary Clinton last month requesting that the TTP be included on the State Department’s terrorist watch list — the question is, why? Some context here may help.

Despite the non-designation, the TTP remains the only Pakistan-based group that the US is militarily targeting, through drone strikes. Baitullah Mehsud was famously taken out by a missile fired from a drone and his successor, Hakeemullah Mehsud, is also believed to have been targeted. According to data compiled by the Long War Journal, nearly 30 drone strikes have targeted the sub-groups led by Baitullah, Hakeemullah and Faqir Mohammad. Moreover, according to analysts familiar with the issue, such action has been possible because the TTP is regarded by the US as a sub-group of the Taliban proper, known colloquially as the ‘Afghan Taliban’. Such designation means that the TTP is already exposed to the full array of legal measures that the US puts in place against foreign terrorist organisations.

Notwithstanding that explanation, there is still ambiguity on the American side. US State Department spokesperson P.J. Crowley gave what amounts to a non-answer when asked in a press briefing about the lack of the terrorist designation for the TTP specifically: “We are considering the question of designating the TTP and are following the procedures established in law … And we would expect to complete this process relatively soon and we would not see a legislative remedy here as being necessary.” Perhaps the US does not want to give the TTP a propaganda tool by giving it a separate identity or perhaps it may have complications for the drone strikes programme. Either way, the US government needs to clarify its position, otherwise, the conspiracy brigade here may have fresh ammunition.

Read More

Editoral-McChrystal’s blunder

It is inconceivable in Pakistan that a top general would be publicly reprimanded, and perhaps even fired, over comments made to the media. But things are done differently in the US where the military brass is answerable not only to the president but also Congress and the American people. What prompted Gen Stanley McChrystal, chief of the international forces in Afghanistan, to talk the way he did to the popular magazine Rolling Stone is difficult to say. Perhaps he is getting increasingly frustrated prosecuting a war with no definite end in sight. Consider also that June has been one of the deadliest months for Nato troops in Afghanistan with some 70 casualties so far. Among the dead, more than 40 were Americans.

Be that as it may, Gen McChrystal chose the wrong forum and a wholly inappropriate tone to criticise the civilian leadership in Washington. The response was swift and the message clear: Barack Obama said the general exercised “poor judgment” while the presidential press secretary maintained that “The magnitude and graveness of the mistake here are profound.” Gen McChrystal was reminded in no uncertain terms that it is elected officials, not generals, who have the final say in policymaking. Chastened and summoned back to Washington, he has since apologised to everyone he offended. Try as you might it is impossible to imagine a similar scenario unfolding in Pakistan. But then that is the difference between old democracies and developing countries where the military has called the shots almost from day one.

The general’s remarks raise some worrying concerns though. Are the field commanders and the administration in Washington on the same page vis-à-vis the fight against the Afghan Taliban? If they are not, can Nato forces ever be successful in quelling the insurgency? It is no secret that some US commanders are opposed to the idea of a politically imposed deadline for pulling out troops from Afghanistan. To placate an increasingly war-weary nation and dispel the impression that the fight is open-ended, the Obama administration insists that US soldiers in Afghanistan will start coming home in July 2011.

So rigid a timetable has apparently not gone down well with some top military personnel who are active in the battle arena and may possibly be more in touch with ground realities. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has meanwhile thrown his weight behind Gen McChrystal and feels that his removal could disrupt the military campaign against the Taliban. That remains to be seen but it is clear that the Afghan war is becoming more difficult by the day and blunders at this stage will not help.

Read More

Editoral-Afghan war’s tipping point

THE contours of a confused end to the war in Afghanistan can be discerned now. After the failure of the operation in Marja, Helmand, the much-hyped operation in Kandahar may not prove more than a military exercise undertaken for the benefit of US voters to show that something far-reaching is being accomplished, the reality, of course, being very different.

President Hamid Karzai has lost faith in his western supporters and has accused the West of instigating the attack on the recent loya jirga that he had summoned in Kabul to reach the Taliban. He also accused two important officials of his government for “being agents of the US and Nato”. Both Amrullah Saleh, the director of the Afghan Intelligence Service and the interior minister, Hanif Atmar, resigned from their jobs recently.

If there was ever any doubt about Karzai’s intentions, these actions clearly show that he has decided to worry about his future rather than fight the Taliban at the behest of his allies. He is a most astute man. He has realised the futility of investing more goodwill in an enterprise that is failing. It is thus unlikely that Karzai will permit the Afghan National Army or the Afghan police to operate jointly with US or Nato forces except in unimportant operations.

As a matter of fact, Karzai would have already opened a channel with the Taliban by now to ensure that there is no mishap before he has succeeded in reaching a settlement with them. Will he succeed? Lessons from Afghan history and the nature of the present Afghan war indicate that he will face great difficulty in his enterprise. Under these circumstances one can sympathise with Gen Stanley McChrystal and other commanders because their projections and commitments made to the US Senate are going up in smoke. The US is severely handicapped and cannot do much without support from the Afghan national forces.

What are the implications of this change for Pakistan? Evidently it has put pressure on Pakistan to begin operations in North Waziristan. Secondly, Karzai’s reliance on Pakistan has increased because he needs help for finding a solution in Afghanistan.

This also temporarily improves Pakistan’s strategic position. If Karzai wants Pakistani assistance he has to distance himself from the Indians. As a matter of fact the resignation of Saleh suits the ISI very well as it considered him to be pro-Indian and one of India’s supporters in the ongoing conflict in Fata and parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan.

Moreover, it is clear that Mr Karzai needs political capital to influence the hostile forces in Afghanistan; with US power compromised, his only insurance from now till 2011 when US forces are likely to be reduced will be Pakistan.

This new scenario creates an opportunity for Pakistan. For one there is going to be no North Waziristan operation as there is no longer any point in confronting the Haqqani network when conditions in Kandahar and southern Afghanistan are calm.

In Pakistan the military will have more freedom to operate against our homegrown insurgency. However, this will be a wild goose chase since we have not instituted reforms to benefit from such operations once the terrorists have been removed.

We have been woefully myopic about our strategy. Even after eight years of hard fighting we are none the wiser in our approach. Our governance remains terrible. Although we blame the terrorists for our misfortune yet we overlook the destruction caused to our people by collateral death and destruction of property. As our political and bureaucratic elite retire behind bomb-proof walls the field has been left open to criminals and the illegal activities of police including staged executions that are increasing daily.

Does it really matter to a poor, impoverished and disempowered Pakistani whether he loses his life to a terrorist strike or to state terrorism? Not really. The result is rising hate and prayers for punishment upon those who fail to protect the poor and weak.

A recent report by the Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation finds that 48 per cent of Pakistanis are suffering from food insecurity. According to another report recently published there has been a 10 per cent decline in wheat consumption as compared to a year ago. It means that the personal income of a substantial number of Pakistanis is declining since wheat is easily available in the market. This is a harrowing snapshot and should jerk our leaders into action.

The situation is worse in Fata and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa because of the high poverty levels. Obviously, these outcomes are not the result of terrorists but our own inability to govern effectively. This analysis poses questions. Who in the eyes of the public is a greater threat to their lives — the terrorist or the state?

In order to win the initiative, urgent reforms are needed. In many ways we continue to be entangled in the mantra of the post-colonial model of development that seeks to transform societies into modern states by channelling investments into education, health and other basic needs.

In a state like ours, that has lost the trust of its citizenry, the priority must shift for at least the next two years towards social-protection governance and strategic communication. Although new opportunities are available because of Karzai’s manouevre, we will only benefit if we are able to capitalise on it quickly.

The writer is a former chief secretary of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

azizkhalid@gmail.com

Read More

Editoral-Why the French crashed

ITHOUT wishing to sound too much like Rex Harrison, let me say this: why can’t the English be more like the French?

There they hold bosses hostage until they accede to revolutionary demands, namely: 1) recognition that working on Friday afternoons or Monday mornings is an insult to everything the soixante-huitards fought for; and 2) the office must be airlifted next door to the boulangerie where they bake really good pain aux amandes.

These life-affirming, economy-destroying attitudes also explain why the French football team has crashed in South Africa. If there is anything more likely to fill English fans with joie de jolly old vivre than elegant Frenchmen immolating themselves on a bonfire they created, we don’t care to hear about it. Certainly not when the British government’s axe is on our throat and what remains of English masculinity depends on a football match between England and a team from a tiny country most couldn’t pick out on a map.

How much we envy the French and their grand gestes. How much England yearns to do what the French did in 1998, to win the World Cup with a mixed-race team that seemed to symbolise a post-colonial rainbow nation at ease with its manifold differences (nearly 180 degrees from the truth about modern France, but let’s not spoil the narrative). How much we’d like to have the cavalier attitude towards victory France had in 2006, when their greatest footballer sent his team crashing out of a World Cup final by nutting an opponent who’d insulted his sister.

There is more to the French disaster than a tradition of revolutionary resistance. There is what French philosopher Alain Badiou calls “the sacrificial temptations of nothingness”.

— The Guardian, London

Read More

Conference by Sc of Pak

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) will hold an international jurists’ conference in the federal capital in the third week of September.

Addressing a press conference here on Wednesday, the association’s acting president Amanullah Kanrani said the chief justices of several countries, including the United States, and leading figures of the international legal community would participate in the conference.—Correspondent

Read More

Gen McChrystal faces sack for unguarded remarks

The White House indicated on Tuesday that the top US commander in Afghanistan might lose his job for making derogatory remarks about President Barack Obama and his team.

“The magnitude and graveness of the mistake here are profound,” said President Obama’s press secretary Robert Gibbs who repeatedly declined to assure the White House press corps if Gen Stanley McChrystal’s job was safe.

“All options are on the table,” said Mr Gibbs when asked if firing the top US and Nato commander in Afghanistan was also an option.

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said Gen McChrystal had “made a significant mistake and exercised poor judgment” but he offered no clue as to whether the commander would stay in his job.

“Gen McChrystal has apologised to me and is similarly reaching out to others named in this article to apologise to them as well,” Mr Gates said in a statement.

A spokesman for US Military Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen told journalists the admiral had expressed his “deep disappointment” about the comments. Admiral Mullen spoke to Gen McChrystal late on Monday.

A spokesman for Nato Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said the general had Mr Rasmussen’s full support. The Nato secretary-general described a Rolling Stone article which included those derogatory remarks as “rather unfortunate”, but stressed it was just an article.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai expressed similar sentiments, saying that he would like to continue to work with Gen McChrystal and that he was generally supportive of the general as the operations in Kandahar and elsewhere went forward.

The White House press secretary, when asked to comment on President Karzai’s statement, said: “It is important that President Karzai have confidence in the entire team. And I think many people in that team enjoy good relationships with President Karzai.”

Earlier on Tuesday, President Obama summoned his top general to Washington to explain the remarks attributed to him and his team.

The White House also confirmed that Gen McChrystal’s top civilian press aide Duncan Boothby had resigned over the scandal.

Gen McChrystal and his aides mocked Obama officials in a profile in the popular US magazine, which is to hit newsstands on Friday.

The aides told Rolling Stone that Gen McChrystal was “disappointed” at his “10-minute photo op” with President Obama last year. He commented that he found last fall “painful” because he was “trying to sell an unsellable position”.

The general himself told Rolling Stone he felt “betrayed” by Karl Eikenberry, the US ambassador to Afghanistan, who sent an internal memo to Washington expressing doubts about Gen McChrystal’s strategy to add more troops to fight the Taliban insurgency.

Gen McChrystal accused Ambassador Eikenberry of “covering his flank for the history books” in criticising President Karzai.

Mr Eikenberry had described the Afghan president as an unreliable partner in the US efforts to defeat the Taliban insurgents.

Aides variously called national security adviser Gen Jim Jones a “clown” who is “stuck in 1985”.

Ambassador Richard Holbrooke is called a “wounded animal” who is “hearing rumours he’s going to get fired, so that makes him dangerous”. In comments on Vice President Joe Biden, an aide said: “Biden? Did you say ‘bite me’?”

According to an aide; the general joked, “Are you asking about Vice President Biden? Who’s that?” when preparing to answer a question about the vice president.

Mr Biden and Gen McChrystal have serious differences over Afghanistan and the vice president favours a far more limited approach in Afghanistan than the one the US military commander advocated.

The summons to Washington came hours after Gen McChrystal issued a statement in Kabul extending his “sincerest apology” for the profile, which he called “a mistake reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened”. Gen has called nearly every figure mentioned in the article to apologise personally.

The reaction to the article was immediate. Gen McChrystal received unhappy phone calls from the White House, the Secretary of Defence, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

He is expected to arrive in Washington on Wednesday to explain his comments in person at a monthly White House meeting on Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“Right now he’s on a plane coming back here to have that face-to-face meeting,” the White House press secretary said.

Mr Gibbs said there would be two meetings, one in the White House situation room with President Obama and the members of his Afghan team and the two would also have a one-to-one meeting.

Asked at the White House briefing if President Obama was angry, Mr Gibbs said: “I gave him the article last night. And he was angry.” “How so?” asked the journalist. “Angry. You would know it if you saw it,” said Mr Gibbs.

“Would the president accept Gen McChrystal’s resignation?” he was asked.

“I think he looks forward to the talk tomorrow,” said Mr Gibbs. “The purpose for calling him here is to see what in the world he was thinking.”

Mr Gibbs also said that the parents of soldiers serving in Afghanistan needed to be sure that the US command structure in that country was capable and mature enough to lead.

“Did I hear you correctly? Are you’re questioning whether Gen McChrystal is capable and mature enough for this job?” asked a journalist.

“You had my quote right,” said Mr Gibbs.

Senator John Kerry, chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, however, urged both sides to show restraint.

“I respect General McChrystal as a soldier and always have,” he said. “Everyone needs to take a deep breath and give the president and his national security team the space to decide what is in the best interest of our mission, and to have their face-to-face discussion tomorrow without a premature Washington feeding frenzy.”

News of the general’s comments came as Britain’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan reportedly resigned. Sherard Cowper-Coles had been a vocal critic of the US and Nato strategy in Afghanistan.

Britain’s foreign office issued a statement saying Mr Cowper-Coles was merely taking a leave of absence and would return later this year. He will be replaced on a temporary basis by the Foreign Office director for South Asia and Afghanistan, Karen Pierce.

Ambassador Cowper-Coles is reported to have told the British government that he believed America’s “military-driven counter-insurgency effort was headed for failure”.

While reporting Gen McChrystal’s remarks, the US media also noted that the last 24 hours had been tough for him.

At least 10 Nato troops were killed across Afghanistan on Monday in a helicopter crash and attacks.

Ambassador Holbrooke, en route to Marjah with Ambassador Eikenberry, was reportedly met with apparent gunfire, and in Kunduz, the head of the public health department was just killed by a bomb under the stairwell to his private clinic, along with a number of patients.

In Washington, a House subcommittee released the results of a six-month investigation finding that the US military was inadvertently funding Afghan insurgents, corrupt public officials, and warlords who reportedly receive “tens of millions of dollars” in safe passage fees for use of Afghanistan’s roads.

Read More

Hafeez gives tough message in polite words

In polite words of Finance Minister Abdul Hafeez Sheikh, the government gave a tough message in the National Assembly on Tuesday: not to let “vested interests” block a reform of general sales tax (GST) and “take a stand” about loss-making state enterprises.

Winding up a 12-day general debate on the new budget, the minister rejected fears of the parliamentary opposition and traders that a reformed GST, earlier proposed to be renamed as value-added tax, would increase prices, explaining that the move would actually reduce the tax rate to a uniform 15 per cent from the present 16 to 25 per cent but would document the economy without exemptions.

The budget for fiscal 2010-11, announced on June 5 and to be effective from July 1, has increased GST rates by one per cent to 17-26 per cent, but the government plans to reform it by October with a uniform rate of 15 per cent. “Then why the prices should increase?” the minister asked, pointing out that food items, health and education, would be free from the levy, which will be applicable to businesses with a minimum Rs7.5 million turnover annually.

Accusing unspecified “powerful people” of getting exemptions after the GST was introduced 20 years ago, he said those profiting from the status quo were opposing the reform and, “while speaking of the small people, want to benefit the big people”.

He asked parliamentarians to “let us make up our mind” and not to play politics over the issue. The minister evoked cheers from both sides of the house when he proposed formation of a parliamentary committee to have a consensus in deciding the future of loss-making enterprises in the public sector, which he said were neither themselves efficient nor were allowing others to enter their field. “We have to take tough decisions.”

Mr Sheikh said Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, who was present in the house at the time, had approved only a Rs3 billion bailout package for the loss-making Pakistan Steel Mills, instead of a recommended Rs25 million and any additional help would depend strictly on performance.

He asked advocates of imposing an agricultural income tax to use their “convincing power” with provincial governments because agriculture was a provincial subject, but said a committee would examine re-imposing wealth tax as the government had committed in the Senate.

The minister also announced government plans to make the Federal Bureau of Statistics “totally autonomous” in a few months so that its statistics could be trusted by the people.

Mr Sheikh advanced his arguments in his usual polite manner, but he seemed to have little patience for those unnamed cabinet colleagues who, according to leader of opposition Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, were using up to six government cars each though their entitlement was only one car.

“What can I say about them?” the minister wondered and said: “Those keeping six (government) cars should be shamed of themselves.”

The minister said the government had accepted 61 out of 71 non-mandatory recommendations made by the Senate about the new budget, including those relating to austerity and targeting subsidies.

After the minister’s speech, the house began a discussion on the charged expenditure of more than Rs5 trillion included in the demands for grants and appropriations which are not to be voted upon before the house adjourned until 11am on Wednesday.

The opposition leader earlier led a token walkout by his PML-N party to protest at what it regarded as unsatisfactory reply of Law and Justice Minister Babar Awan about the time of grants-in-aid for bar associations though the minister assured the house the required rules for such allocations had been followed.

RAJA-FAISAL SPAT:

At the start of the sitting, held after an hour’s delay, Water and Power Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf angrily rejected what he called false allegations of corruption levelled against him by PML-Q parliamentary leader Faisal Saleh Hayat on Saturday regarding rental power projects and waved three files which he said contained newspaper cuttings relating to charges of wrongdoing against the opposition member.

But Mr Hayat repeated his offer to face the minister’s threatened suit for damages in a court of law.

Read More

China likely to go ahead with nuclear deal

China is likely to go ahead with financing the construction of two nuclear power reactors in Pakistan despite concerns from certain quarters, Chinese experts have said.

A plan to build the reactors would be unveiled during a meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) being held in New Zealand, said an article published in the China Daily on Wednesday.

“This is not the first time China has helped Pakistan build nuclear reactors, and since it will be watched by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the deal is not going to have any problems,” said Zhai Dequan, the deputy secretary-general of the China Arms Control and Disarmament Association.

He said the US would not pressurise China too much because it has struck a nuclear deal with India. In 2008, the NSG, which represents 46 countries that control the world’s atomic trade, made an exemption allowing Washington to sell civil nuclear technology to New Delhi.

Pakistan has stressed many times that it wants the same recognition as India on civil nuclear usage.

“Pakistan is also fighting a war on terror for the US as well as for itself, and the country’s loss is greater than the US and the other 42 coalition nations combined,” Mr Zhai wrote.

“The economic aid it has received is too little compared to its loss. Pakistan has an urgent need for more civil energy and that need should be looked after,” he said.

The US asked China to clarify details of the deal last week, after intense urging from India, but stopped short of publicly opposing it.

Last Thursday, China said the reactors were for peaceful purposes and it would accept IAEA’s inspection.

China joined the NSG in 2004 but has already built one reactor and started a second at Chashma in Punjab. The two new reactors in the region will generate 650 megawatts each.

Although the deal is not likely to attract strong opposition, NSG members still do not want to see the transaction go forward, according to Mark Hibbs, nuclear policy expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Policy in Washington.

However, Mr Hibbs said the US-India deal set a precedent. “There was no real agreement between the members about how to proceed,” the Australian Radio quoted him as saying.

Fan Jishe, a scholar of US studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, argues that the nature of the Sino-Pakistan deal is different from that of the US-India deal.

“We do not need an exemption from the NSG, as requested by the US, since the deal was reached before we joined the group,” Fan said.—APP

Read More

Rs12.98 billion budget for Gilgit-Baltistan

The Gilgit-Baltistan government presented on Wednesday its first budget with an outlay of Rs12.984 billion and Rs6.404 billion non-development expenses.

Finance Minister Mohammad Ali Akhtar told the Gilgit-Baltistan Legislative Assembly that Rs1.227 billion would be required to increase the salary of government employees by 50 per cent and medical allowance of employees up to BPS 15 by 100 per cent and higher pay scales by 15 per cent.

He also announced a 50 per cent raise for police personnel and revision of their pay scales to bring them at par with other provinces.

Mr Akhtar said 1,500 new jobs would be created during the 2010-11 fiscal year.

He said that Rs1.878 billion would be spent on subsidising wheat in Gilgit-Baltistan, although this subsidy had been stopped in other parts of the country.

He said 25.16 per cent of the budget would be spent on education and the number of scholarship for students from the region enrolled in educational institutions across the country would be doubled to 600.

The minister said the government’s operating expenses had been reduced by 26.5 per cent and the amount saved would be used to create new posts, adding that 250 new posts would be created in police to improve law and order.

He said expenses on entertainment, gifts and purchase of physical assets had been frozen.

The non-development budget has been increased by Rs638.486 million and Rs700 million has been released for implementing the Empowerment Order of 2009. He said six new departments, headed by secretaries, had been set up.

He said that in view of the increasing population, new divisions, districts, sub divisions and tehsils had to be created. A department will be set up to improve the prisons system and another to deal with disasters.

The finance minister said the services department had been asked to ensure 10 per cent jobs for women.

The budget sets a revenue target of Rs355.124 million and earmarks Rs3.127 billion for one new and nine ongoing projects under the Public Sector Development Programme and Rs1.234 billion for a Special Development Package.

The finance minister said 80 per cent of the allocation would be spent on ongoing projects and 20 per cent on new plans. He said work on 258 of 611 ongoing projects would be completed during the year.

He said Rs1.14 billion had been allocated for completing 14 projects in the power sector and Rs952.2 million for the transport and communications sector.

He said Rs387.7 million had been allocated for improving infrastructure for education, health, tourism, fisheries, agriculture and forests.

The minister said Rs698.35 million would be spent on new projects to be launched in consultation with members of the assembly.

Read More

UK says Iran gas pipeline Pakistan’s internal matter

Iran continued to dominate the political and diplomatic scene on Wednesday as Pakistan cautioned British Foreign Secretary William Hague that sanctions against the Gulf country beyond the ones mandated by the United Nations could have serious repercussions for Afghanistan and the Middle East.

The warning, Dawn has learnt, was conveyed by Pakistani diplomats during their talks with Mr Hague, who is in Pakistan on his first visit as foreign secretary.

According to Foreign Office sources, a significant part of the talks focussed on the latest UN sanctions on Iran and the subsequent efforts by the US and EU to take punitive measures against Tehran’s oil and gas sector.

Pakistan had on June 14 finalised a $7.6 billion gas pipeline deal with Iran, which is considered crucial for averting the energy crisis Pakistan is currently confronting.“Mr Hague was told that the US and EU sanctions could prove counter-productive and may force Iran to react,” a senior foreign ministry official informed Dawn.

Pakistan fears that a cornered Iran could affect the situation in Middle East and the peace and reconciliation efforts in Afghanistan.

According to the official, Mr Hague patiently listened to the Pakistani point of view.

Iran also figured at the press conference which followed the talks, though the guarded remarks of the British foreign secretary did not indicate that he had been won over by the persuasions of the Pakistan officials.

At the media briefing, which Mr Hague addressed with his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mehmood Qureshi, he reiterated that Britain supported “the additional measures within the EU to increase peaceful and legitimate pressure on Iran over its nuclear programme”.

His words merely offered the reassurance that Britain would not support use of force against Iran, in case anyone in the audience feared another military adventure by the West.

The only consolation that Mr Hague was willing to offer was to reiterate what US Special Representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke had said days earlier that the pipeline was Islamabad’s internal matter.

Mr Hague, too, clarified that his country would not interfere in the “sovereign decision of Pakistan (on the gas pipeline project)”.

Diplomacy dominated the mood during the press conference as Mr Qureshi also weighed his words carefully while speaking on the issue.

According to him, the Iran-Pakistan pipeline was one of the options (for addressing the country’s energy crisis) that was “doable and made perfect economic sense”, though he added that Pakistan, being a responsible country, would fulfil its international obligations.

The fourth round of UN sanctions against Iran, tightening punitive measures against Iranian military, industrial and shipping firms, were last week followed by European Union restrictions that barred new investments and technical cooperation with Iran’s oil and gas sector.

The European Union said its sanctions were necessary to force Tehran to resume negotiations over its controversial nuclear programme.

Separately, the US Senate is expected to vote this week on a bill barring energy and financial firms from doing business with Iran.

The US and EU contend that their additional restrictions were meant to compensate for the watered down version of Security Council resolution mandating the new restrictions. Russia, which backed the fourth round of UN sanctions in the Security Council, has also opposed additional US and EU punitive measures, saying they were unacceptable and weakened the foundations for dialogue and interaction.

Pakistan has all along supported a negotiated settlement of the dispute over Iran’s nuclear programme. However, over the weekend, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani caused a mini-storm in the cup when he hinted that Pakistan would abide by US restrictions though he retracted his words a day later by saying the country would only abide by UN measures.

INDIA: At the media briefing, the British foreign secretary made it clear that the new Conservative-Lib Dem government would continue to keep a safe distance from the messy relationship between India and Pakistan.

He said India was one of the countries with which Britain sought to elevate its ties because of the realisation that it was one of the fastest growing economies. But, at the same time, he said: “We want an equally strong relationship with Pakistan. We’ll be sufficiently strong friends with both India and Pakistan to not to tell them how to resolve their bilateral problems and not to lecture them about those issues; so it is not for UK to lay down solutions for them.”

VISA WOES: Good news for Pakistani citizens followed Mr Hague’s meeting with Prime Minister Gilani, where the former agreed to work with Pakistani authorities to resolve contentious issues in bilateral relations, including delays in visa issuance.

“It was agreed during the meeting that the British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Pakistan’s Minister of Interior in their meeting later in the afternoon would find ways and means to address contentious issues like expeditious issuance of visa to Pakistani nationals, curtailing the period of processing visa applications and issuance of visas to Pakistani businessmen by the British High Commission in Islamabad, directly, rather than forwarding their cases to the British regional hub in Abu Dhabi,” a statement issued by the prime minister’s office said.

The British foreign secretary told Mr Gilani that the new British government wanted a new momentum in Pak-UK relations by focussing on the areas of trade, investment and economic cooperation.

Mr Hague also met PML-N chief Mian Nawaz Sharif.

Read More

Obama sacked his top commander in Afghanistan

US President Barack Obama sacked his top commander in Afghanistan on Wednesday over insubordination, stressing that in a democracy institutions were stronger than individuals.

Mr Obama appointed General David Petraeus his new commander in Afghanistan where the outgoing commander, Gen Stanley A. McChrystal, enjoyed much support, both among ordinary people and the rulers.

“Today I accepted Gen McChrystal’s resignation as commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan,” declared President Obama in a brief address to the media at the White House Rose Garden.

“I did so with considerable regret, but also with certainty that it is the right thing for our mission in Afghanistan, for our military, and for our country,” he said.

“Our democracy depends upon institutions that are stronger than individuals,” declared Mr Obama as his generals and defence chief stood by him.

“War is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a private, a general or a president. And as difficult as it is to lose Gen McChrystal, I believe that it is the right decision for our national security,” he said.

An article in the latest issue of the Rolling Stone magazine quotes the general and his staff making disparaging remarks about President Obama and his team. They also questioned the way the Obama administration was conducting the war.

The article claims Gen McChrystal has seized control of the war “by never taking his eye off the real enemy: The wimps in the White House”.

President Obama came to the Rose Garden with his Defence Secretary Robert Gates, US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen and Gen Petraeus who stood by him as he spoke.

“I have a responsibility to the extraordinary men and women who are fighting this war and to the democratic institutions that I’ve been elected to lead,” said Mr Obama while explaining why he accepted Gen McChrystal’s resignation.

Democratic traditions, he noted, also required “strict adherence to the military chain of command and respect for civilian control over that chain of command”.

And that’s why “as commander-in-chief I believe this decision is necessary to hold ourselves accountable to standards that are at the core of our democracy”.

Gen McChrystal, who earlier had a one-to-one meeting with Mr Obama and also attended an Afghan war council meeting at the White House, did not come to the Rose Garden where the president openly questioned his judgment for making those remarks in the Rolling Stone article.

“The conduct represented in the recently published article does not meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general,” he said.

He noted that the commentary in the article “undermines” the civilian chain of command. “It erodes the trust that is necessary for our team to work together to achieve our objectives in Afghanistan,” he said, adding: “Now is the time for all of us to come together.”

“The Commander-in-Chief has made it clear no one is bigger than the mission and nothing less than a unified effort in Afghanistan will get the job done,” said John Kerry, chairman of the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

As President Obama urged the US Senate to confirm Gen Petraeus’s appointment as swiftly as possible, Senator Kerry indicated that lawmakers would not delay the process.

“His decision to return Gen Petraeus to the battlefield provides not just continuity in philosophy, but tested diplomatic skill that is at the very centre of a military strategy which hinges on progress in governance to sustain military gains,” he said.

Senator Kerry, who also was ridiculed in the article, noted that the Marjah offensive, which Gen McChrystal and his team initially depicted as a major achievement, was not really a success.

“We cannot afford another minute of distraction. We’ve already seen in Marjah that impressive military gains cannot be maintained without effective local governance and Afghan ownership. This must happen to give the mission a chance to succeed,” the senator said.

President Obama stressed that while the decision was a difficult one, it did not represent a change in the course of the war. “This is a change in personnel, but it is not a change in policy,” he said.

“I don’t make this decision based on any difference in policy with Gen McChrystal, as we are in full agreement about our strategy. Nor do I make this decision out of any sense of personal insult. Stanley McChrystal has always shown great courtesy and carried out my orders faithfully,” he said. “I did so with considerable regret, but also with certainty that it is the right thing for our mission.”

Gen McChrystal got his marching orders earlier on Wednesday in Washington, where he met the president face-to-face after a meeting with Secretary Gates at the Pentagon.

Mr Gates had hand-picked Gen McChrystal for Afghanistan last year, calling him a driven visionary with the fortitude and intelligence to turn the war around. President Obama fired the previous commander at Mr Gates’ recommendation.

On Gen McChrystal’s advice, President Obama also agreed to dispatch an additional 30,000 US troops to Afghanistan.

The general was in Kabul on Monday evening when the US media reported excerpts from the Rolling Stone article. As soon as he learned about the article, President Obama ordered Gen McChrystal to rush to Washington for a meeting which ultimately led to his departure.

The Wednesday meeting preceded a regular session of the administration’s strategy team for Afghanistan, held in the White House Situation Room. Gen McChrystal would have joined via teleconference had he not been summoned.

New America Foundation, a Washington think-tank, backed Mr Obama’s decision, saying the general had “established a culture of insubordination and indifference toward civilian leaders and partners in government”.

Even the right wing Fox News, which is staunchly anti-Obama, noted: “If not insubordination, the remarks in the Rolling Stone magazine article were at least an indirect challenge to civilian management of the war in Washington by its top military commander.”

The US media pointed out that in America military leaders rarely challenged their commander-in-chief publicly, and when they did, consequences tended to be more severe than a scolding.

While announcing Gen Petraeus’s appointment, President Obama noted that in his current post at Central Command, the general had worked closely with the Afghan and Pakistan governments, and with all US partners in the region.

“We are going to build Afghan capacity. We are going to relentlessly apply pressure on Al Qaeda and its leadership, strengthening the ability of both Afghanistan and Pakistan to do the same,” he said.

“That’s the strategy that we agreed to last fall. That is the policy that we are carrying out in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

Read More

Pak-India poised to set peace agenda today

Foreign secretaries of India and Pakistan will meet here on Thursday to explore ways of overcoming mistrust and returning to peace talks. But expectations for a breakthrough are low.

Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao arrived in Islamabad on Wednesday to set off the phased process for re-engagement agreed between Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and his Indian counterpart Dr Manmohan Singh during their meeting on the sidelines of the Saarc summit in Bhutan.

Ms Rao, who is the most senior Indian official to visit Pakistan after the Nov 2008 Mumbai attacks, is due for a very intense session with Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir. The two will try to find common grounds for continuing the renewed contacts.

The meeting is preparatory to foreign ministers’ talks in Islamabad next month.

Although no agenda has been slated for the meeting, diplomatic sources said the two sides would table proposals for narrowing the distrust in the wake of the Mumbai attacks leading to suspension by India of the composite dialogue, which began in 2004.

The proposals from Islamabad, sources indicated, would focus on improving the human rights situation in occupied Kashmir, resolving water disputes, Siachen, Sir Creek, humanitarian issues, joint efforts for counter-terrorism, encouraging people-to-people contacts and firming up Kashmir-related confidence-building measures.

It is quite evident that expeditious prosecution of the alleged planners of the Mumbai attacks, being tried by an anti-terrorism court in Rawalpindi, will top a set of proposals brought by the Indian delegation.

The talks have been preceded by some positive signals from both New Delhi and Islamabad. While Pakistan’s parliamentary committee on national security has authorised the Foreign Office to take ‘difficult decisions’ to normalise ties with India, Ms Rao, in a recent statement, called for “creative solutions” on Kashmir and other disputes. The cordiality being expressed by both sides ahead of the talks has pleased Pakistani and Indian diplomats.

“We want to pick the process from where we left in 2008 -- during the fifth round of composite dialogue. We are looking forward with confidence to renewing this engagement, but are also mindful of the complexities,” a Pakistani diplomat said.

Sources said the situation was so unclear that the Foreign Office sent Director General of South Asia desk Afrasiab Hashmi, famed for face-reading, to receive the Indian foreign secretary at the airport. Later in the evening, the two sides used a reception hosted by Mr Salman Bashir to pre-judge each other before their formal interaction on Thursday.

Analysts fear that Islamabad’s inaction against Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed and poor progress in the trial of Mumbai suspects could become a sticking point. Although the two issues had led to the failure of foreign secretaries’ meeting in Delhi in February, diplomatic observers said India would try to ensure that the renewed process continued and did not get stuck because of those matters.

Their optimism stemmed from India’s transformed position on relations with Pakistan. New Delhi, which till earlier this year stoutly held that no normalisation was possible until its terrorism-related concerns were adequately addressed, has now expressed its willingness to discuss all issues of concern.

In August last year, India had refused to send Nirupama Rao to Islamabad for talks despite an understanding between the two prime ministers in Sharm el Sheikh to de-link peace talks from progress on terrorism.

Although foreign secretaries and foreign ministers of the two countries met subsequently in October last year in New York on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session, no progress could be made because of Indian insistence that terrorism needed to be addressed first. India also avoided responding to a Pakistani roadmap for re-engagement.

But the situation changed this year after developments in Afghanistan. It is believed that the renewed international pressure and growing realisation in India that the rapidly changing situation in Afghanistan could deprive it of its strategic leverage in the region have forced it to change its mind regarding ties with Pakistan.

Read More

Accord on 1,000MW electricity from Iran in Aug

Water and Power Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf will visit Iran in August to sign an agreement for importing 1,000MW of electricity.

The decision about the minister’s visit was taken at a meeting between Mr Ashraf and Iranian Ambassador Mashallah Shakeri here on Wednesday. The ambassador briefed the minister on a power transmission line from Iran to Gwadar.

Pakistan plans two projects for importing electricity from Iran. Work on a project to import 100MW for Gwadar has already been initiated. The $3.1 million project is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2012.

Pakistan is already importing 39MW from Iran for border areas and Gwadar.

A power ministry official said that a feasibility report on the 1,000MW project would be completed this month. “A 700km transmission line will be installed at a cost of $500m,” the official said, adding that the project was expected to be completed in five years.

According to a press release, the minister and the ambassador agreed that technical experts of both countries would examine the project. “It has been decided that Mr Ashraf will visit Iran within the next couple of months for further deliberation on the project and its early completion,” it said.

After completion of the feasibility report technical-level talks are expected to be held in the last week of July to decide the tariff.

Sources said that negotiations for revision of tariff for the 39MW being imported since 2003 were under way as sought by the Iranian exporting company. Ambassador Mr Shakeri also briefed Mr Ashraf on the proposed Iran-Pakistan-Turkey rail link. He said the project would boost trade and social relations among countries of the Economic Coordination Organisation.

Mr Ashraf said Pakistan actively supported the project which would strengthen links among ECO countries, improve regional cooperation and increase people-to-people contacts.

Read More

Duty on solar energy plants reduces

In order to minimize the persistent energy crisis in Pakistan, Ministry of Environment announced on Thursday lowering of duties that were imposed on solar energy plants.

During a press conference held in Islamabad, Federal Minister for Environment Hameedullah Jan said that at present duty on solar energy products is 28 per cent which is to be reduced to five to six per cent.

For that mater a summary will shortly be presented to the Economic Coordination Committee (ECC).

Jan stated that after reducing the duties, solar energy products will be available at cheaper rates in Pakistan.

Private solar company’s Director Naveed Iqbal also requested the Environment Minister to halt the influx of ‘B’ and ‘C’ class solar energy plants from China. — DawnNews

Read More