EDITORIAL
daal,
damm, chooDi, kaDa
kheer pakai
jitan sey charkha diya jala
aaya kuta chaaT gaya tu baiThi Dhol baja
That was how Amir Khusru,
poet laureate to half a dozen kings of Delhi sultanat in
the thirteenth century, solved the puzzle put to him by
four maidens at a well. Khusru had strayed out into the
country and thirsty, reached the well where the four
maidens were filling their pitchers. He asked for some
water. Recognizing the poet laureate, the girls thought
of a prank. They gave him four words -- khir, kuta,
charka and Dhol -- and asked him to knit them in a
couplet if he wanted to have his drink. Khusru, with the
couplet, not only earned his drink and shamed the maidens
with a matching witticism but also immortalized the
event. The three maharathis of this part of the
subcontinent have put forth four words among themselves.
ChooDi, said Musharraf from across the border. kaDa
responded Vajpayee from this end. Thereupon the little
lion from Kashmir roared in, not one but two words in the
same breath. With no Khusru around it is an open
challenge to the people to knit them together
meaningfully if they want to breathe peacefully here
arounds. Unfortunately for the people, though fortunately
for Musharraf, Shabana Azmi is in deep duel with the
other Musharraf-like fiend, or else she would have taken
the Pakistani President-cum-General to task for being a
shameless denigrator of woman-hood. We could have been
reasonably sure that the general, who is ever ready to
eat his words in and around Ramadan would have changed
tract at the heat....more
|
 |
Time
for introspction
By Srinivasan K. Rangachary
The war against terrorism, it is now increasingly
acknowledged, is going to be a long ....more
Jammu
hosts 'Durbar'
from tomorrow
TALES OF TRAVESTY
By: Dr. Jitendra Singh
With the "Durbar" offices opening tomorrow, the
city of temples --- nay city of stones --- ....more
No
peace without
economic justice
By Bharat Jhunjhunwala
American has nearly succeeded in portraying the Afghan
war..... .more
Post-war
scenario in
Afghanistan
By Jagmohan Mathur
With the sustained US bombing and special forces engaged
in ground operations.......more
Vicious
education mill
Academic pulse
By. Prof. S K Bhalla
These are the days of
career-minded students and curriculum oriented teachers
who .......more
Ziaisation
of Musharraf
By M Rama Rao
The Afghan campaign has pushed to the back burner
President Musharraf's.............more
|
EDITORIAL
daal, damm, chooDi, kaDa
kheer
pakai jitan sey charkha diya jala
aaya kuta chaaT gaya tu baiThi Dhol baja
That was how Amir Khusru,
poet laureate to half a dozen kings of Delhi sultanat in
the thirteenth century, solved the puzzle put to him by
four maidens at a well. Khusru had strayed out into the
country and thirsty, reached the well where the four
maidens were filling their pitchers. He asked for some
water. Recognizing the poet laureate, the girls thought
of a prank. They gave him four words -- khir, kuta,
charka and Dhol -- and asked him to knit them in a
couplet if he wanted to have his drink. Khusru, with the
couplet, not only earned his drink and shamed the maidens
with a matching witticism but also immortalized the
event. The three maharathis of this part of the
subcontinent have put forth four words among themselves.
ChooDi, said Musharraf from across the border. kaDa
responded Vajpayee from this end. Thereupon the little
lion from Kashmir roared in, not one but two words in the
same breath. With no Khusru around it is an open
challenge to the people to knit them together
meaningfully if they want to breathe peacefully here
arounds.
Unfortunately for the
people, though fortunately for Musharraf, Shabana Azmi is
in deep duel with the other Musharraf-like fiend, or else
she would have taken the Pakistani President-cum-General
to task for being a shameless denigrator of woman-hood.
We could have been reasonably sure that the general, who
is ever ready to eat his words in and around Ramadan
would have changed tract at the heat. He, most probably,
have taken all the chooris there in the few Pakistani
shops that are not selling pistols and eaten them up. And
saved everybody. To be fair Sushma Swaraj did try to
kindle some fires there lekin Shabanaji ki baat kahan.
And so the matter rests. Unresolved, probably, waiting
for her to finish her brawl with the Imam. Till then the
Indians have only their Khalistanis, who themselves are
not in much good repair; or else the Pakistani general
would have sent them out to protest against the
‘misuse’ of a wholesome Punjabi word by the
‘Brahmin’ PM and prevented any breaking of the
Pak chooris with this kaDa.
That leaves the sher-I-nar
from Kashmir but his daal does not have enough damm to
take on the Pakistani Dholwalas in his own realm; hoping
that that dammdari would do for the whole country is
asking too much. And, so the words remain unreconciled
and peace remains broken as it always was. But then
perhaps we are taking it all in the reverse. The
Pakistani President alluded to Indians with his bangles;
the Indian Prime Minister was threatening the heavy kaDas
at the chooriwala across the border. And the sher-poot
never meant that he had any liking for the Indian daal.
They were all referring to others with their words loaded
with implication and meaning; they never presumed to look
inwards to solve the puzzle. No wonder the people are
unable to make anything out of this heavy barrage of
mouth-shots. For true to their rajas the praja here is
also habituated to looking to others instead of taking up
the cudgels themselves. All together could be waiting for
a Godot, a Khusru; a Gandhi to come and solve their
problems and be killed for the trouble! Yes, they can.
They are Indians all.
|
Time
for introspction
By
Srinivasan K. Rangachary
The war
against terrorism, it is now increasingly
acknowledged, is going to be a long haul.
This is, in part, because of the very
nature of terrorism, the complex patterns
of sponsorship, the dependencies of
various state and political entities on
their links with subversive groups, the
elaborate global networks of terrorist
organinsations and cells that have
already been established, and the degree
to which legitimate systems of
government, finance, non-government
groups and organisations and various
other structures in democratic societies
have been penetrated and are exploited by
the extremists. The problem has been
allowed to fester and grow for decades in
the benign shadow of much of the world's
tolerant gaze. And often active
encouragement, as many of the nations
that believed themselves immune to the
disease adopted attitudes of moral
ambivalence, sometimes of cold cynicism.
That strengthened terrorist movements in
geographically distant locations.
While
there is now a greater understanding and
moral consensus on many aspects of this
modern scourge, and unfortunately for its
hapless victims, the war against
terrorism will be protracted even further
by the confusion that continues to
characterise the responses of the
political leadership in much of the free
world. This was underlined rather
strongly by a number of events in recent
weeks, including some unseemly
controversies surrounding US Secretary of
State Colin Powell's visit to the
subcontinent.
For some
of these, at least, Powell was himself
responsible, and a few of his remarks
suggested that the Bush administration
had embarked on another voyage into an
unfamiliar world, and as has been the
case with so many American interventions
in the past, this would also have
disastrous consequences. Indeed, and
amazingly, his observations - and others
emanating from various leaders in the
US-reflected a curious identity of
perspectives on some major issues with
those of Osama bin Laden. Both the US and
bin Laden now seem to claim that the
"central issues" of terrorism
are connected with the resolution of the
conflicts over Kashmir and Palestine, and
once these are resolved - evidently to
the satisfaction of the sponsors of
terrorism - the "root causes"
of terrorism would substantially have
been addressed. The only surviving
disagreement here is in the position over
the US military presence in the
"Holy Land" of Saudi Arabia. It
is evident that September 11 has still
not convinced many that the terrorists
and their sponsors cannot be allowed to
set the world's agenda.
The US
position on Kashmir is dictated as much
by abiding, obstinate and self-serving
ignorance, as by its current and uneasy
alliance with one of the chief sponsors
of terrorism - Pakistan - who the
Americans are presently trying to seduce
and bribe back into the fold of the
righteous. Given the circumstances of the
war against Afghanistan it is certainly
expedient to take Pakistan along for the
time being, and the US has been fairly
firm in its pronouncements that terrorism
in all theatres will eventually be
addressed with the same severity.
Significant problems, however, are
created by the gratuitous, poorly
informed and ambiguous pronouncements on
the nature of the Kashmir conflict,
especially within a context of the
heightened tensions in the entire
regions. I would, of course, not read any
Machiavellian calculations into these
postures. They are, by and large, the
unfortunate consequence of American
insularity, insensitivity and inability
to comprehend the nuances of cultures and
contexts other than their own.
The
absurdity of the American position is
reflected in its eagerness to push India
and Pakistan into a "peace
process" - given the record of US
sponsored "peace processes" the
phrase itself sends shivers of
apprehension down the spine - and to
force an immediate resumption of an
Indo-Pak dialogue. This is interesting.
The American president has, since
September 11, repeatedly articulated an
uncompromising policy that makes "no
distinction between terrorists and those
who harbour them"; bin Laden, the Al
Qaida and the Taliban are wanted
"dead or alive"; they are to be
"smoked out" and "brought
to justice, or justice will be brought to
them". At the same time, India is
told that it must initiate a dialogue
with the chief sponsor of terrorism in
the region; it must "negotiate a
solution" to the problem of Kashmir
with terrorist groups and with Musharraf,
who controls, harbours, trains, arms and
funds them. It is high time someone in
the Indian leadership told the Americans
that India will seek a negotiate solution
on Kashmir with Pakistan and with
Pak-sponsored terrorists the day the US
President begins negotiations with bin
Laden and with Mullah Omar to
"resolve" the many supposed
"issues" they have raised, and
at least some of which find echoes of
sympathy among a large sections of
Muslims.
Regrettably,
India has not covered itself with glory
at this time. The sheer desperation of
expectations, the desire to secure an
endorsement of its position on Kashmir
from the US, has led, not only to some
unfortunate and ill-timed adventurism
along the LoC, but also to a rather
comprehensive loss of dignity that stems
largely form the persistent illusion that
America is somehow going to come and
"solve" for us, our problems in
Kashmir. This is not only - to borrow a
charmingly blunt expression used by
Powell in another context -
"nonsense", it is dangerous
nonsense. Given the disastrous record of
US interventions across the world, the
last thing that India could wish upon
itself, and upon the region at large, is
any kind of US initiative to help
"resolve" our problems.
The
difficulty is that the Indian leadership
still does not appear to have come to
terms with the fact that we have to fight
our own battles. The best we can expect
from the rest of the world is that it
should not extend its indulgences and
protection to the sponsors of terrorism;
cooperating nations can help destroy the
support structures, on their soil, of
terrorist orgnaisations active in India;
and they can help streamline matters
relating to the extradition of
terrorists. Beyond that, the problem is
our own, and will have to be sorted out
on the ground.
Within
this dismal scenario, there are at lest
some positive indications. The first and
most obvious of these is the proclamation
of the much delayed and obstructed
counter-terrorism Ordinance. This is a
substantially revised and diluted version
of the draft bill that was circulated by
the Law Commission towards the end of
1999, but it is certainly a step in the
right direction. Far more significant and
far-reaching in its impact, however, has
been the sobriety of the responses of
Indian Muslims at large, to the
provocation, not only of Osama bin
Laden's calls to jihad, but equally to
the ugly and suddenly escalating campaign
launched by the Vishwa Hindu Prishad and
the Bajrang Dal to revive tensions over
the Babri Masjid - Ram Janmbhoomi
controversy.
Apart from
a handful of lunatic voices - the Shahi
Imam of Delhi's Jama Masjid the most
prominent among these - the Muslim
leadership's reactions have been most
responsible, have recognised the gravity
of the present situation, and have spoken
out unambiguously agaisnt those who claim
Islam as justification for their acts and
campaigns of terror. Indeed, intimidated
and terorised from more than one
direction, never before has the moderate
Muslim spoken out as firmly against
terrorism in the name of Islam has he as
now. It is saddening, indeed tragic, that
the Indian state has failed so completely
to internalise the values of secularism,
and despite their long services and great
sacrifices in past wars and present and
continuing conflicts - including those
against Pakistan - India's Muslims are
asked, again and again, to stand up and
be counted whenever Pakistan provokes or
initiates violence against India. INAV
|
 |
Jammu
hosts 'Durbar' from tomorrow
TALES OF TRAVESTY
By: Dr.
Jitendra Singh
With the
"Durbar" offices opening
tomorrow, the city of temples --- nay
city of stones --- nay city of
obeisance-prone eulogisers ---nay city of
subdued sufferers is bustling with a
unique flurry of activity atonce
symbolising the optimism of a handful of
government-friendly self-serving
activists as much as the pessimism of
unwanted unattended commoners destined to
survive from day to day at their own
peril irrespective of whoever holds the
reins of power.
Even while
incessantly complaining of discrimination
allegedly meted out to it over the years
by the powers-that-be, Jammu has never
lagged behind in contributing in full
measure more than its share of henchmen,
courtiers and "Durbaris".
Naturally therefore, every year,
"Durbar" turns into a momentous
event simultaneously gratifying the
elitist hangers-on on the one hand and on
the other hand reassuring partly if not
wholly the insecure morale of the
ordinary have-nots who look forward to
yet another occasion to queue up outside
the Secretariate gate holding xerox
copies of their pending representations
and waiting mutely for a divine
intervention.
The
"Durbar" will also bring with
it fleets of staff cars mostly white
Ambassadors with tinted glasses
conveniently camouflaging the
unauthorised use of Government transport
by bedecked wives and pampered children
of privileged high-ups --- be they the
senior bureaucrats or the ruling
politicians. Thus, "Durbar"
would also further add to the city's
existing traffic congestion as Jammu
plays host to popularly elected Ministers
and unpopularly appointed Commissioners
seeking indulgence at the cost of public
exchequer.
Macaulay
had once remarked that democracy was from
an early period the most aristocratic and
aristocracy the most democratic in the
world. With the "Durbar" moving
over to Jammu, the aristocrats dominating
the society look forward to gain an easy
access to the aristocrats controlling the
polity.
Meanwhile,
in Jammu, for all and sundry seeking
credentials as political or
semi-political leaders and nursing
ambitions of a public career, the
"Durbar" move holds out a
promising prospect. Make a show when the
"Durbar" is a witness. Present
a memorandum. Hold a stage-managed
press-photo session. Arrange a colourful
meet with the State high-ups. The
preferred venues are Hotel K. C.
Residency or Hotel Asia which also have
arrangements for a sumptuous feast for
the stomach. Fix an appointment
preferably with Chief Minister or atleast
with one of the many Ministers. The
potential issues to serve as pretext for
such an appointment are in plenty --- law
and order, security, traffic,
environment, hospital management, price
rise, power-curtailment, etc. If people
of Jammu refuse to recognise you as their
leader, you can still gain entry into the
"Durbar" through the back door
and throw your weight around as an
influential "courtier". If
power eludes you, you can still be a
power broker.
As for the
common man, will the "Durbar"
in Jammu make any difference? Will it be
simply another six months of annual
ordeal? Nagging power-cuts and monotonous
traffic jams? Humiliation in Secretariate
corridors and unrequited wait outside
VVIP bungalows? Will the
"custodians" of State authority
offer a semblance of some justice or will
the political masters, the bureaucratic
stewards and the local clapper-boys gang
up to share a feast at the cost of poor
common man thus making Umapathy a
butt of poet Akbar Allahabadi's refrain: "Qaum
Ke Gham Mein Dinner Khaatey Hain Huk-Kaam
Ke Saath, Ranj Leader Ko Bahut Hain Magar
Aaraam Ke Saath".
|
|
No
peace without economic justice
By Bharat Jhunjhunwala
American has
nearly succeeded in portraying theAfghan war as
that between freedom and terror. That is only
partially true. The real reason for the war is
that America has supported repressive regimes in
the Arab world to secure its economic interests
of oil and left no recourse for dissent for the
oppressed people other than terrorism. The real
war is indeed between terror of the
America-supported Arab regimes and the demand of
freedom by those people.
Fareed Zakaria has
outlined the American view in a lead article in
Newsweek. He says that the problem is somewhere
in the Arab world, and not in the larger American
foreign policy, because "there are billions
of poor and weak and oppressed people around the
world. They don't turn planes into bombs."
The problem is not Islam either for Indonesia,
Pakistan, Bangladesh and Turkey, have larger
Muslim populations than yet are moderate states.
The problem, he
admits, is in the repressive regimes of the Arab
world. The government of Egypt "is efficient
in only one area: squashing dissent and
strangling civil society. Syria has become one of
the world's most oppressive police states, a
regime wherem 25,000 people can be rounded up and
killed by the regime with no consequences."
A similar situation prevails in Iran and Lebanon.
Such repression along with untold luxury of the
ruling elites are 'despised' by the people of the
Arab world. America has not helped by its support
of Israel and the Gulf War. "Most Americans
think," he says, that America "saved
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Most Arabs think we
saved the Kuwaiti and Saudi royal families."
This combination of wealth and repression has
left the youth 'frustrated, bitter and
discontented.' The mosque has become the only
place where civil society functions. It is this
illiberal civil society that has become the
breeding ground of terrorism. Zakaria suggests a
three-pronged strategy to combat this terror.
One, military action to eliminate Al Qaeda. Two,
pressurize Arab regimes to 'open up' to civil
society. Three, to fund moderate Islamic scholars
to strengthen the moderate Islamic culture. This
done, American interests in the extraction of oil
would remain secure while the causes of terrorism
would have been removed. America, and the world
will be happy ever after.
Zakaria sees no
link of the Afghan war with America's extraction
of oil. "After all," he says, "the
Chinese vigorously disagree with most of
America's foreign policy and have fought wars
with U.S. proxies. African states feel the same
sense of disappointment and unfairness. But they
do not work it into a rage against America."
The thrust of Zakaria's argument is that American
foreign policy is fundamentally sound. The sole
problem is that the Arab governments have not
'opened up' which leaves the mosque and
fundamentalism as the only place for them to give
vent to their feelings.
This argument is
superficially right but it is not complete. It is
certainly not one that the people of the
developing countries should buy, willingly at
least. This line of thinking sees nothing wrong
in the extraction of wealth of the developing
countries. It does not question the unjust world
economic order that America heads. It only seeks
to contain its fallout. Such an approach will
only push the people to seek redressal from the
underlying injustice in other ways.
America's foreign
economic policy has to be understood. In the
seventies corrupt Latin governments siphoned away
their countries' wealth into Swiss banks. This
was known as capital flight. America came out to
support the corrupt regimes by providing huge
loans and encouraging private capital
investments. The corrupt regimes were left in
place while their countries became indebted. A
similar story was enacted in East Asia in the
nineties. The American banks who made loans were
bailed out by IMF loans while the countries
became indebted.
Aid has regularly
been offered to corrupt and repressive regimes
like Egypt. America's blatant support to the
forcible creation of Israel in contravention of
all democratic norms has not endeared it to those
people. It is not an isolated happening that the
WTO is set to meet in Qatar, one of the least
democratic states.
There is an
irresolvable contradiction between freedom and
American economic interests. It is disguised only
because of the incompetence and corruption in the
developing country governments. If Arab countries
misuse their oil money against their own people,
America looks the other way. It is a sad
commentary that democratic developing country
governments let themselves fall into American
ploys so easily. Actually, America, and the West,
provides them with a safety valve for bad
governance. This fact, Zakaria and similar
ideologues of the West, refuse to recognize.
The Taliban have
actually provided a springboard for the
expression to the latent resentment pervading the
oil-rich Arab states. It is similar to the
Telengana movement of the fifties and Naxalite
movement of the seventies. Both occurred in
feudal areas. It was the combination of
inequality and wealth that produced those
movements. So also the present war. The only
difference is that the Taliban have expressed the
sentiments of the Arab people rather than of the
regimes. The unfortunate part is that it has
taken on an Islamic fundamentalist complexion.
Similar reaction would have probably taken place
at another place sooner or later. It is the
extraction of Arab oil by America with the
support of corrupt regimes that lies at the root
of the problem.
People in other
developing countries resign themselves to
America's support to their corrupt regimes. But
the drops of oil wealth that has passed on to the
Arab people has made them rise. It should not be
forgotten that bin Laden amassed his fortune in
Saudi Arabia, in part, out of the oil incomes.
And, he calls the Saudi ruling family 'corrupt'.
Zakaria ignores
the fact that neither China not Africa, nor
Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Turkey have
oil or similar natural wealth. They are all
'poor'. Their regimes depend upon Western
largesse in terms of aid, trade and investment to
'buyout' the support of their people despite
their bad governance. Their people do not have
the wealth like bin Laden to give expression to
their opposition to their own corrupt governments
and American support to them. America should
recognize that there can be no world peace
without global economic justice. The elimination
of one Al Qaeda will only breed a hundred. The
opening up of the Arab regimes will immediately
impact the supply of Arab oil and would not be
acceptable to America itself. The moderate
scholars whom Zakaria seeks to be funded will
have no audience.
It is time for
America to recognize that a just world economic
order is not built on the shoulders of corrupt
and repressive regimes. There is a fundamental
contradiction between freedom and justice. The
two cannot co-exist. This is not clear to America
because the injustice in the present dispensation
occurs outside its borders. What is being
portrayed as a war between freedom and terrorism
is indeed so. But behind the screen is also a war
between the terror of American economic interests
and freedom of the people of developing
countries.
|
Post-war
scenario in Afghanistan
By Jagmohan Mathur
With the sustained
US bombing and special forces engaged in ground
operations it appears that fall of the Taliban
regime in Afghanistan is not far away. Political
leaders all over world are now working towards
finding an alternative political system
acceptable to people of Afghanistan and also to
its neighbours. Almost all agree on a broadbased
government but they differ of composition.
Taliban, which
literally means students, have not come to power
in Afghanistan through any elections. They who
studied in madarssas run by Pakistan, have
captured power with the active help from
Pakistan.
They were trained
in military operations by Pakistani army
officers, supplied arms and ammunitions and
supported by Pakistani establishment.
In fact, it was
plan chalked out and executed by ISI. Thus
Pakistani Army Officers know each and every thing
about Talibans and they will not allow them to be
sidelined in any future set up. The United States
which was attacked by terrorists on 11 September
and which led to current crisis and ongoing war
in Afghanistan, is also responsible for foothold
of Talibans and victory against their opponent
factions in internecine fighting that erupted
after withdrawal of Soviet troops. It has been
revealed now that the US administration funded
the anti-Soviet operations at the rate of $ 500
million per year. Now the US has expressed
concern at the huge 'surplus' arsenal left in
Afghanistan. Talibans were created by Pakistan in
1994 captured Kabul in 1996 and by 1998 they were
in control of 90 per cent of Afghanistan. The
Northern Alliance was pushed back to small area.
Thus Afghanistan has now two governments : one
Islamic Emirates of Afghanistan has now two
governments: one Islamic Emirates of Afghanistan
headed by Mullah Mohd Omar of Taliban, other one
is called Islamic state of Afghanistan Government
led by Prof Rabbani popularly known as Northern
Alliance dominated by Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras.
Any future set-up
in the country must reflect all such tribes and
should meet their aspirations and bring harmony
among them. But at present in form of Northern
Alliance tribes of Northern Afghanistan and
Pashtoons dominated Talibans are locked in fierce
fighting and killing each other.
The Taliban
Government was recognised by only three
countries. Besides Pakistan other two countries
who recognised this government were Saudi Arabia
and United Arab Emirates. In wake of September 11
attacks on America Saudi Arabia and UAE have cut
off relations with Taliban Government. It is
believed that attacks were launched by Osama bin
Laden who is living in Afghanistan protected by
Taliban Government. The United States has now
declared war against terrorism and vowed to kill
or capture Osama bin Laden alive, who is
considered the mastermind behind not only the
September 11 attacks but also for earlier bombing
of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. The US is
to destroy All Qaida network including all
terrorist training camps being run by Talibans.
As Talibans have refused to handover Osama
despite repeated appeals by President Bush, the
US in close cooperation with UK has launched
full-scale war on Afghanistan from warships and
through ground forces. The US with its super
power might succeed in its military aims but the
question is what will happen after Talibans are
dislodged.
Some alternatives
are being explored by world leaders. One is that
the 86-year Kind Zahir Shah deposed in 1973 and
who is now living in Rome, is brought back to
Afghanistan to head an interim government after
ouster of Talibans. The US representatives,
Foreign Ministers of France and Italy and some
other influential persons from Afghanistan have
met former ruler Zahir Shah in Rome and discussed
with him plans. The Northern Alliance leaders are
reported to have reached an agreement with King
Zahir Shah that the Alliance will be given 60
seats of 120 seats on the Supreme Council of
Afghan Elders. This body will then call a meeting
of tribal chiefs to elect a head of state and a
transitional government. The Loya Jirga or the
Assembly will be entrusted to frame a new
constitution for Afghanistan and arrange
elections.
The plan has run
into rough weather after King Zahir Shah's envoy
went to Islamabad and held discussions with
Pakistan Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar. As
Pakistan has extended logistic support to
Talibans, it has been agreed that Pakistan will
have say in post Taliban political dispensation
in Afghanistan. Pakistan wants that 'Moderate'
elements of Taliban are included in future
government of Afghanistan. Pakistani President
Musharraf has already declared that future
government of Afghanistan must represent all
ethnic groups of Afghanistan and it should be
friendly to Pakistan.
The Northern
Alliance is now reportedly unhappy over the visit
of King Zahir Shah's envoy to Pakistan. Pakistan
will never allow any dominant postion to NA in
future set-up. They fear that it might be margi
alised if Pakistan's advice on Taliban is
accepted.
It may not be
possible for the US to ignore Pakistan whose
geographical proximity to Afghanistan is an
important factor. The Northern Alliance after
agreement between Zahir Shah's envoy and Pakistan
have declared that it will not be party to any
coalition government that includes members of
Taliban.
During the US
Secretary of State Colin Powell's recent visit to
New Delhi, the American sources expressed
skepticism that King Zahir Shah and his followers
who have been living in Europe since decades and
are out of touch with Afghan situation may not be
acceptable to Afghan people at this stage.
Another avenue
being explored is to involve United Nations in
post Taliban set up. The Bush Administration
seems to be keen to assign expanded role in
Afghanistan in economic as well as political
spheres.
The UN is so far
mainly engaged in providing humanitarian
assistance. One view is that after the war
Afghanistan is placed under Trustship Council
administration. The UN officer incharge for
Afghanistan Mr Lakhdar Brahimi has visited
Washington to discuss post war arrangement in
Afghanistan. Brahimi has certain doubts on UN
role in view of its experience in Bosnia, Somalia
and Rwanda.
A couple of days
back he is reported to have urged security
council not to rush in for peace keeping in
Afghanistan when war ends. He said, ''Afghanistan
is a very difficult country. They are very proud
people and the do not like to be grieved by
foreigners especially by those who are in
uniform. He said 'All we can do is to bring the
parties that have a say, together and we will go
wherever and whenever it is useful' It is
reported that at closed door session Secrity
Council failed to recommend any of three options
tabled before it.
The options
included, holding of tribal conclave or Loya
Jirga under the leadership of King Zahir Shah,
sending in a Muslim security force along the
lines proposed by Turkey and foring a UN Peace
keeping Force and installing a UN Administration.
Mr Brahimi has reported to have recently said
that the UN is definitely not seeking
transitional administration or peacekeeping or
any thing like that in Afghanistan.
Another important
factor in Afghanistan which cannot be overlooked
is Northern Alliance which is supported by
Russia, India and Iran. Russia is helping
Northern Alliance with arms and wants that they
should recapture more and more territory to gain
a say in fuure political set up. The US is also
helping them but not on large scale. One of the
ministers in Northern Alliance government Mr
Mohaqiq has said in an interview that Pakistan
should not have any role in Afghanistan as it has
followed a policy of creating hatred among
various ethnic groups in Afghanistan. With the
financial and military support from Pakistan,
Taliban mercenaries carried out massacre of
various other ethnic groups.
Mr Mohaqiq claimed
that Northern Alliance has all the major ethnic
groups. Russia, India and Iran are in close
contact with each other on Afghan situation. In
September representatives of these three
countries along with Tajikistan met in Dushanbe,
after the assassination of the Afghan Commander
Ahmad Shah Masood. Russian Deputy Prime Minister
was in New Delhi for consultation. Indian Foreign
Minister Jaswant Singh has been in touch with his
counterparts in France, Germany, Australia,
Russia, Iran on the situation in Afghanistan.
India is backing Northern Alliance but favours
that Pashtoons should be included in future
governemnt. We have offered 500 million dollars
for reconstruction in Afghanistan.
It is true India's
interest lies in replacement of present regime of
Taliban who have been harbouring terrorists,
running training camps and exporting terrorists
to Kashmir. Pakistan is insisting on inclusion of
moderate Talibans but the organisation which is
wedded to fundamentalism of extreme type can have
hardly moderates. It is another thing that
Pakistan with a view to keep a hold of
Afghanistan wants Taliban in other garb.
Any way,
Afghanistan can't have stability and peace unless
the new government has representatives of all
ethnic groups and gives up terrorism as its tool.
PTI Feature.
|
|
Vicious
education mill
Academic pulse
By. Prof. S K Bhalla
These are the days
of career-minded students and curriculum oriented
teachers who between themselves have completely
forgotten as to what true education consists.
Socrates, the wisest man of his times said that
the only thing he knew was the fact of his
ignorance which in other words is an awareness of
a truth that the more one learns, the less one
knows. A truly educated person is constantly
striving to link personal achievement of public
good. The billion dollar point is -Is our present
educational system capable of producing such
minds in sufficient number ? The answer is big
No.
In my humble
opinion our educational system is in general
terribly cruel. Students are not encouraged to
find answers on their own. It is race for
cramming to get good marks as we are in the habit
of confusing literacy with education, teaching
with learning and grade acquisition with real
education. We rely on made-easy guide, and help
books rather than the sources of knowledge. The
popularity of these guides and help books among
the teachers and tough at all levels these days
being promoted by a Mafia of
booksellers-pseudo-intellectuals for many
extraneous considerations has generated contempt
for reading the original text books. The students
are unfortunately taught mainly to guess what
their teachers want them to say and write. These
observations are the outcome of my personal
intraction with a motley crew of students from a
few schools and colleges both private and
Government operating in Jammu city who want their
view point to be made public on the condition of
anonymity.
The root cause of
the matter lies in passing through the same
educational mill by our teachers as students. So
the dire need to encourage teachers who educate
their pupils that true education consists not in
knowing all the answers but raising questions and
knowing how and where to find answers. But here
again the dearth of essentially motivated
teachers stares us in the face.
It is quite wrong
to assume that a building makes up a school, a
college or a University. Teachers do. I am
compelled to write that over the years it seems
as if teachers do not command the same respect
they once day. Some have developed the habit of
blaming the parents , complaining about low
salaries, pointing to unresponsive,
administration and find fault with the
facilities. This does not mean that physical
infrastructure the classroom the materials, the
teaching aids are unimportant. But the most vital
ingredient is the level of degree of motivation
which in many cases is missing. According to
Richard Jolly" Is this fair to the children
who have little say in deciding teachers salaries
or deciding the curriculum or reforming the
administration? Why should children pay the price
for something they are not responsible? "
This he said in the context of those teachers who
do not teacher and offer excuses for being late
or absent.
So it is
essentially required that we should set our
goals. This may start top down or bottom-up.
Whatever the process the two processes must meet.
"Goals must be related to the local needs
but also be relevant in terms of national
needs" to quote from an excerpt from J P
Naik Memorial lecture delivered by an eminent
intellectual.
Ziaisation
of Musharraf
By M Rama Rao
The Afghan
campaign has pushed to the back burner President
Musharraf's plans for 'restoration' of democracy
in Pakistan. He has not been talking about the
subject, he so passionately espoused on August
14, the Independence Day of the country.
Not even the
Americans, who had raised several questions,
while expressing happiness at the General
outlining his road map to democracy.
The Alliance for
Restoration of Democracy (ARD), which should be
concerned, is also quiet, in fact, very quiet.
Neither the ARD leaders nor former prime
ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif has
renewed the demand for a caretaker 'neutral'
government in the past couple of months.
Sounds strange!
Isn't it? Who has thrown the spanner into the
Musharraf works?
The last and most
crucial round of elections to the local bodies
were over by the first week of August. But the
new local government system is nowhere in sight.
Local bodies have been promised a financial and
political package to become centres of model
governance. The package is yet to materialise.
There is no
shortage of financial resources with the Federal
government. In fact, the new-found status of a
'front-line state in the fight against terrorism'
has made Islamabad derive 'Al Faida' from 'Al
Qaeda' and is literally floating in an ocean of
aid packets and debt trap bail-outs from the
western world.
Political parties,
initially, denounced the Musharraf exercise at
creating a new set up for the local bodies as
meaningless and dangerous to democracy. Yet, they
participated in a big way overcoming the official
ban on the presence of political parties in the
fray. All most all-big parties, the PPP, PML (N),
PML (QA), ANP and Jamaat-e-Islami fielded their
proxies.
Many of their
candidates had won the elections, notwithstanding
the official campaign against these parties. The
victory was not because their political base is
in tact, as some tend opine. It is because the
political parties have by now perfected the art
of survival by being on the right side of the
military master.
The people's Party
of Pakistan (PPP) of former Prime Minister
Benazir Bhutto has proved that it is adept at
playing to the 'military' gallery. She was in
long distance dialogue with the General Sahib,
who in her own words, is a far better bet than
her enemy No. 1- Nawaz Sharif. As the Dawn
reporter Ashraf Mumtaz said in his September 7
despatch from Lahore, senior PPP vice-chairman
Makhdoom Amin Faheem was negotiating the 'deal
for democracy'. Faheem was to become the interim
prime minister and conduct elections the Supreme
Court had decreed should be held before October
2002.
Under the 'deal'
PPP would be 'helped' to win the elections but
Benazir would renounce her claim to prime
minstership. She will be contented to see her
husband become a free man once again. Asif Ali
Zardari, who was knon as Mr 50% during the
Benazir stint in office on account of his
business interests has been languishing in jail
from the Nawaz Sharif days.
Other components
of the 'deal' are no less interesting, if not
intriguing. While the breakaway 'sarkari' Muslim
League, (PML-QA) will get Punjab to rule, the
governments in Sindh and NWFP will be handed over
to PPP and Balochistan will be federally
administered till a workable arrangement is
arrived at locally.
On-record denials
and off-record affirmations notwithstanding,
Benazir Bhutto and military establishment have
been engaged in public battle of wits to
preserve, protect, and promote their
'credentials'. Understandable. Not surprising.
Some time back Gen
Musharraf had said that it was the army's
decision that Benazir and Nawaz would not be
given a third chance to rule the country. This
was the price for their failure to come up to
people's expectations, not once but twice.
Still, he was
willing to deal with Benazir as she was in a
position to impart 'respectability' to his
regime. More over she needed his 'bail-out' more
than he needed her services. The fragility of the
democratic institutions and traditions in
Pakistan was never exposed in the way it happened
under General Musharraf.
The difference
between the past and the present is simple.
Musharraf's predecessors had to put up
appearances. He need not.
Why should he when
politicians are falling head over heels to please
him!
When the Bush
administration, unlike its predecessor, is
willing to go along with his plans !
And like late
chief justice Anwarul Haq and his colleagues at
the time of Zia-ul-Haq, have gone out of their
way to legitimise the Musharraf coup and
authorised him to amend the constitution at will.
That the Constitution is functionally dead until
the General decrees otherwise is a different
thing.
Before we attempt
to find out what would be next on the Musharraf
agenda, a flash back to 1947 the year the
departing British carved out Muslim Pakistan is
essential.
Mohammad Ali
Jinnah was popular. His Muslim League created a
mass movement to realise his dream. But it had no
loyal cadre and that was why at the dawn of
independence it found itself ill-equipped to run
the government. Probably, had it had a second
rung leadership even wth a feudal background, who
shared Jinnah's idealism, things could have been
different.
Military stepped
in to fill the vacuum. It stunted over time the
growth of political parties as the Generals by
temperament loath to share power.
The Post-September
11 developments in the Pakistani power structure
and political world are a reflection of this
harsh reality.
Gen Musharraf has
quietly extended his tenure as the army chief
citing the security environment as the prime
reason for his resolve to stick to the uniform.
Whatever little threat was there to his 'army'
position was removed by 'friendly tips' from the
US, who finds in him a 'good, reliable, forward
looking foot soldier'.
Ziaisation of
Musharraf is complete.
Carter's peanuts
had boosted the Zia morale. Like Bush's berries
now for Musharraf.
Who cares for
history? Only 'fools'across the line divide?
Advanis, Vajpayees et al. May be !
--Syndicate
Features
|
|
|
