|
AGRI MARKET UNDERGOES BASIC CHANGES
Biofuels boom driving food prices up
Martin Khor
The rising cost of wheat flour and its possible inflationary spillover to bread, noodles, cakes, biscuits and chapatti has been making hot news in Malaysia, with the government urging makers of wheat-based food products to restrain from raising their prices excessively.
It is the same bad news the world over. And wheat is only one example. The prices of many other food items are also going up.
In the world market, wheat and milk prices have risen to all-time high levels. Rice is at a 10-year record level. Corn and soyabean prices are also higher than their averages a decade ago. The price of meat has shot up in many countries.
The era of cheap food seems to be over. With demand exceeding supply, there is also concern of impending shortages, as stocks in warehouses decline, and as some countries restrict the export of their food.
We are used to some food prices suddenly going up and then declining again. This is usually due to output being affected by drought or crop disease, and indeed the present drought in some wheat producing countries is one reason for the recent hike in wheat prices.
But this time there are also other more structural and long-term factors that suggest that the high levels of food prices will remain or climb further.
The first is the rising demand for many types of food in developing countries, due to population growth, rising incomes, and changing tastes. China is often cited as an example of this rising demand, but there are also many countries where demand is outstripping local supply, thus increasing the pressure on world markets.
The second is the rising cost of inputs that go into producing food. Oil is the prime example. Its price has been shooting up, hitting a record of US$92 a barrel recently with predictions that it may reach US$100 in due course.
This hits food prices in at least two ways - by driving up the cost of inputs such as tractor fuel and fertiliser, and by increasing the cost of transporting the food across oceans.
The third is the boom in biofuels, which is causing land that could be growing food crops to be used for producing crops for fuel.
The increased demand for biofuels is causing basic changes to agricultural markets that may drive up the world prices of many farm products, according to a June report by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development - the developed countries' think-tank).
Their Agricultural Outlook 2007-2016 said that temporary factors such as droughts in wheat-growing regions and low stocks largely explain the recent hikes in farm commodity prices.
"But structural changes are underway which could well maintain relatively high nominal prices for many agricultural products over the coming decade," said the report summary.
The most important change is "the growing use of cereals, sugar, oilseed and vegetable oils to produce fossil fuel substitutes, ethanol and bio-diesel.
"This is underpinning crop prices and, indirectly through higher animal feed costs, also the prices for livestock products."
The shift of land use from food to fuel is ringing alarm bells. On 26 October, the United Nations' rapporteur on the right to food, Jean Ziegler, told a press conference in New York that there should be a five-year moratorium on biofuels "as it is a crime against humanity to convert food crops to fuel.
"Biofuels are driving up food prices at a time when there are 854 million hungry people in the world."
Another recent FAO report (on "Crop prospects and food situation") said that international wheat prices have risen sharply since June, hitting record highs in September, due to tightening world supplies, low stock levels and sustained demand.
The combination of higher export prices and soaring freight rates is "pushing up domestic prices of bread and other basic food in importing developing countries, and causing social unrest in some areas."
Overall, developing countries are estimated to spend a record US$52 billion in cereal imports in 2007. Other highlights of the FAO report:
Maize prices are well above last year's levels, despite bumper crops, due to strong demand from the biofuel industry.
The 2007 cereal harvest will only just meet utilisation levels in 2008, meaning that stocks will not be replenished Cereal stocks will remain at very low levels for the foreseeable future.
Wheat stocks are "worrying". Sustained demand amid insufficient production increase this year may cause world inventories to fall by at least 14 million tones to 143 million tones, the lowest in 25 years. 36 countries are currently facing food crises.
With food prices on the rise, and with food insecurity increasing as stocks tighten or fall, many countries are already planning to increase their own production of food.
Since the prices of food imports are now so high, it is economically more worthwhile, for both farmers and the nation, to start or increase the production of various types of food crops.
-Third World Network Features
 ^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Tension in India-US ties on nuclear deal
Barrister Harun ur Rashid
The centre piece of India's new friendship with the US was the US-India nuclear deal. It seems to be in great trouble. The deal which was announced by President Bush last year and approved by Congress has been involved in domestic politics in India.
The left-wing parties, especially the Communist party (CPI) and CPI (M), which provide support to the coalition government of Dr. Manmohan Singh oppose the deal as they perceive it takes away India's sovereignty in dealing with nuclear development within the country. They also threaten that they will bolt out of the coalition government if the government proceeds with the deal. The right-wing opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) also opposes the deal.
The government first considered to call a new general election on the issue to force CPI (M) not to oppose the deal but on October 12 decided not to do so. The coalition government is scheduled to run until 2009 and they do not want to take risk of losing power in an early general election.
Against this background, Prime Minister Singh decided to postpone the implementation of the nuclear deal. However on 30th October, he diplomatically stated that the deal, though delayed, was not dead. He reportedly said "We have not reached the end of the road".
The US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, visiting India, took it lightly when asked about the latest snag and on 29th October, and said in Mumbai "Obviously India needs to sort this out and come to its conclusions."
US officials suggest that it could cost India not only a generous nuclear accord but also make future dealings more difficult
The Bush administration is severely disappointed that India has suspended its follow-up action to clinch the deal. While the White House has been careful not to exert pressure publicly, privately they are dissatisfied that India cannot keep a commitment made by the Prime Minister. Further it goes to the question of credibility of India as being an unreliable partner to an agreement.
Furthermore the White House maintains that the deal needs a final vote of the Congress after India goes through process for implementation, namely, getting approval of the IAEA and of 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group.
If the process of implementation is delayed by India, the White House believes that it will be difficult to get the nuclear deal passed in an increasingly polarised US Congress as the American election approaches.
Strove Talbott, a former Deputy Secretary of State in the Clinton administration, reportedly said India's chances of getting a deal through Congress would diminish over time and make it difficult to negotiate a similar deal with a future US administration.
There is a view that post-Bush administration may find it difficult to revive the deal for two reasons, namely India's insistence on investing in a natural gas pipeline from Iran, and its insistence on the right to continue testing nuclear weapons.
Henry Kissinger, the former US Secretary of State and close to President Bush, reportedly declared in an interview with a private Indian television that for India to shelve the deal would affect negotiations on other matters with the US.
Some Congress men and women hold the view that the deal is inconsistent with the US policy of nuclear non-proliferation for Iran and North Korea.
Disarmament campaigners allege the U.S.-India deal would violate the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1970) by letting India devote more of its uranium to expanding production of plutonium for nuclear arms. Furthermore India is not a party to NPT.
The NPT binds members without nuclear arms not to acquire them, promises nuclear "have nots" access to the technology for peaceful purposes, and obliges the original five nuclear powers including the US from the post-World War II era to phase out their arsenals.
The question is whether Prime Minister Singh can assuage its critics from the political left and right in time for the Bush administration to get it past the Congress. Time seems to be running out for both the Dr. Singh government and the Bush administration.
India's economy is growing and it is a big market for US companies. The bilateral trade at the end of 2006 stood at $32 billion dollars. The US companies have been chasing Indian opportunity as the middle class in India is rising and stands more than 300 million with disposable income on modern gadgets.
Furthermore, some Indian strategists hold the view that India's importance to the US will continue to remain despite the fall out of the deal because India is a counter-weight to China's power.
Besides, the US perceives China as strategic competitor, not as strategic partner. The US policy is to prop up a countervailing force in Asia against China. What country can be better other than India to contain China's influence in Asia? Both India and the US need each other because of long-term strategic interests.
The writer is a former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Kurdish fighters in Iraqi Kurdistan will resist if Turkey attacks
Frman Abdul-Rahman in Qandil
Kurdish fighters deep in the mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan say they are prepared to fight Turkey if it invades northern Iraq to flush out PKK guerrillas.
General Jabbar Yawar, spokesman of the General Command of the Kurdistan Regional Government's Border Guard Force, said that Kurdish forces will fight Turkey if it enters Iraq.
"We have a strong force in Kurdistan, and we have been able to protect the security of Kurdistan for years," he said. "We will not stay out of the way of the Turkish army. We will resist."
The General argued that Turkey was using its conflict with the Kurdistan Worker's Party, PKK, as a pretext for a military incursion into the region of northern Iraq which enjoys self-rule. "Turkey has not been able to accept this region up to now," maintained Yawar.
The PKK is facing one of its most serious challenges from Turkey since setting up bases in the Qandil mountain area of Kurdish northern Iraq in 1982. Turkey is threatening to invade following weeks of fierce battles over the Iraqi-Turkish border between PKK rebels and Turkish forces, in which dozens have been killed on both sides.
Ankara accuses the US and the Iraqi governments of not doing enough to stop the PKK, which was founded in Turkey, from conducting cross-border attacks.
Washington, which is an ally of Turkey, is leading diplomatic efforts to prevent a Turkish invasion of northern Iraq, and US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice held high-level talks with Turkish leaders on November .2
Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is set to meet US president George W Bush in the intervening period and Turkish officials have said the country will decide whether it will send troops into Iraq after the meeting. While the US and Turkey consider the PKK to be a terrorist organisation, the party and its supporters say that it fights for Kurdish rights.
Although the US and Iraqi officials have pledged to crack down on the party in recent meetings with Turkish officials, Iraqi Kurdish leaders and PKK fighters say its bases in the rugged Qandil mountain range are impossible to access. The Qandil mountain range is about 3,500 metres high and about 1,500 square kilometres, lying between Iraq, Iran and Turkey.
The terrain is known in Iraqi Kurdistan as "Iraq's Tora Bora", a reference to the mountainous area of Afghanistan where al-Qaeda and Taleban fighters are thought to be hiding.
The PKK controls the towns below the mountains, and it is necessary to walk - and sometimes even crawl - up steep terrain to reach the party's bases.
Guerrillas have also built trenches and tunnels throughout the mountain range, which is blanketed by snow in the winter.
Abdularahman Chadirchy, a member of the PKK's command board, said that because of the harsh conditions, he does not believe that Turkey will launch a wide ground attack on PKK bases, despite reports that Turkey has sent 100,000 troops to the border. "If Turkey attacks Qandil, it will be by air," he said.
Fuad Hussein, chief of staff for the KRG, told IWPR that Iraqi Kurdistan's Peshmarga military forces are not able to drive out the PKK from such impenetrable terrain.
"Turkey is asking the Kurdistan region for something that is beyond our ability," said Hussein, who has called on the PKK to stop attacking the Turkish military and "giving them the pretext to come into the Kurdish region".
He also noted that rooting out the PKK would leave the mountain range open to Islamic extremists, such as Ansar al-Islam, the Kurdish-affiliated al-Qaeda group. Nowruz Jarand, a member of the PKK Leadership Council, confirmed that the group had fought Ansar al-Islam in the mountains.
She also said that the PKK continues to hold eight Turkish soldiers as prisoners of war, since they were captured during clashes in late October. Jarand said the troops were with the PKK inside Turkey and invited the International Committee for the Red Cross to visit them.
While the KRG condemned the capture of the Turkish troops - and has called on the PKK to stop attacking Turkey - Iraqi Kurds tend to support the group, arguing that Turkey discriminates against its Kurdish population. Many are also suspicious that Turkey wants to limit the power of the KRG.
Saria Mustafa, 20, a Syrian Kurdish fighter with the PKK, who joined the rebels last year, said she is ready for a Turkish attack. "They might reach Qandil," she said while sipping a cup of tea after a military training, "but it will be over my dead body."
The author is an IWPR correspondent in Sulaimaniyah.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
British blamed for Helmand's security problems
Wahidullah Amani in Kabul and Aziz Ahmad Tassal in Helmand
"The British do not want to bring security to Helmand," said Hazrat Sebghatullah Mojadeddi, speaker of the Meshrano Jirga, parliament's upper house. "They could wipe out the Taleban in a day if they wanted to. The Taleban are not as strong as they say."
Mojadeddi's words were salt in an already raw wound. The British have been bogged down in an increasingly bitter battle in the southern province of Helmand for more than a year, when they took over command from the United States-led Coalition.
The transition was not a smooth one. The British forces came in as part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, ISAF, with a different mission and rules of engagement from the Coalition. Whereas the latter was - and in other parts of the south still is - involved in an aggressive counter-terrorism campaign, the British were supposed to be bringing the security needed to allow reconstruction efforts to take place.
Over the past 18 months the insurgency in Helmand has boomed, reconstruction has stalled, and the local population has become more and more disaffected. The British have had to engage in operation after operation to clear the province of hostile elements, while the top NATO commander publicly admits that Afghan government forces are unable to hold the territory gained in such battles.
Now the British are being criticised by Afghanistan's senate, in the wake of a report delivered by Helmand member of parliament Abdulwahid Karezwal. After a fact-finding trip to his home province, Karezwal told the Meshrano Jirga that British soldiers are involved in intrusive and offensive house searches, and that they bomb villages and kill civilians, including children.
"The real reason behind the insecurity in Helmand is the behaviour of the British soldiers," he said.
The senators reacted angrily to his report, demanding that the accusations be investigated and action taken.
The contents of the report and the Meshrano Jirga's response to it highlight one of the major stumbling blocks in the British campaign to bring security and stability to Helmand - many local residents simply do not accept that the foreign troops are on their side.
"The British want to avenge their ancestors," asserted Mohammad Hanif Hanifi, a senator from neighbouring Uruzgan province, expressing a commonly-held view.
The British have had a long and troubled history in Afghanistan, beginning with the Great Game of the 19th century, in which they tried several times to create an Afghan buffer state to safeguard their Indian empire from the expansionist Russians. The rebellious locals were not cooperative, and three unsuccessful wars ensued. The most disastrous military engagement came in 1880 at the Battle of Maiwand, on the Helmand river, which resulted in the deaths of over 1,900 British and Indian troops.
Nearly 130 years later, Helmand's residents still remember the tales, and they are convinced that the British do, too.
"Their predecessors were defeated in Helmand, and that is why they are creating insecurity in the province," said Hanifi. "This is why they kill local people."
Prior to the arrival of the British, security was much better, he insisted. "When the US forces were here, the province was safe, and people had a better relationship with the foreign forces."
According to Hanifi, the Meshrano Jirga intends to send a copy of its report to President Hamed Karzai, with a request that strong action be taken.
"Security cannot be restored in Helmand province until the British are removed and another country's forces are deployed," he said.
Hanifi's opinions are widely echoed in Helmand. Locals are convinced that the rapid downhill spiral in security that occurred with the British arrival was no coincidence.
"If the British are here today, it is because they want to fight the Pashtuns," said Sultan Mohammad, a resident of the provincial capital Lashkar Gah. "The British have modern technology and weapons, but they are unable to defeat the Taleban. Why can't they ensure security, with more than 7,000 troops present in the province? They cannot do any reconstruction; they cannot win the hearts and minds of people. In reality, they do not want security."
Lieutenant-Colonel Richard Eaton, ISAF spokesperson in Helmand, rejects any suggestion that the British troops aim to do anything other than provide security and stability.
"We are here at the request of the Afghan government, and by decision of the United Nations Security Council," he said. "NATO forces launch joint operations with the national army and police. They do not conduct searches alone."
The only reason the British were in Helmand was to create security, he insisted. "NATO and ISAF are here to prevent Taleban attacks on the Afghan government and on ISAF," he said.
The head of Helmand's provincial council, Mohammad Anwar, also rejects the senators' accusations.
"Many years have passed since the Afghans and British fought," he said.
"The British are here to help, not for revenge."
Ghulam Sarwar Ghafari, a political expert from Helmand, condemned the parliament's verbal assault on the British.
"It is a very bad thing for parliament to accuse the British of not wanting security," he said. "That is not parliament's job."
Ghafari was not quite ready to leap to the defence of the foreign troops, however. "The UN should establish a supervisory council and investigate the British actions," he said.
Public opinion tilts towards the parliamentarians' view.
"The people of Helmand cannot tolerate searches of their homes by the British," said Sardar Mohammad, a schoolteacher in Lashkar Gah. "For a foreigner to enter the house of a Pashtun without permission is a crime against humanity. The soldiers should be tried and punished. They kill or imprison innocent people, calling them al-Qaeda or Taleban."
The authors are staff reporters of IWPR.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Sri Lanka: Military action polarises society
Jehan Perera in Colombo
Sri Lankan troops and Tamil Tiger rebels have fought fierce battles in the north of the island with the loss of many lives, the two sides said. About 30 soldiers and rebels are reported to have died. Both sides say the other suffered heavy casualties. There is no independent confirmation. Military jets also pounded on 1 November a suspected rebel training base in the north-east. Fighting between troops and the rebels, who want autonomy in the north and east, has worsened in recent months. The military says at least 22 rebels were killed in fighting near Mannar in the north-west on 1 November. Two soldiers are said to have died. According to the military, the bodies of eight rebel fighters were recovered after the fighting. Soldiers learnt of other rebel casualties from radio intercepts. In a clash further north at Muhumale in the Jaffna peninsula, another eight rebels were killed and their bodies left behind on the battlefield, the army says.
The rebels, however, said they had killed at least 25 soldiers near Mannar, with the loss of seven of their own. They said troops had suffered casualties in the fighting in Jaffna, while the rebels had not. The pro-rebel TamilNet website said a young woman had been shot dead by troops while they were evacuating casualties from the battlefield near Mannar.
Sri Lankans of all communities celebrate together and grieve together when it comes to non-violent and non-political accomplishments, such as the national team's victories and defeats on the cricket grounds. The multi ethnic and multi religious cricket team stands as a positive example of the results that can be accomplished by team work when the members of society are bound by a common purpose. By way of contrast, the violent actions of the government and Tamil militants fighting for a separate Tamil homeland over the past three decades have deeply polarized the country and its people, primarily along ethnic lines, but also along political lines.
The salesgirl at the bakery was all smiles when I walked in the morning after the news that LTTE political wing leader and chief negotiator in peace talks, S P Thamilselvan had been slain in an air strike. On the last occasion she had bitterly complained about the rising cost of living, the loss that her bakery was making, and the small salary that she was drawing that made ends impossible for her to meet for her family. She had agreed that these were the inevitable costs of war. But on this occasion she was happy with the news that the government had successfully eliminated a top ranking LTTE leader and giving the LTTE a dose of their own medicine.
On the other hand, no Tamil person I have yet met expressed that same happiness, although most of my Tamil friends cannot be said to be either LTTE supporters or even sympathizers. The line of division therefore is clear, although undoubtedly there would be many exceptions also. Fortunately for those who hope that Sri Lankans of all ethnic communities will one day be one in both heart and mind in a united country, the line of division is not only ethnic. There is also a line of division between those who yearn for a negotiated political solution to the ethnic conflict over those who seek a military solution, one in which there will be a mutually agreed solution, rather than a unilaterally imposed solution of the victor over the defeated.
Much is talked about a Sri Lankan identity, in the past and now. Even Sinhalese nationalist parties who seek an elimination of the Tamil Guerrillas through a military solution, talk about the importance of a Sri Lankan identity which implies a Sri Lankan family. The social doctrine of religion tells us that the ideal human society would be based on the model of the family. Indeed, "to the wise, the whole world is one family." The most salient feature of the family is that in it, each individual is equally an end in himself or herself, and no member is an instrument or means to an end. Within a properly functioning family no dispute is settled by force or by numbers, but only by mutual consent, in which dialogue and a willingness to accommodate each other are the mode of behaviour. Unfortunately, such thoughts appear to be far from the hearts and minds of the leadership of the government and Tamil Guerrillas at the present time.
Reconsider strategy
The shock and awe type of air strike by sophisticated bomber aircraft of the Sri Lankan air force deep into LTTE-controlled territory and the precise nature of the targeting that killed the LTTE's political wing leader S P Thamilselvan will do much to firm up the belief in the viability of a military solution. There is also an indication that the detailed information necessary to have pinpointed the location in which the Tamil Guerrilla leader was at in the wee hours of the morning could only have come from within the Tamil Guerrilla itself. It may have been this combination of factors that made the Sri Lankan Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa to assert that the government would get the Tamil Guerrilla leadership one by one.
Ironically at the same time as BBC reported the news of Thamilselvan's killing by a Sri Lankan air strike, it also reported that an Israeli air strike in the Gaza Strip had killed a Hamas leader. For several years now the Israeli government has been targeting Palestinian militants with deadly effect, eliminating a large number of them. But the conflict in Palestine does not seem to be getting resolved. Although some of those killings seemed very significant at the time they took place, none of them has led to a solution to the conflict apart from generating still more hatred and determination to retaliate and fight back.
The killing of Mr Thamilselvan is likely to lead to more severe escalation of the present phase of war. It deepens the crisis of violence that confronts the country and serves as a grisly reminder of the tens of thousands of lives that have been lost, including a large number of democratically elected leaders of the government and other political actors. In its statement condemning the government, the Tamil National Alliance which represents the war battered Tamil people of the north and east in Parliament, called on the Tamil Guerrilla to reconsider deeply its strategy.
As Mr Thamilselvan was Tamil Guerrilla's chief negotiator at the last two rounds of peace talks, his killing will be a major setback to any possibility of a return to the negotiating table any time soon. The government's choice of him as a target also suggests a lack of belief in the relevance of negotiations at this time. The weakness of the Tamil Guerrilla that is manifesting itself at the present time has been its inability to convert its military capacity into an equivalent political strength. Only a fortnight ago the Tamil Guerrilla demonstrated once again its capacity for guerilla warfare with its attack on the Anuradhapura air force base. They destroyed millions of dollars worth of aircraft on the ground.
Ltte response
On the other hand, even during the peace process, the Tamil Guerrilla was unable to change the perception of itself as a terrorist organization. Not one of the countries that had banned the LTTE made any move to lift that ban. During even the height of the peace process between 2002 -2004 the LTTE kept on with its programme of assassinating its political opponents and forcibly recruiting children into its cadre. Although several LTTE delegations visited foreign countries on exposure tours, they failed to make the crucial shift towards a political organization that no longer used violence as an instrument of political achievement.
The question is how the LTTE will respond to the killing of Mr Thamilselvan. Its spokesman has said that the LTTE will respond with deeds and not with words. The cycle that Sri Lanka has got accustomed to is one of reprisals, where each side attempts to outdo the other in the damage and pain that is caused. If the past is any guide to the future, the LTTE's efforts will be to level the score by attacking an equivalent or more important target, be it an individual, a military base or economic asset that would shatter the government's morale. President Mahinda Rajapaksa has warned his Government members to be on the highest alert.
Such retaliatory and escalatory actions will be satisfying to the instincts of revenge. Success will also be a morale booster. But experience has shown that such successes are ephemeral and illusional. The fundamental military balance does not change with one or two setbacks, even if they are important ones. The history of the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka is full of examples of very high level people who have been killed, including a President, but without altering the long term trajectory of the conflict to any noticeable degree.
As advocated by the TNA, the LTTE needs to consider a complete shift of approach, and one that accords with the best interests of the Tamil people. As a relatively small ethnic minority, the Tamil people desire a negotiated political solution that is based on the principles of justice, power sharing and mutual consent, and not one that is imposed by violence, unilateralism and brute force. At the present time the Sri Lankan government is headed by a leadership whose background and experience of the Tamil Guerrillas has made them think otherwise. Instead of an increased likelihood of an escalated cycle of violence and revenge that will further dehumanise the social and moral fabric of our country, the government and Tamil Guerrillas need to address the political root causes that gave rise to the conflict as a matter of priority and find that the military conflict becomes much easier to resolve.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
NEWS NOTES FROM NEW YORK
Fazle Rashid
Musharraf move Bush's nightmare
Police in Pakistan went into a rampage using tear gas and batons to disperse demonstrators protesting clamping of the state of emergency by the military dictator Parvez Musharraf. Musharraf ridiculed the rumour of his being put into detention telling the diplomats he would be playing tennis in the afternoon
The US, which expressed disgust through secretary of state Condi Rice and defence secretary Gates, swiftly postponed the meeting on defence cooperation. The judiciary which spearheaded the anti-Musharraf movement bore the brunt of attack. Judges have been arrested.
US defence secretary Robert Gates made it clear that Musharraf must return his country to law based, constitutional and democratic rule as soon as possible. Secretary of State Condi Rice voiced her disappointment. The move is highly regrettable, Rice said,
Musharraf's action is a huge embarrassment for Washington but there is little it can do. US would not do anything that would jeopardise battle against the terrorism that is being fought on Pakistani soil.
America has given Pakistan $10 billion in military aid since 2001. But the money has been used to beefing up its conventional arms rather than combating the growing might of al-Qaeda and Talebans
Musharraf's enemy has not been al-Qaeda or Talebans who are rapidly encroaching upon Pakistani territory but the judges and lawyers. Musharraf's targets are democratic secular elites. Musharraf and the army think they are above law and international obligations. Musharraf treats the judiciary with contempt. There is an ever widening gap between an unaccountable army and the people that yearn for an independent judiciary, rule of law and respect for the constitution.
Musharraf's first concern is his own survival. Army is deeply demoralised and unwilling to fight a never ending war against his countrymen, wrote Ahmed Rashid, in the Telegraph.
An army takeover will not have the blessings of Washington.
Army in Pakistan, Thailand, Myanmar and Fiji have come under blistering attack for trampling, democracy, rule of law, civil rights, flouting constitution, imposing its will on the people and training their guns on people with weapons bought by tax-payers money.
Iraq peace lost
A report prepared by the British army and leaked to media held foreign policy planners in US and UK responsible for the mess in Iraq. Leaders should not start an operation without thinking through the options and implications.
The document said widespread planning failures by the coalition forces led to the 'peace' being lost within 100 days of the occupation. The Iraq campaign was severely undermined by lack of planning, resources, funding and intelligence.
The report said US and Britain breached the Geneva Convention by failing to properly conduct themselves as the occupying force. They failed to win the hearts of the Iraqi people.
PETROCHINA now world's #1
PETROCHINA, China's oil and gas giant, became world's first company to surpass $1.08 trillion in market capitalisation. It edged past US oil behemoth Exxon Mobil as the world's most expensive company.
China is home to world's most expensive companies. It has five of the ten largest companies in the world. China has the biggest bank, insurance company, telecommunication carrier and airline by market capitalisation.
China National Chemical Corporation teamed with two other companies made a bid to acquire Nufarm by paying $3 billion. Nufarm is the biggest agricultural chemicals company.
The Labour Party in Australia, if it were to the win the November 24 polls will expand economic ties with China. The close proximity of the two countries has been cited as a reason for expanded economic ties.
Bangladesh has warm bilateral ties with China. Why not Dhaka does something to have a slice of China's booming growth in all sectors.
Nuclear fuel plan
America has been exhorted to shelve ambitious nuclear energy plan for supplying other nations with reactor fuel and reprocessing their nuclear waste. A 17-member panel expressed deep reservation about the ability to address nuclear waste disposal and found no economic justification for pursuing the technology on a commercial scale.
Washington in the meanwhile has given its green signal to Egypt which has declared its intention to go nuclear for civilian purposes. US is on the other hand is vehemently opposed to Iran's bid to enrich uranium for civilian purposes. The avowed purpose of both Iran and Egypt are the same. The difference is Egypt has diplomatic ties with Israel.
China's cheap labour no more
China's seemingly bottomless pool of cheap labour which has been the main force behind its phenomenol economic growth is drying up. Double digit economic growth for 30 years has reduced the rural population of surplus labour to as few as five per cent, a recent study revealed. Workers are becoming scarce therefore expensive. Wages have spiked after decade of stagnation. China once had 200 million surplus labour, main prop for china's astounding economic success
Gender imbalance
Growing gender imbalance is threatening the institution of marriage in some of the densely populated countries like China, India, Nepal and Vietnam. In these countries men far outnumber women.
Sex trafficking, violence against women and depression among men will increase if the problem is not addressed, researchers fear. There are 2.1 billion men to 1.9 billion women in these countries. General apathy to having a female child particularly in India has largely aggravated the situation.
Deputy Executive Director of the UN population fund said perception of women's value needed to change in Asian culture, Sex imbalance is a reflection of the fact women are not valued.
The researchers fear that men in these four countries may go to other countries to get married.
Dalai Lama
At least four countries - the US, Britain, Canada and Germany - have ignored warnings from Beijing and accorded reception to exiled Tibetian leader Dalai Lama. Dalai Lama fled from Tibet after a failed uprising against communist rule in 1959.
Dalai Lama says he wants greater autonomy not independence. China says Dalai Lama is a separist. China treats such treatment to Dalai Lama as an intrusion into internal affairs.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
ISLAMABAD DIARY
Jonaid Iqbal
General Pervez Musharraf, Chief of Staff of Pakistan Army, issued a new Provisional Constitution Order (PCO) on Saturday evening, putting the Constitution of Pakistan in abeyance.
The General dressed in civilian sherwani spoke on the state television wee hours of Sunday morning justified his action by pointing to the growth of militant Islamic movement and a court system that hindered his powers and had forced him to declare the state of emergency.
A number of fundamental rights such as the freedom of speech, association, and protection of citizens from arbitrary action of the state, including arrest have been put on hold. However, the parliament, the cabinet and courts have been allowed to function, while judges of the Supreme Court as well as the four high courts of the provinces were allowed to continue.
Selected group of judges were invited to swear a new oath under the PCO, while others were left in the lurch.
Most observers saw this as an action to pre-empt the decision of the Supreme Court which was busy examining the legality of President Musharraf's bid to be elected as the President since, according to the Constitution, a servant of the government could not contest the election before two years of his leaving the office.
President Musharraf's lawyers continued to argue that the Constitution has allowed him to hold the office of the Parliament had given him the permission to hold the office of the President while he continued to hold the post of the Chief of Army. His detractors accepted this argument but said it was valid only for Pervez Muharraf's present term as President. For the next term he is obliged to stick to the wording of the Constitution. Nonetheless, the COAS acted while the petition was still being in the process of judicial decision.
Nevertheless, the PCO was massively rejected by a number of politicians and the civil society. Among those who protested were the PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto, who called the action as Martial Law, because the COAS was not authorised to slap emergency, which she said only be done by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister.
Not Martial Law
Benazir returned to Pakistan on Oct. 18, after concluding a deal, between her and President Musharraf, brokered with the United States help, had earlier left for Dubai, to see her children and ailing mother, once again came back to Pakistan to 'encourage the people,' as she put it. Countering her argument Attorney General Malik Mohammed Qayyum denied that Gen. Musharraf had imposed Martial Law - direct rule by the army - under the guise of a state of emergency. He noted the prime minister was still in place and that the legislature would complete its term next week
All unofficial channels, including the foreign ones such as Al-Jazeera, BBC, CNN, were locked out since November 3, minutes after the state television announced the coming of the PCO. Citizens are now surfing Internet to get news about mounting opposition and protests, which started on November 4.
On the first day after the emergency, police and para-military forces, arrested nearly 1500 (BBC said 2000) activists and opposition members, including many women, shouting "Shame" and "Go Musharraf go." Yahoo news reported, 'Officers dragged some out of the crowd and forced them to the ground. Eight were taken away in a van.' The demonstration, attended by 40 people, near the Marriott Hotel, was broken up by baton-wielding police, while scores of troops were blocking the Supreme Court and parliament buildings. However streets in the capital appeared calm, with only a handful of demonstrations.
The first to be arrested on November 3 evening was Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, the new President of Supreme Court Bar Association, who has now been put inside the Adiala (Rawalpindi) Jail. Nawaz League President Javed Hashmi, the NAP President Asfandyar Wali, a famed human rights activist and head of Pakistan Human Rights Commission Asma Jahangir, and many PML-N and PP activists have also been arrested.
Former Inter Services Intelligence Chief Gen. Hameed Gul was arrested when he went to shower flowers on seven judges who did not present themselves to take oath under the PCO.
With protests mounting in Pakistan, Gen Musharraf's action has disappointed his allies and friends including Britain, China, and the USA. Gen. Musharraf read from Abraham Lincoln for US benefit; justifying his action on the touchstone of Lincoln who had at times also acted outside the Constitution to save his country.
Rice's concern
However, US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice has expressed grave concern at this latest move and said Washington would review billions of dollars in aid to its close terrorism-fighting ally Pakistan.
"Some of the aid that goes to Pakistan is directly related to the counterterrorism mission," but Rice anticipated, "We just have to review the situation, ignoring or set aside our concerns about terrorism." Meanwhile, a US defence official gave a quick assurance that military aid [to Pakistan] would continue.
Thus Pakistan has once come under the periodic rule of the army. The cycle has continued since 1954 after Premier Khwaja Nazimuddin was dismounted after elections in East Pakistan in 1954, in which the United Front led by Sher-e-Bangla A.K. Fazlul Haque and Moulana Abdul Hamid Khan Bhashani swept the election and the ruling Muslim League could get merely 10 provincial seats. The late Mahmud Ali, used to say, Martial law was imposed in Oct. 1958, four months ahead of general election expected to take place in Feb. 1959.
This time around, crucial general election, expected to take place in Jan. 2008, is again at stake. Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz said that the polls could be delayed up to a year. He said the extraordinary measures would be in place "as long as it is necessary.'
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
|
