Palestinian rights

Over the years, the approach of most American policymakers toward the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict has been Israel-centric with near total disregard for the suffering
endured by the Palestinian people. The architects of policy in successive US
administrations have discussed the conflict as if the fate of only one party (Israel) really
mattered. Israelis were treated as full human beings with hopes and fears, while
Palestinians were reduced to a problem that needed to be solved so that Israelis could
live in peace and security.
It is not just that Israelis and Palestinians haven't been viewed with an equal measure of
concern. It's worse than that. It appears that Palestinians were judged as less human
than Israelis, and were, therefore, not entitled to make demands to have their rights
recognized and protected.
Operating from this mindset, the US has given Israel carte blanche, while pressure and
punishments have been reserved for the Palestinians. On occasion, policymakers have
timidly raised issue with some Israeli practices, but because they’ve taken no effective
measures to change these behaviors, Israel has seen no reason to alter its course. As a
result, Israel operates with impunity, while Palestinian actions have been scrutinized and
condemned and their protests have either been ignored or silenced as disruptive or
counterproductive.
Recent actions by the Biden Administration sadly fit this pattern. In just the past few
weeks, they have: condemned the decision of the International Criminal Court to begin
prosecution of Israel for its war crimes in Gaza since 2014 and its illegal settlement
expansion in the West Bank; criticized the UN Human Rights Council for its
condemnation of Israeli abuses of Palestinian human rights; rejected tying US aid to
Israel's human rights behaviors; declared opposition to Palestinian calls to boycott,
divest, and sanction Israel for its violations of Palestinian rights; and ‘embraced’ the
expanded definition of anti-Semitism that includes some legitimate criticisms of Israel.
Especially revealing was one of the reasons given for US opposition to Palestinians taking
their complaints to international fora. The US charged that, “Such actions against
Israel...increase tensions and undercut efforts to advance a negotiated two-state
solution.” This appears to suggest that Israel’s aggressive land confiscation, settlement
1
construction, demolition of Palestinian homes, detention without charges or trial of
hundreds of Palestinians, collective punishment of the entire population of Gaza, and
Israel's mass killing sprees of Palestinians in 2014 and 2018, did not “increase tensions
or undercut efforts” at peace making. But Palestinians seeking legal remedies against
these Israeli actions is disruptive. In short, Israel can do whatever it wants, with US
backing. But when Palestinians protest – precisely because the US will do nothing to
defend them – then they are at fault.
By: James Zogby
Source: The News
Excerpted: ‘US Policy Ignores Palestinian Human Rights’

2
 Will Biden’s plan succeed?
Last week, in a bid to revive the floundering Afghan peace process, the US Secretary of
State Antony Blinken wrote a letter to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani.
Adjacently, an eight-page peace plan was also shared with the Afghan government,
opposition parties, civil society and the Taliban. Among other things, the peace plan calls
for the formation of an interim “peace government” for two years, forging guidelines for
talks between Afghan political leaders and the Taliban in Turkey, a UN-led meeting of
India, Pakistan, Iran, Russia, China and the US to create regional consensus on
Afghanistan and a 90-day reduction in violence.
Read together; the two leaked documents provide critical insights into the Biden
Administration’s mindset and broader aims in Afghanistan. The leaks are deliberate to
garner reactions by regional powers, Kabul and the Taliban, before finalizing Biden’s
official Afghan policy.
The proposed peace plan is a high-stake political gamble that is fraught with multiple
contradictions and risks. The plan contains a laundry list of items against an unrealistic
and a limited time window. At present, the Biden Administration is split between
political appointees who advocate ending America’s longest war by declaring success on
the 20th anniversary of 9/11 and military and intelligence careerists who oppose a
premature declaration of victory.
Some experts are comparing the proposed peace plan with the 2001 Bonn Agreement,
which took place in Germany and put in place the current political order in Afghanistan.
The apparent difference is that the Bonn Agreement 2001 excluded the Taliban from
talks, while the current plan is inviting them to the negotiation table in Turkey.
From the two documents, three things become unequivocally clear.
First, by choosing Turkey as the venue for Afghan peace talks, the Biden Administration
has pulled the plug on the Doha process. Turkey is part of Nato’s mission in Afghanistan
and, unlike Qatar, it can observe ceasefire compliance on the ground. Furthermore,
Turkey can work closely with the US, which is trying to mend ties with Ankara – which
were destroyed by the Trump administration – and Pakistan. Ankara is planning to host
the first meeting of the Afghan peace talks in April.
Second, the peace plan exposes the Biden Administration’s policy paralysis and limited
policy options in a highly complex conflict situation. For instance, an extended stay is a
recipe for more conflict. At the same time, an exit without a political compromise
between Kabul and the Taliban will hasten the collapse of the current political order in
Afghanistan.

3
Third, Biden is desperately looking for an exit strategy by installing an interim political
setup, no matter how untenable, to provide a semblance of stability and give the US
some face-saving in Afghanistan. Arguably, if the Geneva (1988), Peshawar (1992) and
Mecca (1993) accords are anything to go by, it is quite evident that it is not difficult to
get a deal in Afghanistan. However, what happened after these deals is more critical –
Afghanistan descended into never-ending chaos.
The tone and tenor of Blinken’s letter marks a sharp shift in the Biden Administration’s
initial accommodative messaging to Kabul. The language of the letter is significant as it
asks Ghani to “join other Afghan stakeholders” in the efforts to create an interim
government in Turkey. Alongside the Taliban’s rising violence, the Biden Administration
views Ghani’s inflexibility towards forming an interim government as a major hurdle to
peace efforts. In other words, the US is asking Ghani to show flexibility or step aside.
This letter will further weaken the embattled Ghani and his team.
Notably, the Biden Administration has not tied the status of the US military presence in
Afghanistan with the peace plan and its outcomes. By not committing its troops to the
peace process, the US is keeping its options open for three potential outcomes. First, if
Kabul and the Taliban reach a peace agreement in the next few weeks, it will allow the
Biden Administration to withdraw the remaining 2,500 forced by May.
Alternatively, if there is promising progress in peace talks with chances of a genuine
breakthrough, the US could stay beyond May 1, signalling to the Taliban that the troops
would leave as soon as the agreement is reached. On the other hand, if the peace
process flounders and talks breakdown, the US has the room to retains its troops'
presence in Afghanistan indefinitely. Also, by keeping its withdrawal plan ambiguous,
the US hopes to build some leverage with the Taliban.
The Taliban have not given an official reaction to the peace plan; they are still reviewing
it. However, the Taliban are unlikely to agree to a ceasefire before the agreement is
finalized. The Taliban are a violent entrepreneur and violence is their only leverage to
stay relevant to the Afghan endgame. So, they will not give up on violence until they
secure a favourable settlement suiting their interests. Furthermore, before resuming
talks, they will exploit Biden’s desperation to extract more concessions, such as the
release of more Taliban detainees.
Historically, Afghanistan has been the agent of change in South Asia. So, what happens
in Afghanistan has far-reaching implications on the region, particularly Pakistan. Given
the divergent strategic outlooks, competing interests, and diametrically opposed
positions of India and Pakistan on the Afghan conflict's potential solution, it is anybody’s
guess that Biden’s plan to forge regional consensus in a few weeks is a non-starter.
4
Even the best laid out plans can fail, and the worst ones can succeed. So, the hope for
peace should never be abandoned. However, given the complexity of the ground
situation and fragility of the US’ proposed peace plan, violence is likely to rise in
Afghanistan. The peace proposal is comprehensive, and it has the potential to deliver
peace dividends only if it is not rushed. By focusing on deadlines instead of ground
realities, the US runs the risks of compromising twenty years of democratic gains in
Afghanistan.
By: Abdul Basit
Source: The News

5
 Questioning inequalities

The question of inequality in human society has always attracted the attention of many
thinkers. The recent pandemic has triggered this debate again, with many critics
bemoaning the fate of the Global South where vaccines are likely to benefit the mass
majority of the people much later than people of the advanced world.
One of the reasons for this phenomenon lies, according to some, in the advancement of
the West. It is argued that since industrialized countries are brimming with wealth, they
would be the first to take advantage of this cure for the contagion.
Ancient philosophers have justified these inequalities on the basis of natural laws. For
them, these inequalities are important to run society. From Sumerians to Egyptians and
from the Greeks to the Indians, all agreed that it was an integral part of human society.
Even the biggest champions of freedom and equality in the European continent and
North America justified these differences on the basis of natural laws and human nature.
The ruthless colonization of Asia, the massacre of the indigenous people in the Americas
and the plundering of the colonies was also based on this unjust concept of inequality.
Even today, there are a number of thinkers and social scientists who come up with
arguments in support of this myopic idea of Western superiority.
Authors like Niall Ferguson believe that the West ruled the rest because of democracy,
free market, competition, scientific research and concepts like rule of law. His famous
book 'The Empire', according to many critics, seems to justify Western imperialism,
giving an impression that empire was not all bad as is widely believed in the Global
South. But there are many who challenge this notion of Ferguson and other historians
like him. They also criticize those who believe that the West managed to rule the rest
because of its democratic culture, competition, research and concepts like rule of law.
Some of the critics believe that it was geography that in fact paved the way for European
advancement. They contest the idea that European people are more developed because
they may have been smarter than people living in other parts of the world. One such
author is Jared Diamond, who spent more than twenty years investigating inequalities
between parts of the world. Diamond visited Papua Guinea, New Guinea, South
America, Central America, Spain and other parts of the world to find out the answer of
the question that was asked by a local of New Guinea more than 30 years ago.
A geographer by profession, Diamond has vast knowledge of anthropology, evolutionary
biology, history and human societies. He says that people from New Guinea to England
and Papua Guinea to America are all the same when it comes to their intellect and skills
but it is geography where the roots of inequalities lie. According to him, agriculture
6
surfaced in the Fertile Crescent of the Middle East 13,000 years ago. At that time, people
in New Guinea and Papua Guinea were living in jungles hunting animals or acquiring food
from trees. The people in the Fertile Crescent domesticated goats, cows, sheep and
other animals that helped them increase agriculture production besides enriching their
diet. This surplus production enabled the people of the Fertile Crescent to engage in
other activities that paved the way to civilization while people living in the jungle spent
most of their time working to arrange their food.
From the Middle East, agriculture and domesticated animals spread to Eurasia and some
other parts of the world. Again this spread was possible because of geography. Unlike
Eurasia, the people of Central and South America were living in rough terrains and in a
climate where animals could not be domesticated. Barley, wheat and other crops that
were grown in the Fertile Crescent reached Europe. It was Europeans who brought these
crops and animals to North America. Out of over a dozen animals that helped the West
increase agriculture productivity, none existed in South and Central America.
Even the creation of language was easier in Eurasia than in South and Central America
because the rugged mountains and tough terrain made it impossible for people to
interact easily, putting an end to the possibilities of communication. While people in
Central America had some sort of written language before the Europeans arrived, the
same was not the case in the South. So in case of an emergency they could not have
sought the help of Central American people.
Some historians however say that claiming the decimation of indigenous people is also
linked to geographical factors does not mean that the rapaciousness of the white settlers
should be overlooked. Repeated plagues and the spread of other infectious diseases
over the centuries had created immunity in European people against infections while no
such community existed in South and Central America where according to some
estimates 95 percent of the population perished in such infectious diseases.
Some historians assert that surplus production in the Fertile Crescent also enabled the
people there to develop steel which reached Europe over the centuries. The
development of steel was instrumental in improving the fighting skills of the Europeans.
European conflicts before the 15th centuries prompted the ruling elite to master in arms
manufacturing. Such weapons and the use of horses, which were alien to the people of
Central and South America, played an important role in subjugating those nations. It is
quite clear that these natural factors played an important role in the conquest of Central
and South America. When Francisco Pizarro arrived in South America, he had only over
100 soldiers but the Spaniard had also brought with him an invisible enemy in the form
of germs that annihilated the locals.
7
The concept that Europeans were somehow unique human beings created the way for
colonization and that colonisation led to the ruthless exploitation and plundering of
today's developing countries. This inhuman theory emerged as a great threat to mankind
because it prompted certain sections of the ruling elites in the Western states to claim
racial superiority, which proved to be catastrophic not only for these Western countries
but for the world as well. Therefore, it is important to debunk this myth of Western
superiority on the basis of their political and economic ideas.
In reality, it was geography that created conditions for European conquests. The ruling
elite of the West exploited geographical conditions to ruthlessly exploit the people in
the Global South and plunder their wealth. Around 20 tons gold and silver was looted by
the Spaniards from a few parts of the Americas. The UK is believed to have snatched
away around $45 trillion from India. The black community has been demanding five
billion dollars in reparations for the slavery that enriched the modern capitalist world.
Even today, this myopic concept exists in some or another form. The ruling elite in the
advanced capitalist world militarily intervene in third world countries – bombing and
destroying state after state. Therefore, it is important to challenge this inhuman concept
on all platforms. One of the ways to do so could be to incorporate the books of those
authors who question this widely held perception of Western superiority. Such books
should not be discussed in debating clubs only but included in the syllabus of Western
educational institutions. The pernicious tentacles of fascism are once again rearing their
monstrous head in the advanced capitalist world and other regions. Questioning
inequalities would be one of the ways to deal with them.

By: Abdul Sattar

Source: The News
The writer is a freelance journalist.

8
 Learning from China
Modern China is in many ways a remarkable success: within a generation it has become
a moderately high-income country from a low-income one. It has eliminated poverty,
and expanded the capability of its citizens with decisiveness and skill.
China has also become the mightiest economy, in terms of purchasing power parity. Its
children are top performers in mathematics, science and reading, and it produces the
largest amount of scientific literature – all telltale signs of more future progress.
China’s hope of realizing ‘Zhongguo Meng’ (the Chinese dream) and overtaking the West
in living standards no longer seems a distant one. Through investments in education and
healthcare, it keeps enhancing living standards and labor productivity at faster rates
than in any other country.
And so, its 14th five-year development plan, published recently, promises another round
of economic and social transformation, another leap towards giving practical content to
Zhongguo Meng.
Though admitting that industrial greatness is still 30 years ahead, the plan aims to make
China the world leader in ten industries, including aviation, and critical technologies such
as semiconductors. It will also build a navigation system to rival the US’s GPS, expand
the already impressive network of high-speed rails, power grids and much more. As a
result, growth this year could be a whopping nine percent.
China’s development is a good example to follow. Its emphasis on expanding human
capability both as a goal in itself and an integral element of achieving growth is an
effective way to eliminate poverty and rapidly improve living standards of the people.
The lesson here is: there are enormous returns from bettering human lives.
Rather than adopting laissez faire or the path of Western style deregulated capitalism,
China follows one of active economic management. The Chinese call this ‘capitalism with
Chinese characteristics.’ It means opening the economy to competition. But rather than
letting the market rule economic life, the state governs the market, controls assets and
income streams. It mobilizes funds for investment, shapes the economy and economic
outcomes through its five-year development plans. And, far from retreating, the state
throws its weight behind its enterprises, enabling some to become world leaders in their
respective areas of business.
The lesson here is: China uses capitalism well, but it practises state-led capitalism
rejecting Western-style laissez faire ideology.
Our socio-economic underperformance could be traced to a failure to learn from China’s
example of bettering human lives and from the example of its state’s active role in the
process. Yet, Western pundits and our very own China experts are quick to tell you that
9
capitalism with Chinese characteristics works ‘because of the capitalism, and not the
characteristics.’ Hence their conclusion that China and we need more capitalism. So,
they tell us, sell more of your profitable state enterprises, reduce the state’s role in the
economy so that, guided by their ‘animal spirits,’ Pakistani businessmen can do
everything efficiently.
Binyamin Appelbaum’s book ‘The Economists’ Hour: False Prophets, Free Markets and
the Fracture of Society’ tells us how such economists dominated policymaking in
Washington and ‘seriously misled the nation, helping to disrupt and divide it socially with
a false sense of scientific certainty about the wonders of free markets.’
Still, there’s a grain of truth, only a grain, in the pundits’ claim concerning the role of
capitalism in China’s development, but it is far from the whole story. And you can’t
understand China’s story without recalling the follies of its encounter with capitalism a
century ago. At the time, China was a country of addicts. For fifty years, the East India
Company was exporting opium to China from Bengal to pay for Chinese tea which the
British drank copiously, as now. Annual opium exports to China were over nine hundred
tons, which turned millions of Chinese into addicts but cleared up Britain’s trade deficit.
So, quite naturally, Britain was outraged when the Chinese finally clamped down on the
harmful drug in 1839. Britain’s naval flotilla seized Canton killing thousands, which the
British foreign minister said was essential to protect ‘free trade,’ a fundamental principle
of capitalism. Britain annexed Hong Kong and wrested twenty million silver pieces (more
than half a billion dollars in today’s currency) in war reparations. Fifteen years later, also
in the service of free trade, France, Russia and the US joined Britain to wage another
‘opium’ war on China. In its aftermath, they extracted more reparations and legalized
opium trade.
The Chinese call these years their ‘century of humiliation.’ During this time they say
‘foreigners dismembered China, poisoned it with opium, butchered our people and
looted our treasures.’ The Qing dynasty collapsed; civil war and revolution led to Mao’s
Long March in which 90,000 red army soldiers died. Yet, the communists recovered.
They beat the much superior Japanese army and the nationalists. Twenty million Chinese
died in the struggle. It is a feat more heroic and remarkable than the mythological
Chinese Titan Pan Gu splitting the sky and earth from primordial chaos with his axe.
And so, today, no one pushes China around. It is on a roll, showing the rest of the world
the enormous benefits of central planning and collective behavior without which
humanity can no longer manage itself.
By: Sarmad Khawaja
Source: The News
10
The writer is a freelance contributor. Email: khwaja.sarmad@gmail.com

11
 District heating and cooling
Except for Karachi, Pakistan has extreme cold and hot weather in the respective seasons.
With rising standards among the higher economic classes, comfort requirements are
also increasing.
In Pakistan, power demand goes down to as low as 8000 MW in the winter and goes up
to 25000 MW in the summer. Similarly, other than Karachi, gas demand is doubled or
tripled in winters. This has serious implications for infrastructural planning and the
economics of supply. What are the reasons for the high gas demand for heating in the
winter and high electricity demand for cooling in the summer? District heating and
cooling (DHC) can play some role in dealing with this imbalance.
District heating has been there for more than a century and continues especially in
Europe. Over the years, technology has changed and improved. District heating or
cooling means separating the point of production and the point of use. Hot or cold water
is produced at a central nearby point and is circulated through pipelines to the user
buildings or facilities. The user is not required to install his/her own heating or cooling
facilities except internal piping, distribution and circulating fans. The domain of the DHC
system can be as small as a business district with 20-25 high rises or it can be as large as
a city such as Stockholm which is almost fully covered by a heating network.
District heating and cooling has a great role in peakshaving; 50 percent or more of the
electrical demand comes in the peak period. This peak can be flattened due to hot or
cold water storage possibilities, thus much lesser investment by government or its
generation utilities, higher utilization and lesser fixed cost and even subsidy and circular
debt. Besides, district heating and cooling is 40 percent more efficient. It can relieve
expensive commercial space and full floors in a high-rise building. It has a 40 percent
lower carbon print as well. Above all, it simplifies commercial buildings construction and
maintenance, and the lead time is reduced for completing large building projects.
In Europe, the tradition of district heating has been around since 1880. Coal-fired boilers
were used to make steam and circulated at 100 degrees plus in the networks. It used to
be highly inefficient, due to unnecessarily high temperatures of the steam that was used
in the pipes. Gradually, temperatures have gone down with increase in efficiency and
reduction in cost.
These days, mostly waste heat from various sources such as power plants, waste
incineration plants, industrial heat and other sources are utilized instead of virgin heat
production. District heating needs have probably been a driver for MSW incineration
plants, especially in Scandinavia. Promotion and mandatory targets for cogeneration
also seemed to fulfill steam or hot water is also stored to balance the demand and
12
supply. And cool river and sea water is used for cooling, although this may not be
possible in Pakistan.
Although the main driver of DHC is the utilization of waste heat from fossil plants, there
is scope for utilization of renewable energy as well. Often there is curtailment of wind,
solar and even hydro in some cases. There is excess supply in the system and for a variety
of reasons like transmission constraints, renewable energy cannot be inducted into the
main grid. In such cases, extra energy can be diverted to DHC projects. Solar parabolic
water heating projects can be installed where space and distance allow.
There are hot water streams in Gilgit-Baltistan which could be utilized where a demand
cluster exists. Even in Karachi, there used to be a Manghopir hot stream. In passing, one
would want to lament that solar water heaters can be installed on roof tops, which has
not been done to a reasonable level. More attention should be paid to this. A large part
of excessive gas demand in the northern areas could be met through a rooftop solar
water heater.
The concept of district heating and cooling may be viable in posh areas or in business
districts containing high-rise buildings. Gated communities are getting increasingly
popular. They are wasting the exhaust heat of the generators they have installed. In
Pakistan, there are several large cities where DHC can be installed since there is demand
density and customers. For example, in Islamabad, from the secretariat and PM House
to F-8, Kashmir Road etc. In Karachi, the whole Sharah-e-Faisal and around provides an
ample cluster along with Clifton, Defence and I I Chundrigar Road etc.
The global market for district cooling alone has been estimated to be $21.9 billion and
expected to double by 2026. The market share of the Middle East has been estimated at
15-25 percent. Tabreed, a DHC provider has installed 1.40 million RT (refrigeration tons)
in 86 plants scattered throughout the Gulf countries; Malaysia, Singapore, Hongkong
and Thailand are also adopting it. Even in India, there is a DHC project that has been
recently completed. The largest functioning cooling market is in the Middle East,
although district cooling is expanding in Europe as well as in business buildings where
there are heat sources like data centers, office machinery and kitchens. As much as 40
percent of commercial buildings have installed cooling systems, district based or singly,
although cool water is drawn from lakes and rivers for this purpose.
Can we do it or should we do it? We are a poor country as the argument may go. This is
cheaper than the traditional standalone system, both in terms of energy bills and the
capex. It may not be a one-fit solution. As discussed earlier, there are areas and sectors
whose energy requirements are almost similar. Room temperatures in many Pakistan

13
offices are much colder than anywhere else. Executives and officials wear suits in the
scorching summer.
DHC schemes can be introduced on the IPP model. A DHC policy would be required to
give legal cover. DHC areas would have to be identified and auctioned. If it remains
voluntary, there may be no need for regulation. If end-user participation is made
compulsory for the identified clusters, then regulatory controls would be required.
Special night-time electricity tariff may be given to such projects. DHC projects can run
their system in the night and store cold water to be distributed in the day. This would
increase capacity utilization as well and have a positive impact on electricity cost and
tariff.
The challenge would be finding nearby energy generation facilities whose waste heat is
to be utilized. In these days of technology and insulation technology, 50-100 kms may
not be an issue. Some stranded facilities can be relocated.
DHC may not be a panacea for all our energy problems but it can help fill the natural gas
supply-demand gap in the winter. It can improve buildings which are defaced due to the
clutters of ACs, and can bring down heating and cooling costs, reduce carbon print and
improve thermal efficiency. It will make building and construction simpler and efficient,
especially in business districts.
By: Syed Akhtar Ali
Source: The News
The writer is a former member of the Energy PlanningCommission and author of
‘Pakistan’s Energy Issues:Success and Challenges’.

14
 Role of government
Last week, the US Congress approved the $1.9 trillion American Relief Plan (ARP)
proposed by President Biden to pull the country out of the economic crisis brought on
by the pandemic. It includes funds for low-income individuals, and for vaccinations, as
well as for public schools and state and local governments that have been struggling to
provide services.
ARP was approved by the slimmest of margins in both houses of Congress, passing solely
with Democratic votes. Not a single Republican voted for this bill, finding many things to
criticize – “it is too costly”, “has too much money for things not affected by the
pandemic”, etc. Having ignored $8 trillion added to the national debt by the Trump
administration over four years, the Republicans have suddenly discovered fiscal
responsibility. It appears fiscal responsibility becomes important to them only when
Democrats are in power.
Differences in Democrat and Republican attitudes towards the relief plan speak to
fundamental differences in the two parties’ ideologies. Republicans continue to have
faith in ‘trickle-down’ economics – that is, if people at the top of the income and wealth
pyramid do well, everyone below them will also benefit. They were comfortable giving
trillions to companies in 2020 to provide financial support during the pandemic but are
reluctant to directly support low-income households.
Biden was quick to acknowledge the very unusual nature of the pandemic’s economic
impact. Just as different industries have been affected very differently by the shutdown,
similarly different classes of people have been affected very differently. After a severe
economic shock in 2020, a mild recovery has now begun, based on expectations of roll
out of the vaccines. However, this recovery is very different from past recessions. It is
being called a “K-shaped” recovery, meaning that, while many sectors and individuals
are bouncing back fast, many others continue to suffer severely.
Total employment in the US economy continues to be about 10 million people less than
pre pandemic level. Yet the US stock market is now more than 13 percent higher than a
year ago, adding trillions of dollars in wealth to those who own stocks. Minorities, who
often work in low-end service sector jobs are struggling, while most middle and upper-
income white-collar workers have been able to maintain their employment working
from home.
Republicans often say most Americans have some stake in the stock market through
their retirement plans. They cite this as evidence that growth in the stock market is
helping everyone. However, data reported by the US Federal Reserve shows that the top
10 percent wealthiest households own 87 percent of the stock market, and the
15
wealthiest top one percent owns 52 percent of the stock market value. The bottom 50
percent of all households own less than one percent of the stock market. The deeply
skewed nature of stock ownership was conveniently ignored by former president Trump,
when he routinely equated the stock market to the overall economy.
The Republicans’ belief that all government is essentially bad, or at best a necessary evil,
hindered their ability to help pull the country out of the economic impact of the
pandemic. While they invested large sums in the development of vaccines, they were
inept in supporting the public health infrastructure needed to administer the vaccines
to the most vulnerable citizens.
The Biden Administration has quickly focused on faster production and delivery of
vaccines across the country. As a result, it is now expected that by mid-summer the vast
majority of adults in the US will have been vaccinated and life will start to return to
normal.
It turns out that dealing with the pandemic and the lopsided economic impact needs a
belief in the positive role a government can play.
By: S Qaisar Shareef
Source: The News
The writer is a freelance contributor based in Washington DC.

16
 The Indian farmer’s movement
Recently, in the wee hours of the morning, Delhi police arrested Maninder Singh alias
Moni, a 30-year-old Sikh AC mechanic, from PitamPura. You might wonder: why is the
Indian government hunting mere AC mechanics now? Surely Mr Modi could get an AC
mechanic from any electronics market in New Delhi. But Moni Singh is special, because
on Indian Republic Day he and hordes of fuming Sikhs scaled the Red Fort. They planted
the Sikh Flag (Nishan Sahib) atop the fort and swung their swords in front of a charged
mass of protesting farmers.
At the surface level, the Sikh community is agitated because of three controversial farm
laws passed by the Indian Parliament back in September 2020. These laws stripped
Indian farmers of governmental protections like state procurement and price floors. For
hard-pressed farmers, the government acted as a middleman and ensured a fair price
for their produce. But these laws have cut the government out of the equation. Instead,
mammoth investors like Ambani and Tata will now acquire produce directly. Farmers
have a lurking suspicion that investors will buy away their lands and squeeze out their
profits.
Then again, why should Pakistan care? Certainly, we’re knee-deep in our own problems.
Someone might say: let them deal with their own demons. But Pakistan has been
continuously linked to Sikh uprisings and must be cognisant of any repercussions,
military or otherwise.
Firstly, many in India contend that separatist Sikhs are in cahoots with Pakistan—
endeavouring to break away and establishing their own homeland, Khalistan.
Historically, it has caused the Indian state immense disquiet and massive losses to
suppress. In 1984, under PM Indira Gandhi, the Khalistan movement gained serious
traction under the command of its flag bearer Jarnail Singh. It was only after the military-
led Operation Blue Star which ransacked the Golden Temple that the movement
dwindled. Mere months later Indira was shot dead by two of her own Sikh bodyguards
in retaliation. India relentlessly alleges that Pakistan was complicit in the uprising and
provided the Sikhs with monetary and military aid.
So when the farmers, predominantly Sikh, come raging at the doors of New Delhi India
points its finger at the most obvious culprit—Pakistan. Back in September of 2020
Kangana Ranaut, a veteran Bollywood actress, called protesting farmers ‘terrorists who
are causing a ruckus’. The Indian Union Minister Raosaheb Danve conveniently alleged
the protests were being orchestrated by China and Pakistan. Some might say that Indian
jingoism has morphed into delusion.

17
The Pakistani Foreign Ministry Spokesperson refuted this accusation by saying India
‘finds it convenient to blame India’s neighbours for all its internal failings’. Cornered
internationally, nudged towards the FATF blacklist and fragile both politically and
economically Pakistan cannot afford to be embroiled in Indian affairs.
Secondly, farmers on our side of the border are also struggling and the Indian experience
tells them something: they too must rise up to challenge the state. In the last few months
alone Lahore has witnessed numerous farmer protests, and only horrendous measures
have been able to curb them.
In August of 2020, Prime Minister Imran Khan announced the Ravi Urban Development
Project; however, to the farmer’s dismay there was little consideration for its
mmrepercussions. The government plans to buy land spanning 2,562 kanals but isn’t
willing to offer fair compensation to the farmers. This has elicited immense disquiet by
show of protests. Notably in the start of March, FIRs were registered against 90 farmers
who turned violent at a protest on Kala Khatai road. Similarly, in November 2020, the
Pakistan Kissan Ittehad assembled at Thokar Niaz Beg, blocking traffic going in and out
of Lahore. The farmers came to the negotiating table only after the police baton-charged
them and arrested dozens. Amidst the chaos, Ashfaq Langrial, a grower from Burewala,
died. The government places the onus on a heart condition, but the farmers are adamant
it was due to police brutality.

Thirdly, some see this as an economic opportunity in Pakistan. If the government in India
can lavishly reward its corporate tycoons by backing out of produce procurement then
why can’t Pakistan? Granted, Pakistan doesn’t host as many MNCs and billionaires as
India, but we do have our fair share of opportunists. And, if Mr Modi doesn’t succumb
to the pressure it might just set an example, and our private investors will also initiate
lobbying for such laws.
In conclusion, throughout sub-continental history, farmers have commanded significant
clout—by virtue of their numbers, pervasiveness or economic role. If Pakistan wants to
ensure long-term peace, then we would do well to avail this sliver of opportunity and
allay farmer concerns. Contrasted with India’s manhandling of farmers it would be the
responsible thing to do. However, the BJP in India has built up a very divisive
atmosphere. And, if Indian jingoism of recent times is any indicator, Pakistan would also
do well to prepare for any eventuality from across the border.
By: Muhammad Mohad Zulfiqar
Source: The Nation

18
 Quad—alarm bells for SCO
With the Quad’s virtual meet between leaders from the US, Australia, Japan and India,
the Indo-Pacific debate has surfaced again with a calendar of activities lined up till the
end of 2021. As a follow up, there was a media blitz in western mainstream media.
Washington Post published back-to-back joint Op-eds by senior leaders, one by Joe
Biden, Narendra Modi, Scott Morrison and Yoshihide Suga and the other by US Secretary
of State Antony J Blinken and Secretary of Defence General Lloyd J Austin.

The underlying theme of both op-eds was Quad’s future trajectory on how to contain
China in the region.

The initial part of the first op-ed is an affirmation of the Quad leadership being
committed to a shared vision for an Indo-Pacific region that is free, open, resilient and
inclusive. The group is striving to ensure that the Indo-Pacific is accessible and dynamic,
governed by international law and bedrock principles such as freedom of navigation and
peaceful resolution of disputes, and that all countries are able to make their own
political choices, free from coercion. In recent years, that vision has increasingly been
tested.

The second part of the op-ed invites regional players by describing the Quad as a flexible
group of like-minded partners dedicated to advancing a common vision and to ensuring
peace and prosperity. The grouping will welcome and seek opportunities to work with
all of those who share in those goals.

While the first op-ed was softly written, without mentioning China in a hostile tone, the
second op-ed by the Secretaries of State and Defence penned by Antony Blinken and
General Austin was more substantive and harsh.

It stated that US-led alliances are what the military calls “force multipliers.” No country
on Earth has a network of alliances and partnerships like the US. It would be a huge
strategic error to neglect these relationships.

The op-ed quotes President Biden who stated that the world is at an inflection point. A
fundamental debate is underway about the future—and whether democracy or
autocracy offers the best path forward. It’s up to the US and other democracies to come
together and show the world that they can deliver.

19
In the second part of the op-ed, the secretaries open up by stating, ‘not all countries
share this vision. Some seek to challenge the international order—that is, the rules,
values and institutions that reduce conflict and make cooperation possible among
nations. As countries in the region and beyond know, China in particular is all too willing
to use coercion to get its way. Here again, we see how working with our allies is critical.
Our combined power makes us stronger when we must push back against China’s
aggression and threats. Together, we will hold China accountable when it abuses human
rights in Xinjiang and Tibet, systematically erodes autonomy in Hong Kong, undercuts
democracy in Taiwan or asserts maritime claims in the South China Sea which violate
international law. If we don’t act decisively and lead, Beijing will’.

This sounds familiar to the Cold War rhetoric and what was being propagated by
Western allies before launching the Global War on Terror to target so-called ‘Political
Islam’. In the sixties, the bogey was the Soviet Union, in the 90s’, it became political Islam
and in the 21st Century it has become China.

Although Chinese Global times responded to these hostile assertions, there is a need for
a larger debate on how the Quad will affect the future of SCO and Eurasia.

The Lowy Institute of Australia feels that cracks between India and SCO members have
already started appearing. In a March 3 article with the title ‘Cracks beginning to appear
in the Russia-India relationship’, the author suggests a shift in perceptions in both Russia
and India. ‘India’s annual summit with Russia was cancelled last year for the first time
since its inception—the official reason, as was commonly blamed for many abandoned
events, Covid-19. The summit’s cancellation was a rare hiccup in what has otherwise
been a traditionally close partnership’. It goes on to highlight that ‘Covid-19 could also
be a convenient excuse to mask what is likely to be Russia’s growing unease about India’s
deepening security ties with the US, especially New Delhi’s active participation in the
Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, aka the “Quad”.

While discussing the challenges faced by Russia and India, the Lowy Institute article
states that ‘in Moscow’s view, the Quad undermines Russian interests on several fronts.
Moscow has favoured a Russia-India-China (RIC) trilateral formative to advance a variety
of security and diplomatic objectives—ranging from the normative promotion of the
inviolability of state sovereignty to the pursuit of a more multipolar, less US-dominated
global governance and security architecture’.

20
There is another aspect of Quad that has not been discussed in mainstream Chinese and
Russian media, the element of Neo-colonialism. Interestingly Quad has four members,
one is an erstwhile colony and three are erstwhile colonisers. India has suffered under
British colonial rule before independence, no wonder Nehru’s non-alignment policy had
a historical and psychological factor attached to it. Today India seems to be abandoning
emerging Asian powers to side with the neo-colonial powers like the US, Japan and
Australia.

The Eurasian brotherhood, so dear to President Putin and President Xi, aims at throwing
the yolk of colonialism and uniting the geographically contiguous Eurasia for shared
economic development and regional security.

In one of our articles published by the Nation in September 2018, we had argued that
the potential of Eurasia and SCO was enormous and it has a promise of a shared destiny.
A few extracts of that article are being reproduced, as they remain relevant even today:

With 55,000,000 square kilometres of land mass, Eurasia covers around 37 percent of
the Earth’s total land area including 5 billion people, which translates to 70 percent of
global population.

The 21st century is a century of global connectivity, China and Russia are actively
working to connect the globe through a system of land and maritime routes, on the
other hand, the old globalists led by the West, who thrived on the creation of blocs,
division of regions and the creation of shatter zones and barrier belts, are trying hard to
create a fear of the rise of new powers so as to maintain the status quo.

Science and technology developments, especially in the field of infrastructure and

material sciences have made it possible to surmount physical and geographic challenges,
bringing down strategic barriers. There is a need to review the potential of connectivity
and geographic proximity within Eurasia and Africa to develop a framework of global
peaceful coexistence, economic development and interaction between various nations,
civilisations and societies.

To conclude, India joining the Quad has raised alarm bells in Eurasia and the SCO; we are
sure every Indian move is being closely watched and analysed by Moscow and Beijing.
Is India going to become the odd man out in SCO—only time will tell.

By: Adeela Naureen and Umar Waqar

21
 Source: The Nation

22
 70 golden years of Pak-China ties
The 70th anniversary of Pak-China ties is being celebrated this year and it is a good thing
that the friendship with China is at the forefront of issues on which there is no difference
of opinion in Pakistani society. The positive feedback on the usefulness of establishing
closer ties with China in Pakistan came with the advent of the Chinese Revolution and
its profound effect on the collective psyche of both nations. This is not just rhetoric, but
when Chinese President Xi paid his first visit to Pakistan in 2015, he wrote an article in
which he expressed his feelings in this way “When I was young, I heard many touching
stories about Pakistan and the friendship between our two countries. To name just a
few, I learned that the Pakistani people were working hard to build their beautiful
country, and that Pakistan opened the air corridor for China to reach out to the world
and supported China on restoring its lawful seat in the United Nations. The stories have
left me with a deep impression.”

Sentiments for Pakistan in these words are a national asset for us. And this is not a new
mindset that has gone up and down; this friendship of the brotherly nations is
recognised by the policymakers and opinion leaders on both sides. When the communist
revolution broke out in China in 1949, there was a fierce difference between capitalism
and communism in the world. Non-communist countries did not seem ready to
recognise the Chinese revolution, but under these circumstances, just three months
after the revolution, on January 4, 1950, Pakistan sent a high-level delegation to China.
And things started moving towards the establishment of diplomatic relations. Regular
diplomatic relations were established between the two countries on May 21, 1951. It is
important to know that Pakistan was the first Muslim country to establish diplomatic
relations with China after the Chinese Revolution and the third non-communist country
to take such a step.

From this, one can easily gauge the extent to which the government of Shaheed-e-Millat
Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan was looking into the matter with proper understanding of
this important issue. It was clear that Pakistan was not going to follow in the steps of big
powers who were lobbying against the Chinese revolution.

Later, in 1955, a high-level Chinese delegation led by Vice President Madam Song Ching
arrived in Pakistan and high-level visits were made. In response, Prime Minister Hussain
Shaheed Suhrawardy visited China in 1956. The Boundary Agreement between Pakistan

23
and China, signed in 1963, is the most significant deed because it resulted in the
regularisation of all borders with China so that there would be no future differences.

Pakistan became the first non-communist country whose airline launched flights to
Beijing in 1964 and began to play its part in reducing China’s isolation from the world.
Similarly, the Scientific and Cultural Cooperation Agreement was signed in 1976, which
opened a new path for Pakistanis on scientific matters. The Karakoram Highway of 1978
connected Pakistan with western China, while China also gained access to the Arabian
Sea.

Similarly, in 1995, a transit trade agreement was signed between Pakistan, China,
Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, opening the way from Central Asia to Eurasia. Pakistan has
been facing a defence threat from India since its inception. In order to prevent this threat
and India’s air superiority, the Nawaz Sharif government signed an agreement with
China in 1999 to make JF-17 Thunder fighter jets. JF-17 fighter jets joined the Pakistan
Air Force in 2010, which India enjoyed in the form of Abhinandan. During the Zardari
government in 2013, the Chinese Prime Minister Li visited Pakistan and the two
countries discussed the concept of ‘Comprehensive Strategic Cooperation’.

In 2013, the Nawaz Sharif government was formed in Pakistan and in the same year he
visited China and presented the “vision for deepening China-Pakistan strategic
partnership in the new era” and then President Xi paid a historic visit to Pakistan in 2015
in which the agreement for CPEC was signed and then the work started on CPEC under
the Chinese vision of Road and Belt initiative.

No situation in Pakistan can spoil our relations and no other opinion can be formed in
this regard. But it is worrying that after the political change of 2018, a silence is beginning
to be felt and silence on CPEC is very inappropriate. Similarly, our diplomatic position in
the world is weakening. For example, it is very significant that President Joe Biden did
not have contact with Imran Khan until a month after he came to power. At the moment,
Chinese diplomatic circles seem to be questioning Pakistan’s future political landscape
as they plan President Xi’s visit to Pakistan after April. But there are also fears of delays;
President XI’s visit should happen because it will give more strength to our brotherly
relations.

By: Muhammad Mehdi

24
 Source: The Nation

25
 The US and China: Avoiding a meltdown
The Biden administration is preparing for a Pivot to Asia 2.0, but there is little it can do
to stop China rising.

The world’s leading powers, the United States and China, are like giant glaciers moving
slowly but surely towards a collision. Their chilling conflict and competition are destined
to dominate the 21st century as the Cold War dominated the second part of the past
century, and more.

So it is fitting that their national security teams are meeting in Alaska on March 18 to
avert an early crash with dire consequences for both nations and the world.

Early reports that the two governments did not agree even on the framing of the high-
level meeting does not bode well for its outcome. Beijing sees it as the start of a
“strategic dialogue”, but the Biden administration, which called for the meeting, deems
it a one-off event, possibly to put China on notice regarding their differences.

On the face of it, this may seem like a misunderstanding over diplomatic phraseology.
But in reality, President Xi Jinping is in a rush to normalise their great power relationship
as the world’s leading G2, while President Joe Biden would like to see China moderate
its strategic posture and tone down its menacing ultimatums before restoring normalcy
to the bilateral relationship, which had deteriorated under his predecessor, Donald
Trump.

Truth be told, the relationship was not exactly peachy during the eight years of the
Obama administration either. Although President Barack Obama maintained a civil tone
with Beijing and welcomed a constructive, responsible and strong China, his “Pivot to
Asia” was in fact a serious attempt to contain rising China.

But Trump’s withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership undercut Obama’s

containment strategy. He killed the expansive free trade agreement, which included 12
nations that make up 40 percent of the world’s economy, and which could counter
Chinese power on the continent.

Instead, Trump embraced a populist-nationalist course, accusing China of “theft” and of

“raping our country” through unfair trade practices and pursued a dual policy of offering
deals and threatening sanctions. But Beijing is no donkey to be treated with carrots and

26
sticks, and four years later, his strategy seems to have produced more pain than gain, as
China continues to expand in Southeast Asia undeterred.

Meanwhile, Trump increased the Pentagon’s already colossal budgets to $738bn in

2020, while Xi rushed to modernise and expand China’s military power as tensions
flared, notably in the South China Sea.

Against this chilling backdrop, Washington intensified its criticism of China.

It condemned China’s mistreatment of its Uighur Muslims and its devouring of Hong
Kong, warning against potential military invasion and annexation of Taiwan.

It criticised Beijing’s overall threat to regional stability and its “sabre-rattling” in the
strategic, resource-rich South China Sea.

And it condemned China’s overall human rights violations, intellectual property theft,
currency manipulation and cyber attacks.

But pretty much all of that indignation has fallen on deaf ears in Beijing. China reckons
the West is the least qualified to preach about minority rights, respect for national
sovereignty, cybersecurity, and military overreach, considering, for example, its horrific
record in the Middle East.

More importantly, all these diatribes are in fact symptoms and pretexts, not the actual
root causes of the American-Chinese friction.

The real cause of the conflict lies in China’s assertive rise as a regional hegemon that is
slowly reshaping the structures of power in Asia and in America’s attempt at containing
its influence before it becomes a peer competitor or a truly global power.

From the Napoleonic wars, through the world wars to the Cold War – the geopolitics of
the past two centuries, and their tragedies, were largely shaped by this type of great
power conflict between dominant and rising world powers.

Long considered a “sleeping lion”, China has finally awakened. And, despite Xi’s
assurances that it is a “peaceful, amicable and civilised lion”, its roaring is already shaking
foes and friends alike.

27
China is moving rapidly to occupy what it considers to be its “rightful place” at the helm
of the world power structure, and there is little the US can do to stop it.

It aims to surpass America as the world’s largest economy by setting up a global network
of economic relations through its massive Belt and Road Initiative.

It has also established various multilateral and financial institutions like the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization, BRICS as well as the New Development Bank and the Asia
Infrastructure Investment Bank to compete with the West-dominated IMF and World
Bank.

Xi believes China has long punched below its weight, and it is high time for the Chinese
to “make China great again”. After all, the country was a great power throughout much
of its 5,000-year history.

The seasoned Biden understands that all too well and seems to fully realise the
momentous challenges ahead. His administration has already named China the top
nation-state threat to the US.

Biden also moved quickly to fill his national security team with Asia experts, including
Kurt Campbell, the architect of Obama’s Pivot to Asia, as his “Asia tsar”, in order to meet
the China challenge early on in his administration.

The US president will try to slow down the rise and expansion of China’s influence
through an effective containment strategy. And, unlike his predecessor, he knows the
US cannot go at it alone. It needs its Asian and European allies. Desperately.

Biden’s virtual meeting with the leaders of Japan, India and Australia on March 12 may
be the first step towards a Pivot to Asia 2.0. Likewise, the follow-up meetings in Japan
and South Korea of his secretaries of state and defence this week are meant to lay the
ground for an effective new grand strategy.

But this may still prove an uphill battle as some of these allies had moved on to shape
their own foreign relations with mighty China during the disruptive Trump presidency.
The EU, for example, concluded the landmark Comprehensive Agreement on Investment
with China only three weeks before Biden took office.

28
Moreover, the US president is certain to face an even greater challenge because he
seems to have decided to take on both China and Russia at the same time, which will
help bring them closer together.

When the West slapped Russia with sanctions in response to its military intervention in
Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea in March 2014, it was China that came to the
rescue, signing a $400bn gas pipeline deal with Moscow, only two months after Western
retaliation.

The case of Ukraine has resonated in Taiwan among those who worry that their country
could meet the same fate.

China wishes to see the island return to the fold peacefully but makes no secret of its
ambition to outright annexe Taiwan by force if necessary. Only a few days after Biden
took office, China threatened Taiwan with war if it seeks “independence” – even though
the two have been separate since the end of the civil war in 1949.

All of this leads to certain pessimism about the outcome of what seems to be an
inevitable collision. But it does not have to end in tragedy.

Instead of supporting this or that side, Asian and other major powers with much at stake,
like Japan, India, Indonesia Russia and Brazil to name a few, must come together and
deter the United States and China from resolving their differences through unsavoury
means.

Hegemons like the US and China cannot be trusted with power and should not be
entrusted with global security.

By: Marwan Bishara

Source: Al Jazeera.

Chinese President Xi Jinping shakes hands with US Vice President Joe Biden as they pose
for photos at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China on December 4, 2013 [File:
AP/Lintao Zhang]

29
 Fight or flight?
IN recent years, as the negotiations phase in the 21st-century variant of the Great Game
has gathered pace, every cliché in the diplomatic playbook has been trotted out to
illustrate its sporadic progress.

There have been multiple windows of opportunity, open doors, seats at the table,
options on the table — and inevitably some dealings under the table. ‘Between the devil
and the deep blue sea’ doesn’t figure all that frequently in official statements, but it
pretty much sums up the choices Afghanistan has faced for the past 40 years.

Among the latest options is a draft ‘peace’ agreement secretly proposed by the Biden
administration, but much commented on since it was leaked last week. Some officials in
Kabul have poured scorn on the US wish list — which is hardly surprising, given it
effectively consigns the Ashraf Ghani administration to oblivion. The Taliban have been
more reticent in their response so far, saying they are studying the document.

The entity that the US and its allies dislodged from power nearly 20 years ago is being
offered substantial representation in every tier of an interim government. A constituent
assembly is envisaged, with elections to be held once it has completed its task. There
are motherhood statements about education, intellectual freedom and women’s rights.

There won’t be a ‘dignified’ US exit from Afghanistan.

As golden-throated philosopher Freddie Mercury once wondered: “Is this the real life?
Is this just fantasy?”

For many years now, the biggest fear among some Afghans has revolved around their
nation’s prospects once the foreign military forces exited. That apprehension highlights
the crux of Afghanistan’s abiding tragedy: since the late 1970s, its fortunes have largely
been determined by outsiders. Of course, more broadly, that has been the case for
centuries.

The tyranny of geography is an immutable fact, but what’s particularly remarkable is the
extent to which Afghanistan has resisted being swallowed up by neighbouring empires.
Only time will tell whether that rugged exceptionalism serves it well in this century.

When the US invaded in collaboration with the Northern Alliance in 2001, in the wake
of the 9/11, the Taliban chose to melt away, reinforcing the impression of a Western-led
30
cakewalk into Kabul. Once the botched effort to track down Osama bin Laden failed, the
Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld administration saw little reason to expend too much energy or
too many resources on Afghanistan. Its attention shifted to Iraq.

Perhaps the Taliban realised even back then that they had time on their side — apart
from sanctuaries in Pakistan, where bin Laden also found refuge. Over the years they
steadily re-established their clout across the countryside. The US and its allies poured in
tens of thousands of troops, and tens of thousands of people — mainly Afghans — have
been killed since then. Both sides have committed innumerable war crimes that will
likely go uninvestigated and unpunished.

And where are we today? The debate is over the exit of the remaining 2,500 US troops
in Afghanistan by May 1. Actually, the figure is closer to 3,500, according to the New
York Times (which notes that the Pentagon routinely understates troop numbers). Then
there are the 8,000 or so ‘contractors’ — unofficial military personnel, in effect — plus
smaller contingents from the usual Western allies, which wouldn’t stay behind once the
Americans pack up.

Joe Biden is under considerable pressure to postpone the pullout. Should he do so, as
seems likely, the Taliban would have an excuse to renege on their part of the Doha
bargain — whereby they have resisted the temptation to attack foreign forces. Beyond
that, the violence has not significantly diminished in the past year. Apart from other
atrocities, targeted killings of women in particular occur with brutal regularity. The
Taliban deny responsibility, but no one else claims it.

It’s reasonable to assume that the security situation would deteriorate in the immediate
aftermath of a Western troop withdrawal, with uncertain consequences. The
alternative, however, is also fairly dire. What could a continued foreign presence achieve
that has not already been attempted in the past two decades, with all too few worthy
results?

Will a planned flurry of diplomatic activity — including talks in Turkey between Kabul
representatives and the Taliban, and UN-sponsored conference of foreign ministers
from Russia, China, the US, Iran, India and Pakistan tentatively scheduled for next week
— achieve very much? Some commitments may be made, but what will they be worth?

The latest US plan is informally being referred to as a moonshot. But the original
moonshot was backed by science. This one is riding on unsubstantiated hope. The
31
Americans will only be postponing the inevitable if they linger. A ‘dignified departure’
won’t be an option down the track, just as ‘peace with honour’ proved elusive in
Vietnam.

By: Mahir Ali

Source: Dawn

32
 The forever struggle
ANYWHERE one casts a glance, women are in turmoil. Even in the year 2021, where DNA
is revealing the secrets of human illness, where internet connections can allow people
to communicate over thousands of miles, where we can see live images from Mars,
women’s lives are as endangered, as misunderstood and as constrained as ever.

Indeed, where the lives of women, their choices, their welfare, their health are
concerned, a kind of worldwide primitivism prevails. The world may be virtual but
women’s physical bodies suffer in ways that men’s never do. The experience of the
world, of walking down a street, of going to a shop, of enjoying the weather, of meeting
a friend, all of it, each and every moment of existence is rendered somehow dangerous
by the very fact of being a woman.

This year too many in Pakistan pounced on the women who dared participate in the
Aurat March 2021. In a country where women are kidnapped and raped and killed
without anyone batting an eyelid, this one act by women wanting to celebrate
themselves was, yet again, labelled as vulgar. The organisers of the march, sadly used to
getting threats every year, faced their detractors yet again. This year, the critics
increased in number and became even more vicious and venomous. Photos from the
march were photoshopped and circulated, and videos were dubbed to underscore the
thinking that women have no right to occupy public space or to make their own choices
and tell their own stories.

For its part, the government has chosen to speak out of both sides of the mouth. On the
one hand it has launched an investigation into the march, suggesting some illicit
involvement, while on the other, it says it is looking at the origin of the doctored video
clips and photoshopped pictures (that tried to link the march with blasphemy) whose
creators may also face punishment. The TTP too threatened the marchers and women.
In sum, they all came together to tell those Pakistani women who want a different future
that their goal was simply impossible. If Pakistani women are angry these days, they
have good reason to be.

Global primitivism prevails where the lives, welfare and choices of women are
concerned.

33
It is not just Pakistani women though. In the United Kingdom, thousands of women
across the country defied the lockdown to protest against the killing of a young woman
named Sarah Everard. Last week, Everard had been walking home from her friend’s
house after the two had dinner together, when she disappeared. Her remains were
found in another part of the country and were in such a condition that she could not be
immediately identified.

A police officer from the Metropolitan Police, a man who guarded diplomatic properties
in London, has been arrested as a suspect. So it is that the very police that is supposed
to ensure that the streets of London are safe for women, had one of its own arrested as
a suspect in the murder of a young and innocent woman who was simply walking home.

In the aftermath, thousands of women from around the world have been sharing
information about just how unsafe they feel in public spaces, how they are followed,
harassed, stalked and subjected to catcalls just because they dare to exist. The streets
are not safe for them when there is a pandemic and the streets are not safe for them
when there is none.

Over in the United States, the governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, is alleged to have
sexually harassed young women in his employ. The allegations range from forcible kisses
to inappropriate comments, many made in a professional venue. Even as the number of
allegations increases and more and more women emerge as having suffered harassment
allegedly at the hands of the most powerful man in New York, the governor has refused
to resign. He could be removed by impeachment but current counts of the votes do not
show enough support to remove him from office. The lesson is simple: women suffer
and men survive.

These are just some cases. The pandemic has affected men and women unequally, and
the latter’s poor access to health, their inordinate burden of childcare and all sorts of
other factors combine to make them even more vulnerable than they were before. At
one point in time, transnational bodies like the United Nations could have been counted
on as a platform where a united agenda for the safety of women could have been urged.
The UN that exists sold itself long ago to the misogynistic whims of countries that have
thrown money at the organisation in exchange for international leverage. The radical
potential of female solidarity is no longer something that the UN seems to be interested
in.

34
So women everywhere are on their own, fighting alone but together. In their favour is
the promise of emerging generations who bring with them new ideas about connectivity
and collaboration. Technology can help, even though it cannot be counted on as the
magic solution to the victimisation of women. In addition to public marches, which are
unavailable to some women owing to their family situation or their work situation,
consumer boycotts can be added to the activist arsenal.

When male money is threatened, male behaviour is likely to change. Finally, some
attention can also be paid to change among women. It is women who are the bosses of
millions of domestic workers in the country. Perhaps they can sign charters that protect
the dignity of those women. These sorts of actions will not solve the problems that face
Pakistani women, who are made to bear the brunt of all the insecurities and inferiorities
that are faced by Pakistani men, but they will make a difference. In the meantime,
whether it is in Pakistan or the UK or some other place, the struggle goes on, at least for
one half of the world.
By: Rafia Zakaria
Source: Dawn

The writer is an attorney teaching constitutional law and political philosophy.

35
 A new battlefront
THE PTI government wants the entire Election Commission of Pakistan to resign because
apparently the prime minister is unhappy with the institution for not bowing to his
whims. This can only be termed an attempt to undermine the authority and
independence of a constitutional body. The unprecedented attack on the ECP is yet
another manifestation of an authoritarian mindset that seeks to dominate every state
institution.

A bevy of federal ministers at a press conference this week claimed that the ECP could
not continue functioning in its current state because it failed to stop the alleged horse-
trading in the recent Senate elections. Accusing it of partisanship they declared that the
ECP had lost the confidence of the people. They were echoing the earlier remarks of the
prime minister against the commission.

While demanding the resignations of the ECP members the government has ruled out
constitutional recourse to filing a reference (in the Supreme Judicial Council) against the
ECP. It seems it wants to force them out through other means, a hallmark of hybrid rule.
But such tactics may not work as the government itself is in dire straits. Any attempt to
intimidate the constitutional body could end up further weakening the regime itself.

While the allegations of foul play in the Senate elections might have been used by the
government to demand the ECP members’ resignation it was in fact the election body’s
action in the Daska by-election that provoked the ire of the ruling party. The ECP has
come out with a damning indictment of the Punjab provincial administration and has
held it responsible for violence and vote manipulation. In a bold move, it has ordered a
re-poll in the entire constituency. It was indeed rare for the electoral body to show such
spine.

The ECP’s statement shows that its members have the courage to stand up to
government pressure.

But it was the ECP’s statement in the Supreme Court on changing the rule on secret
balloting in the Senate elections that brought the conflict to a head.

It was simply a legal position on the part of the ECP that the voting rule could only be
changed through a constitutional amendment. The government wasn’t happy with the
36
argument as it wanted the ECP to follow the PTI line. Such expectation from an
autonomous body whose main responsibility is to ensure fair and free elections is
beyond comprehension.

Following the court’s rejection of the presidential reference, the ruling party had tried
to build pressure on the ECP to put a barcode on the ballot paper in order to identify
voters switching sides. The argument was that this could prevent horse-trading in the
Senate polls. The ECP did not entertain the proposal on the ground that it would
compromise the secrecy of the ballot. That obviously didn’t go down well with the
government. The defeat of the finance minister on the Senate seat from Islamabad
brought the conflict to a head. The government blamed the ECP for the poll upset.

Controversy over money changing hands in the Senate elections is not new. There is a
ring of truth to the allegations of wrongdoing in the latest polls too. Some video and
audio recordings reinforce the accusation of horse-trading. But blaming the ECP for not
stopping it is outrageous. The case against the opposition is still being investigated.

In an unprecedented move, the prime minister in an address to the nation blasted the
ECP accusing it of “damaging democracy”. He blamed the body for supporting secret
voting that caused his party’s defeat in the capital’s Senate seat poll. He accused the ECP
for “protecting those who made money by holding the Senate elections through secret
ballot”. It was an unprecedented assault by the country’s prime minister on a
constitutional body.

While blaming the ECP for the poll upset he does not seem to accept the fact that it is
parliament’s responsibility to make laws. Indeed, the business of buying and selling
votes has badly damaged the credibility and legitimacy of parliament and it is imperative
to eradicate this curse in order to restore public faith in elected institutions. But for that
there is a need to develop a consensus in parliament.

It was too late by the time the PTI moved the bill for open voting just weeks before
polling and that too without building the bipartisan consent needed for a constitutional
amendment. It was also unwise of the government to file a reference in the Supreme
Court hoping that it could bypass parliament. It was extremely irrational of the prime
minister to dump the blame for his missteps on the ECP.

Matters turned uglier still when the ECP responded to the prime minister’s diatribe with
an equally strongly worded rebuttal. It rejected the prime minister’s “discussion and
37
unhappiness” over the way the polls for the upper house of parliament were conducted.
“This is democracy and free elections and the beauty of free elections which the entire
nation saw and which is mandated by the Constitution,” the ECP declared in a statement.

There may be some objections over the tenor of the ECP’s response to the prime
minister’s remarks, but one cannot dispute the rationality of its stance. The statement
shows that the chairman and the members of the commission have the courage to stand
up to the government’s pressure. It was unbecoming of the head of government to
slander a state institution in the first place.

Interestingly, it was the PTI government that with the consent of the opposition had
appointed the current ECP chairman, a retired civil servant known for his uprightness.
With such a person at the helm, the ECP has been more assertive in attempting to make
the electoral process transparent and fair. A powerful and independent election
commission can ensure the legitimacy of the elections.

The credibility of the electoral body is most critical for strengthening the democratic
process in the country. Instead of making it an issue of ego, the prime minister must
think more rationally. Such a mindless campaign against a constitutional body will not
only damage the government, it will also harm the democratic process in the country.
By: Zahid Hussain
Source: Dawn
The writer is an author and journalist.

38
 Religious Tourism in Pakistan: The Case of Sikhism & Buddhism
A largely unexplored avenue of tourism in Pakistan is religious tourism – mainly Sikh and
Buddhist tourism – which can potentially generate over $60 billion for Pakistan, and
create over 100,000 jobs. To get the maximum benefit from this sector, the government
needs to immediately invest in developing and maintaining vital supporting
infrastructure.

Introduction

This article aims to highlight some monumental opportunities of Sikh and Buddhist
religious tourism in Pakistan that can greatly enhance its overall tourism industry, and
even boost the economy. It also aims to elucidate the often-ignored indirect benefits of
promoting this type of tourism to the national exchequer of Pakistan.

In the year 2016, foreign tourists spent $33.82 billion across South Asia and nearly 69%
of this amount went to India, 10% to Sri Lanka, and 7% to the Maldives. Pakistan, on the
other hand, managed to scrap a mere 1% of this potential source of earning. The regional
average of tourism’s direct contribution to the national GDPs is 3.5%, while for Pakistan
is a bleak 2.8%.

One can safely guess that a majority of the readers from Pakistan grew up hearing about
the plethora of tourist sites in Pakistan – and not wrongly so. In the year 2020, travel
company Wild Frontiers named Pakistan as the “Country to visit”. Similarly, the US-
based lifestyle and luxury publication Condé Nast Traveler ranked Pakistan as the
number one country for tourism in 2020.

All of these publications broadcast the usual landscapes and mountains of Pakistan to
entice its audience to visit. The government has followed suit in a bid to help the sinking
economy float back to the surface, and has launched various commendable initiatives
to boost Pakistan’s tourism scenario.

However, one significant area of tourism worthy of more attention than it is getting from
the media, public, and even the government, is the potential Sikh and Buddhist religious
tourism in Pakistan.

Potential of Sikh Tourism

39
Sri Harmandir Sahib (also known as The Golden Temple) in Amritsar was declared as “the
most visited place of the world”, with an estimated daily total visitor count of 100,000.
Nearly 120 kilometers west of the Golden Temple – across the most luminous
international border – lies another paramount Sikh religious site, that is, Nankana Sahib.

It is the birthplace of Sikhism’s founder and first master Guru Nanak Dev, and is located
at a distance of about 76 kilometers from Punjab’s provincial capital Lahore. The number
of Sikh pilgrims who visited Nankana Sahib from India on the 550th birth anniversary of
Guru Nanak Dev was only 2,000. On regular days, the number of visitors is even lower;
a distance of only 120 kilometers and a reduction of 98% of the visitors.

It is not that there is any lack of interest shown by the Sikh community to visit Nankana
Sahib. A survey shows that 79% of the 20 million Sikhs living in India want to visit
Pakistan. On top of that, 83% of the 8 million Sikhs living outside India expressed a similar
desire. In an unfortunate contrast, only 10% have actually visited Pakistan.

If Pakistan manages to attract only 44,000 Sikh tourists in a full year (44% of the daily
attendance at the Golden temple), and other variables like current expenditure profiles
and mix of pilgrims are kept constant, a conservative estimate would be an 85 times
increase in the expenditure of Sikh tourists on goods and services in Pakistan. The
current amount generated from Sikh tourism of Rs 208 million can reach Rs 18 billion.

Apart from the direct contribution, there are various indirect advantages of Sikh tourism
for Pakistan’s economy as well. As estimate by the World Travel and Tourism Council
postulates that every one rupee that is spent by Sikh pilgrims leads to additional
spending of Rs 1.46 in the tourism sector.

Moreover, every direct job that is created due to Sikh tourism, leads to the creation of
additional 1.55 jobs in the related sectors. If these indirect multiplier effects are taken
into consideration, the total contribution of Sikh tourism to the national economy is
projected at a lucrative Rs. 44 billion annually, with the creation of 82,000 jobs.

Potential of Buddhist Tourism

There is an estimated market of around 500 million Buddhists across the world. If
Pakistan manages to attract even a tiny proportion of this massive market, it can start
an entirely untapped segment of the tourism market. Areas like Taxila, Haripur, Mardan,

40
and Swat that made up the ancient Gandhara region, can be the main attractions in this
regard.

It is said that nearly 1300 years ago, the ancient Korean monk Hyecho traveled here.
Quite recently, a statue of Buddha nearly 50 feet long was unearthed in Haripur which
is claimed to be the world’s oldest sleeping Buddha statue. The marvel and magic of
these historic sites are reflected in the reaction of Buddhists across the globe as well.

As per a Gallup survey conducted in 2016, there are almost 58 million “interested”
Buddhist visitors wanting to visit Pakistan. Out of these 58 million, 2.9 million were
termed as “likely to visit”. If Pakistan manages to bring in just 1% of these 2.9 million
“likely” visitors, it would translate to 29,000 annual visitors.

As per moderate estimates, it would mean a revenue inflow of about $63 million in the
short-term, with a major potential to grow further. If one accounts for the direct as well
as the indirect economic implications of Buddhist tourism in Pakistan, the contribution
is estimated at a whopping Rs. 16 billion with more than 30,500 jobs created.

Prevalent Issues

It becomes obvious from the discourse above that Pakistan has massive potential for
religious tourism especially Sikh and Buddhist tourism. Unfortunately, it has failed to
capitalize on these lucrative opportunities. A few idiosyncratic issues are barring the
progress of Pakistan in this regard. At the top of this list are issues such as lack of
conformity with UNESCO standards and federal-provincial co-ordination.

At the Katas Raj Hindu temple, there was a federal-provincial confusion (post 18th
amendment) that led to an archaeological oversight in the renovation that permanently
damaged the antiquity. This incident is a painful reminder of the barriers being faced by
Pakistan currently in the area of religious tourism.

The Tourism Development Corporation of Pakistan (TDCP) has identified 480 similar sites
across Pakistan. Out of these 480 sites, 106 carry historical importance, 120 have
religious significance, and 26 sites have religious as well as historic importance. If the
government is able to iron out the wrinkles (like the federal-provincial confusion) and
can conform to international standards like UNESCO, it will be making a highly profitable
investment in the short as well as the long-term.

41
Conclusion

One can conclude by emphasizing the need of working towards the development of Sikh
and Buddhist tourism in Pakistan. As mentioned earlier, the government needs to think
of spending in this sector not as a luxury, but as a much-needed investment. Every small
step taken in this direction can pave the way for greatly profitable developments for
Pakistan.

As discussed previously, once the wheels are set in motion, the number of tourists and
their subsequent revenues will grow with a snowball effect. As the great poet, Iqbal said,
“Nahi hai na-umeed Iqbal apni kasht-e-weraan se, Zara nam ho ye mitti to zarkhaiz buhat
hai saa’qi” which translates to: “But of his barren acres Iqbal will not despair: A little rain,
and harvests shall wave at last, oh Saki!”.
By: HAMZA KHAQAN
Source: Paradign Shift
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do
not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.

42