Guardian - 16-07-10

Higher education: Dr Cable's taxing lecture

Elite universities will nag to be able to levy their graduates' pay at a higher rate - they should not be allowed

In a hushed lecture theatre, Dr Vincent Cable let his professorial glasses to slip down his nose and set out to convince the assembled great and good of the university world that he was one of their own. It is just as well that he did that spell as a lecturer in the 1960s, because he went on to say things that only a member of the family could. Making full use of that detached, frank and apolitical manner which has proved a political winner, the industry secretary talked of cuts that would lead not merely to consolidation but outright contraction, while also warning that the average student would have to cough up more. For good measure – just in case anyone was still feeling complacent – he headlined his address "the looming crisis".

Dr Cable, however, added an extra ingredient to what has become the coalition's trademark brew of blood, sweat and tears – namely, fairness. While he took care to fox-trot away from the toes of the ongoing Browne review, which until yesterday had looked like a process designed to provide the cover for higher top-up fees, he plonked a new option on the table. A graduate tax (or, in the inevitable euphemism, a "graduate contribution") marks a progressive departure from the current mish-mash of loans and fees. First, and most importantly, it requires graduates to repay their due in line with what they can afford – with the repayment period being fixed instead of the cash amount. That, as Dr Cable relished explaining, might mean social workers paying back less, and investment bankers paying back more. Second, as a consequence of doing away with flat-rate bills, it also removes the upfront debts which increasingly hang round the neck of university courses, price tags which are a particular psychological deterrent to students from cash-strapped families investing in their future.

So far, so fair, but there is a legion of questions which bear on the principle as well as the practicalities. The industry secretary steamrollered through the obvious technical quibbles about how tax receipts in the distant future could rescue cash-starved colleges in the here and now. He rightly senses that a solution ought to be possible; he must now strain every sinew to find one, or his proposal will disappear into the black hole of public debt. He must also decide whether elite universities should be able to levy their graduates' pay at a higher rate. Although they will press for the right, they should not get it. Funding an academic premier league by a super-tax would put off the poor, and since the alumni of the ivory towers command such high salaries, charging these at the ordinary rate should bring in considerable cash. Dr Cable must also find a way to soothe the nerves of his party, whose manifesto made the rash promise to ditch tuition fees – not to replace them with a graduate tax, but in order "to save students £10,000 each". Having snapped up student-rich seats, such as Manchester Withington, with the help of the proposed giveaway, the Lib Dems will not enjoy explaining to young scholars why most will now have to pay not less, but more.

The party, however, would be well-advised to give serious consideration to the deal that Dr Cable is trying to broker. Yes, there are Conservative parts to the package – the encouragement of private university provision – and Lib Dem activists will rightly be anxious not to create an educational architecture that could unravel into an American-style educational market. Until the government gets a grip on rising graduate unemployment, students will also have every right to resist demands to stump up even more for qualifications that provide a passport to nowhere in particular. But billing for learning on the basis of earnings is not something the Tories would have come up with alone. It had been starting to seem as if the coalition was yellow on liberty but blue on anything involving hard cash. It was Dr Cable's achievement yesterday to defy that caricature.

Source : http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/16/graduate-tax-universities-vince-cable

Financial Times - 16-07-10

Graduate tax is an elementary error

A hoary old chestnut has been exhumed. Vince Cable is the latest British politician to be seduced by the idea of a graduate tax: an income levy on ex-students to pay for England’s universities. The Liberal Democrat business secretary has asked a government review of university finance, due to report in the autumn, to consider it. But this idea has rightly been rejected several times before.

At the moment, English undergraduates are given loans with which to pay for tuition. When their earnings later break a threshold, the government takes a share of their income until they have repaid the debt. The system has two crucial advantages: it makes students pay a portion of their degree costs while allowing needs-blind admissions.

A graduate tax would differ in that ex-students would keep making repayments even after they had covered the cost of their study. The main attraction of this tax to Mr Cable is that it would require high-earning graduates to pay more for their education. But the distributional effects would be paltry, and the damage to the university sector could be enormous.

England’s universities are among its most liberalised public services: the main force driving up teaching standards is the sharp-elbowed consumer student. Since fees were introduced in 1998, undergraduates have forced universities to raise their game in order to compete for custom.

So the logical conclusion for the university finance review is that the tuition fees payable by students, which are currently not allowed to rise above £3,225 per year, should be allowed to reach at least £7,000. The extra money would help cash-strapped universities, but also allow competition between institutions on price. Competition would be sharpened, driving up standards.

By contrast, a flat graduate tax would break the link between the cost of a degree and the student’s pocket. All degrees would cost the same. Institutions would depend less on the good will of its students than of the Treasury. So a graduate tax would erode university autonomy and damps the pressure on universities to respond to their students’ concerns.

There are, furthermore, formidable practical difficulties to such a tax. How will university drop-outs be charged? Will Britons be able to leave the country to escape paying for their education? Will Europeans coming to the UK be allowed to study for free? Mr Cable’s idea causes a host of new problems without solving any old ones.

Source : http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c47706d0-9049-11df-ad26-00144feab49a.html

The New York Times - 15-07-10

Congress Passes Financial Reform

There was more than enough in the financial reform bill — now on its way to President Obama — to merit broad support. Yet, for Thursday’s final Senate vote on the bill, 60 to 39, just three Republicans joined 57 Democrats to support reform. In the House, only three Republicans voted for the bill when it passed that chamber in June, 237 to 192.

Republican opponents would have you believe that lack of bipartisanship was evidence of the bill’s unworthiness, but the margin of victory was really about partisan politics and not the bill’s content. That made the vote an even greater victory for Mr. Obama, who has had to fight for every inch of progress against entrenched Republicans (who have been willing to deny unemployment benefits to millions of Americans rather than cooperate with Democrats on anything).

As was the case with last year’s economic stimulus and this year’s health care overhaul, Republican opposition to the bill was primarily an attempt to drag down Mr. Obama by killing any legislative accomplishment.

When that effort was headed for failure, Republican leaders disparaged the bill on ideological grounds. On Thursday, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, lashed out at what he called a “government-driven solution,” while the senior Republican on the banking committee, Richard Shelby of Alabama, bemoaned “vast new bureaucracies.”

Those are convenient and time-tested bugaboos to campaign by, but they ignore the urgent needs the bill addresses, and its achievements. Those include resolution procedures to help ensure that shareholders and creditors — not taxpayers — bear the losses when big financial institutions fail; new capital requirements for banks and other curbs to help quell speculative excess, including the regulation of derivatives and restrictions on proprietary trading.

To get all that, the bill had to withstand a lobbying juggernaut. Since January 2009, the financial sector has spent nearly $600 million to weaken reform, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The lobbyists notched some victories, to be sure, mainly in the defeat of reforms that would have broken up large banks and done more to constrain risk-taking throughout the financial system.

But they also lost, especially on consumer protection. The new consumer financial protection bureau established in the bill is a milestone, not only for its intent and power to rectify lending abuses, but because it will institutionalize the insight that the safety and soundness of banks cannot — and should not — be measured by profitability alone, but by the impact that bank practices ultimately may have on consumers.

Having earned this victory, the Obama White House and the bill’s Congressional supporters still have another fight ahead of them — over implementing the bill. The legislation requires regulators to write hundreds of rules and conduct dozens of studies, a process that occurs largely outside of public view.

Complicating public trust in the process is the fact that some of the regulatory bodies — the Federal Reserve comes most prominently to mind — are still run by the same people who were blind-eyed as the financial crisis developed. And because the implementation phase is labor- and resource-intensive, public-interest groups, including consumer and investor advocates, will be outmatched by the financial lobby. Congress will have to be unceasingly vigilant during the rule-making to ensure that resulting regulations reflect lawmakers’ intent and the public’s needs.

The administration also must supply top-level fire power, and use the president’s bully pulpit, to guarantee that the bill’s promise is fulfilled.

Supporters of this much-needed financial reform bill took a well-earned bow on Thursday. Now they have to get back to work.

Source : http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/opinion/16fri1.html?_r=1&hp

The Bangladesh Today - 16-07-10

Crackdown on Old Vehicles

Dhaka Metropolitan Police (DMP) has launched a drive against old and faulty vehicles in the capital from Thursday. Police started the drive against over 20 years old buses, minibuses and over 25 years old trucks as well as faulty vehicles .DMP has already constituted 15 teams and each team, led by a magistrate, would conduct the drive mainly aimed at solving traffic jam and checking environment pollution. The DMP Commissioner has said that the seized vehicles will be dumped into a place at Kamalapur.

According to a report, the crackdown has been launched on the thousands of decrepit and dangerous vehicles that ply Dhaka's busy roads in a bid to ease chronic traffic congestion. A team of magistrates has been appointed to identify and remove from service an estimated 12,000 buses, minibuses and trucks that are over 20 years old. Communications Minister Syed Abul Hossain said."This drive will greatly help reduce traffic jams and accidents in the capital," he said. Buses that are older than 20 years are already banned from the capital's streets, but the law is routinely ignored. Local media reports say illegal buses are involved in the majority of road accidents in Dhaka.

Dhaka is one of the most congested cities in the world. According to the Bangladesh Road Transport Authority (BRTA) the city has 527,285 licensed vehicles, but this is growing by about 20,000 a year in line with the city's population growth -- which is up from 20,00,000 in 1974 to 12 million in 2010. As the city dwellers are groaning under the pangs of mounting traffic congestion, some experts have put forward a valuable suggestion saying that the government should build pro-people communication systems with mass transport and wide footpaths in the capital city to remove the acute traffic jams.

Severe traffic jam is one of the major problems gripping the people living in and around the city. This problem continues to be complicated as the population of the city is growing fast, the pressure of commuters is mounting on the roads and the influx of vehicles is increasing. The city dwellers are facing the severest ever traffic jam in the capital in recent days. One of the major causes of this situation is that new vehicles are coming to the street everyday worsening the crisis. Experts think, to ease the traffic jam in the city, the activities between DCC and traffic department should be integrated, traffic rules should be implemented strictly, and violators of the rules should be seriously dealt with. Meanwhile, the large scale import of small vehicles should be discouraged by imposing duties at a higher rate and use of public transports in increased number should be encouraged under well planned traffic system. Besides, some more flyovers and by-pass roads should be constructed on urgent basis.

It is clear that the existing communications facilities based on private cars could never help reduce the traffic congestion in the city; rather it would help increase the traffic jam. But use of private car cannot be stopped either. So it will be wiser to encourage use of mass transports and creation of wide footpaths in the capital city and discourage use of private cars to ease the acute traffic jams. The crisis is aggravated by old and faulty vehicles plying the roads. So it is a timely and correct attempt to remove these vehicles from the capital in the public interest.

It may be recalled, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina recently spelt out in parliament her government's detailed plans to free capital Dhaka from unbearable traffic congestion. The plans include shifting of long distance bus counters from city centers to inter-district bus terminals, introduction of IC Card Ticketing System (E-ticketing),formulation of parking policy, construction of five overpass/flyovers at Mirpur-Zia Colony, Maghbazar-Mouchak (combined) flyover, Jurain Overpass, Kuril Interchange, and Jatrabari-Gulistan flyover. The Prime Minister has dealt with a very important issue which calls for urgent resolution. Traffic congestion is a long standing problem that disrupt the normal life in the city.

Source : http://www.thebangladeshtoday.com/editorial.htm

The Asian Age - 16-07-2010

Unified Command A Promising Step

The idea of a unified command among states — announced by Union home minister P. Chidambaram on Wednesday — to deal with the range of issues thrown up in the fight against left-wing extremism is self-evident. The surprise is it took so long for the Centre and some states to institutionalise it. The challenge posed by Naxalites, who typically operate in regions that are mineral rich and have strong populations of tribal forest dwellers who are extremely poor, is a complex one. Only a sophisticated response will do. The Maoist menace has become more multi-dimensional in recent years. The weapons that the Naxals use are often more advanced that those handled by the police. The organisation and deployment of Maoist cadres now speaks of careful thought and training. In the past, the Naxals were urban middle class revolutionaries who travelled to the hinterland to arouse the poor. Now it is the poor themselves who have taken up arms under the leadership of urban outsiders. The phenomenon suggests that the question of development needs to be addressed urgently. This must be the vital complement of a well thought out and carefully crafted police strategy.

The unified command, if its implementation is trouble-free, has the potential to marry development and security-related concerns on the ground. Both dimensions were adequately articulated in the speech of Prime Minister Manomohan Singh when the unified command was created. In attendance were the chief ministers of Chhattisgarh and Orissa, the Jharkhand governor (the state now being under President’s Rule), and a senior minister from West Bengal (CM Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee stayed away), besides the Union home and finance ministers. Dr Singh noted quite appropriately that the Centre needed to be with the states not only conceptually but also in operational terms. This makes perfect sense. It is a pity that Bihar, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh — where also the impact of the Maoists is felt on a regular basis — have so far chosen to stay out of the ambit of the unified command. The seven states — the four that are within the unified command structure and the three that are not — are a geographical contiguity with forest cover which allows Naxal cadres to move about with relative ease. Due to the greater effectiveness of operations in states under the unified command, the Maoists may now be expected to escape to the other three states where operations are being conducted in the old way. Indeed, this was the problem earlier. Naxal cadres simply hopped from one state to another when the heat was turned on. The Centre should continue to persuade the naysayers to join the comprehensive effort. The states will themselves benefit from resources provided to reinforce the security coordinates, including recruitment and training of more police personnel, besides targeted development activity in line with each state’s unique needs. Finally, the idea of a military man of suitable experience to be associated with the anti-Naxal operations has been accepted. A retired officer of the rank of major-general will assist the unified command. This is certain to have a positive impact on training and tactics appropriate to jungle warfare. This was an element lacking in earlier approaches to dealing with the Maoists.

It is a happy sign that states that have agreed to the unified command are run by parties as diverse as the BJP, the CPI(M)-led Left and the BJD. This gives the effort a political and ideological wholeness, not to say a shared purpose and sense of responsibility. Equally, the pooled efforts of these parties signifies a commitment from a wide swathe of the political spectrum to the uplift of the poor in tribal areas. This is an important signal to give.

Source : http://www.asianage.com/editorial/unified-command-promising-step-382

The News - 16-07-2010

Small Steps

The long-delayed press conference by Indian External Affairs Minister S M Krishna and our Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi at the end of yesterday's talks was low key. There were no surprises and the two men sat next to one another speaking in measured tones – they wanted nobody to misunderstand what they said. Yet what they said was very little and there was not much room for misunderstanding it. Reading between the lines there are a number of positives. The first was that they took longer in their discussions than was expected, a sign that they were at least prepared to sit around a table with an agenda that was clearly wide-ranging. Secondly, they are going to be doing it again and our foreign minister has accepted an invitation from his Indian counterpart to visit in the near future. Thirdly it is obvious that even though there may be a willingness to discuss more openly and frankly the issues which both divide as well as bind us together – few of them are easily soluble.

There are Confidence-Building Measures (CBMs) that are at the margins where movement can clearly be made – an exchange of prisoners accused of petty crimes for instance, and here there was a welcome mention of the fishermen that both sides hold. A resolution of the Sir Creek dispute on which we have requested that the Indians put their proposal to us in writing. On more tricky ground there was a suggestion that both sides are fighting a common enemy, terrorism, and that fighting the enemy together made more sense than doing it separately. Foreign Minister Qureshi pointed to 'a change of mood' in Pakistan which might enable that to happen rather better than it does at the moment. Words like 'useful' and positive' peppered the press conference throughout and the impression was given that we have moved on from 'talks about talks' to 'talks about what we do next'. To the man on the street this may seem like little more than a rearrangement of the chairs, but in diplomatic terms this is a significant shift in the currents that run between us. There is no quick fix, but at least the possibility of a fix for some things is on the table. Keep talking.

Second Editorial

Burqa Bans

What are we to make of the legislation passed by the French Parliaments' lower house last Tuesday which bans the wearing of the burqa and the niqab in public? Female violators of the ban will be fined 150 euros but stiffer penalties are there for men who are found to have forced their female relatives to wear the garments. Spain has already passed a similar law. The legislation was passed 335-1 and it seems that it will be fast-tracked through the French senate to be law by September. Legal pundits are already speculating on what might happen if a conviction under the new law is appealed to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg – coincidentally in France. At the level of the populist the ban has the support of 80 per cent of French voters and the overwhelming support of the non-Muslim population.

There is a clear and increasingly codified sense of popular dislike and mistrust of Muslims in the non-Muslim populations of Europe and North America. This in part stems from 9/11 and events that followed which are popularly interpreted as being representative of the desires and views of a majority of Muslims – which they are not; and the widespread failure of policies associated with the doctrine of multiculturalism. Alongside these elements is the perceived failure of Muslims to integrate in the same way that other cultural and religious minorities have into their host culture. The French seem to see the ban as an attempt to blunt the rise of fundamentalism, but they may find that it will be used by conservative Islamic groups to aggravate wider Muslim concerns about being unfairly targeted and discriminated against in societies that are becoming measurably less tolerant. Such laws will only fan the fires that fuel alienation.

Source : http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=251036

The Express Tribune - 16-07-2010

Surrendering to the extremists

The censor board’s decision to prevent the new film Tere Bin Ladenfrom screening in Pakistan is nothing short of cowardice. Without so much as a single threat, the censor board has given in to the perceived fear that the Pakistani population does not have the ability to laugh at itself. The only comfort Pakistani cinema fans have is in the delightful irony of having a comedy film mocking the irrational sensitivities of a segment of the population banned to protect the sensitivities of that same segment of the citizenry. The reason given for the ban is that it presents a security threat, in that militants may well attack movie theatres which screen the film. Surely, this is tantamount to the worst form of surrender to the extremists. That the ban has taken place under a government led by a party that has always stood against fanaticism and obscurantism makes the whole episode all the more unfortunate. After all, one wonders what exactly the government is afraid of, and whether the prohibition is nothing more than pandering to the extremists. The only result of that will be to embolden them further.

The government should immediately overturn the ban on the film. The protagonist in the film, musician Ali Zafar, has made a name for himself in the country and overseas in his chosen field and his effort needs to be acknowledged not spurned. If the government is afraid of any threat to cinema halls, then it should share this intelligence with cinema hall owners and work out a security plan. Pakistani film-goers need to decide for themselves whether the film is good or bad or whether it is offensive. In case of the latter, the sensible thing usually is to not see the said production. Bear in mind that according to a comprehensive survey held in 2009, a mere nine per cent of Pakistanis had a favourable opinion of the al Qaeda chief.

Source : http://tribune.com.pk/story/28093/surrendering-to-the-extremists/

The Dawn - 16-07-2010

A State of Confusion

WASHINGTON’S lack of direction in its Afghanistan policy is perplexing. The mixed signals coming from the US suggest that the Afghan imbroglio is not being dealt with in a desirable fashion. As reported in this newspaper, US opposition has halted efforts by Pakistan to bring the Haqqani network to the table in order to make peace with the Afghan government. The hardening in the American stance came after Gen David Petraeus replaced Stanley McChrystal as the Isaf commander. Petraeus wants the militants defeated in the field and favours designating the Haqqani network as a terrorist group. This, it is said, will torpedo efforts for a political solution to the Afghan quagmire.

However, one US senior official said recently that there is room for those who want to “come in from the cold”. Differences between the American civilian and military leadership over how to deal with Afghanistan were brought to light by Gen McChrystal’s indiscretions. But Washington must clearly spell out what sort of policy it wants to pursue in Afghanistan. Abrupt about-faces in this regard will not help. Washington needs to communicate to Islamabad and Kabul its vision for an Afghan solution. The US administration’s own lack of clarity was evident in the frustration expressed by senior lawmakers as they grilled Richard Holbrooke during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday.

The confusion needs to end and Washington needs to pursue a solid Afghan policy. As long as confusion prevails only the militants will benefit and an end to the war will be unlikely in the foreseeable future. If the US keeps changing its stance every time a new general takes command of the operation it will cause much bitterness in both Islamabad and Kabul. It is significant that both the Afghan and Pakistani governments are on the same page with regard to bringing most of the Afghan Taliban into the political mainstream. This is a welcome departure from the mistrust of the past. If the Americans have credible information that the link between Al Qaeda and the Haqqanis is too strong to be severed, they should share it with Kabul and Islamabad. Or else it’ll be seen as an effort to scuttle Hamid Karzai’s efforts to forge an ‘all-Afghan’ solution. Senior American lawmakers have admitted that the Haqqanis are the most significant threat to stability in Afghanistan. They must now decide whether to engage the militants politically or to dig in for what appears to be an open-ended conflict.

Source : http://epaper.dawn.com/ArticleText.aspx?article=16_07_2010_007_001

The Nation - 16-10-2010

Murder most foul

The wave of violence - whether acts of terrorism or targeted killings - that has gripped the nation for so many years constitutes a standing rebuke to the leadership governing the country as well as those who exploit the differences among the various sections of the population and aid and abet these crimes. As a result, no one feels safe. The shooting down of Baloch leader, former Senator and Secretary General of BNP-Mengal, Habib Jalib, known as a moderate who stood for greater autonomy and control over its resources for Balochistan, on Wednesday, was a great tragedy that must be mourned by the entire country. One should not be surprised to see his home province paralysed by strikes and shutter-downs in protest at this murder most foul.

The province, rich in mineral wealth, natural gas and other useful resources, has had a long history of neglect, leaving it in a state of underdevelopment and poverty and rightly giving rise to a strong sense of exploitation. The murder of leaders like Nawab Akbar Bugti and the agonising tale of missing persons have added fuel to the fire. Inevitably, there is righteous anger that targets even innocent people, who though have had no role in doing injustice to them, yet represent those who, in the perception of the local people, have been responsible for their miseries.

Source : http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Editorials/16-Jul-2010/Murder-most-foul

The Nation - 16-10-2010

Still going nowhere

As expected, the Foreign Ministers' talks produced no concrete results in terms of any movement towards the conflict resolution. In fact the only agreement that seemed to have come out of these talks was the Pakistani Foreign Minister's immediate acceptance of an invitation to visit India! So more travel expenses for the Pakistani tax payer for a visit that will again probably bring no fruits for the country.

Actually from the Indian perspective the talks did yield some positive signs for India since the Pakistani Foreign Minister made it clear that the major common concern was not Kashmir but terrorism, which he saw as the "common enemy" which both countries must fight jointly. Then he went on to add that both sides sought to find a way to hasten the "trial process" - a reference to Mumbai. If terrorism was the central focus of the talks, as it seems, then why did the Pakistani side not raise the issue of trials for the Samjhota Express accused? Clearly, the Pakistani side came under pressure from India and succumbed to it.

As for Kashmir and India's repression in Occupied Kashmir, Foreign Minister Qureshi could barely bring himself to say the K word and merely lumped it with a set of "core issues" as opposed to reiterating it as the core issue. The Indian Minister was more clear on Kashmir, which he declared to being an integral part of India and emphasised that India would deal with the trouble there in accordance with the Indian Constitution. It was shameful to see the Pakistan's Foreign Minister did not find it opportune to counter this statement and reiterate that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is a disputed territory and recognised as such in the UNSC. More than anything else, Qureshi's telling silence on this represented the appeasing posture the government has adopted towards India. Even Amnesty International has confronted India more forcefully on its human rights violations in Occupied Kashmir.

Source : http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Editorials/16-Jul-2010/Still-going-nowhere

Daily Times - 16-07-2010

A broken-hearted Balochistan

Balochistan mourns once again. However, this time, the entire country has also followed suit. The cold-blooded assassination of one of the province’s moderate and peaceful nationalist politicians and human rights activists, Habib Jalib Baloch, has reduced the nation to deep sorrow. Killed by unidentified gunmen outside his home in Quetta, this tragic incident has brought to light, again, the repression of any voices in Balochistan dedicated to rationality and restraint. As General Secretary of the Balochistan National Party-Mengal (BNP-M), Jalib strongly advocated the removal of the military and Frontier Corp (FC) from the province and back into their barracks, granting the rights of the Baloch people and defending the cause of the missing persons who, unfortunately, are numerous in Balochistan.

Habib Jalib Baloch’s funeral procession was reflective of his stature as a martyr. Carried from the Civil Hospital to the Red Zone that houses the CM Secretariat and the Governor’s House, furious mourners protested the demise of a widely respected leader. Similar tearful protests and angry voices could be seen and heard all over the country. Barricaded by the police who threw tear gas into the crowd to disperse protestors before they could enter Quetta’s Red Zone, Habib’s mourners and adherents now have two paths open in front of them: they can either continue the politician’s peaceful struggle for Baloch autonomy or they can become consumed by the rising tide of hatred and extremism engulfing the province.

For too many years now, the Baloch people have been cast aside by the Centre and for too long they have been made the victims of the military’s use of force. No one is unfamiliar with the devastations inflicted upon people in Balochistan who dare raise a voice against military operations in their province. However, the recent spate of target killings in the province point towards a more aggressive and extreme aim. The murder of a moderate member of the political arena means that there is now a very low threshold for the fundamental human right to express an aspiration for autonomy, knowledge of rights, recognition of identity, and condemnation of army operations.

Balochistan has, unfortunately, become a messy muddle with speculations, conspiracies and blame travelling faster than government willingness to grant the Baloch their constitutional rights. Some quarters are pointing to the involvement of nationalist insurgents, who they cite as becoming too extreme in their views against those who toe a more democratic line. However, such misguided views fail to address the logical conundrum that the “men in the mountains” and parties like the BNP-M all advocate the same slogan: freedom from occupation and granting of complete autonomy to the Baloch. Both may have chosen different pathways to get there, but they remain allies when it comes to the basic interests of their province and their people.

It is a lot more likely that the usual suspects, a list led by the FC, the military and every other member of the security agencies currently engaged in Balochistan, may have had a hand in this murder. Some reports have indicated that an unknown group called the Baloch Musalha Defai Tanzeem has claimed responsibility. Whenever shadowy groups just ‘magically’ appear, suspicion is immediately aroused that they may just be front organisations for an agency that would like to create further waves in the choppy political waters in Balochistan.

It remains to be seen whether Habib Jalib Baloch’s followers continue to resist the renewed and after his murder, strengthened appeal of the insurgents. His political legacy of moderation is now at risk of being overtaken by more radical methods with increased resonance for a battered and disgusted Baloch populace. *

SECOND EDITORIAL:

Nurse attacked

The dismal state of affairs for women who dare venture out into the public space was brought into the limelight yet again recently when a trainee nurse from Karachi’s Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre reportedly suffered an assault at the hands of a colleague doctor, Jabbar Memon. Not only that, circumstantial evidence suggests she jumped from the doctor’s apartment window in efforts to save herself from the doctor’s attack. She was found unconscious and in worrying condition. Dr Memon has been taken into police custody and the results of chemical tests are awaited before incorporating possible rape charges into the FIR against him. In an encouraging response to this horrific incident, staff nurses and students have staged a vehement protest against the accused, vowing to stand by the victim. In response, the hospital authorities have constituted a permanent committee to look into such cases in future.

However, whatever the circumstances, the entire sorry affair reeks of how maltreated and unprotected are professional women in Pakistani society, despite the passage of legislation to protect them in the workplace. Faced with increasing financial burdens, more and more women are leaving the traditional chaadar aur char diwari and are entering the workforce, shoulder to shoulder with their male counterparts. Defying restrictive ideologies and cultural restraints, the young women of this nation are venturing out for their share of financial empowerment. Unfortunately, the male mentality in Pakistan is left flabbergasted and does not know how to respond when segregation is overturned in favour of equal participation. That is when they seemingly go haywire and such unfortunate incidents occur.

Considering how serious an offence this is and how discouraging it is for young women about to enter the workplace to see such episodes occur, a complete and thorough investigation is required and the culprit must be duly punished. There should be no lapses.

It is vital to educate the traditional and narrow mindsets that exist throughout the country, especially in the workplace. In the modern age where women may gain equal economic benefits, our men must become sensitised to a woman’s public participation. If such education and enlightenment is not introduced, we may have many more similar instances to deal with. *

Source : http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\07\16\story_16-7-2010_pg3_1