Basmati dispute

EditorialPublished June 9, 2021 - Updated a day ago

Facebook Count
Twitter Share
   
12

MORE than two decades ago, Pakistan and India had put up a joint
front to protect the ownership of their ‘shared heritage’ by fighting
an attempt by a US company to get an American strain of rice
patented as basmati. The World Trade Organisation decided in
their favour, denying the American company’s application. Today,
they are at loggerheads over who owns the unique, long-grain
aromatic rice grown only in the subcontinent as India has applied
for the grant of an exclusive GI (Geographical Indications) tag for
its basmati rice at the European Union’s official registry. If India
wins this battle, Pakistan would not only lose the large EU market
but also find it difficult to export its basmati rice to the rest of the
world to the detriment of thousands of farmers and other people
associated with the rice trade. At present, Pakistan exports basmati
rice worth between $800m and $1bn, controlling almost 35pc of
the basmati market share across the world. India, the only other
global basmati rice exporter, accounts for the rest of the market.

The EU had given both countries an additional three months until May this
year to settle the matter between themselves. The period expired, and India
sought another three months for reaching a bilateral settlement of the issue.
However, only a few on this side of the border expect a negotiated settlement
since the two countries have yet to begin discussing the matter let alone agree
on its resolution. This is in spite of the fact that Pakistani basmati farmers and
exporters are strongly in favour of the two countries applying for joint
ownership of the shared heritage of this region. Although the Pakistani variety
of basmati rice has an edge over its Indian counterpart owing to its superior
characteristics and better quality, as well as the EU’s pesticide restrictions,
some are not ruling out an EU decision in favour of India in case New Delhi
declines the proposal for joint ownership of the basmati trademark. Pakistan
has diluted its case because we have rebranded our basmati under different
nomenclatures, failed to resolve the dispute between growers and exporters
over the domestic GI ownership of basmati rice, and delayed GI legislation.
Given the implications of an adverse EU decision for basmati farmers and
exports, it is imperative that the government and other stakeholders work
together as a team to prevent any such outcome.
Pakistan’s Afghan predicament

The writer is the author of No-Win War — The Paradox of US-Pakistan

Relations in Afghanistan’s Shadow.

WITH the American forces racing to the exit, Afghanistan has

further descended into chaos. There is an element of inevitability
about the unfolding situation. The power vacuum widened by the
withdrawal of foreign forces has encouraged the Afghan Taliban to
accelerate their military offensive.

Heavy casualties suffered by the Afghan government forces in recent days

underscore the fierceness of the insurgents’ assault. Fierce fighting is going on
in 26 of the 34 provinces. With no sign of the two warring sides reaching a
negotiated political settlement there seems little possibility of cessation of
hostilities.

The growing violence threatens to push Afghanistan into a new civil war
with serious consequences for the region. The deteriorating situation across
the border has also worsened Pakistan’s predicament as the country is caught
in the midst of a geopolitical crisis. It faces multiple security and foreign policy
challenges with the threat of the Afghan conflict spilling over to Pakistani soil.

Despite the apparent tightrope walking it will be hard for Islamabad to escape
the fallout. One is, however, not sure whether our policymakers have a clear
grasp of the seriousness of the situation and a clear strategy to deal with these
challenges.

Some of the comments emanating from Kabul are outright abusive and have
crossed all diplomatic norms.

The Taliban’s military success across the border is ominous for Pakistan’s
national security. It is bound to exacerbate this country’s own problem of
militancy in the border areas and religious extremism inside the country. Most
perturbing is the report of transnational militant groups stepping up activities
along the Pak-Afghan border regions.

In its latest report, the UN Security Council’s Sanctions and Monitoring

Committee warned that a significant part of the Al Qaeda leadership resides in
the regions along the border with Pakistan, which have become the main
centre of militant activities. The growing instability seems to have allowed
various transnational militant groups greater space to operate in Afghanistan.

Most alarming is the escalation in the activities of the so-called Islamic State
(IS) group. More than two dozen militant groups are reported to be active in
the region including several factions of the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).
The competition among them for territorial control makes the regional
situation extremely volatile.

The Taliban’s commitment that they would not allow any militant group to use
Afghan soil for attacks on any country had cleared the way for the Doha
accord that led to agreement on the withdrawal of all foreign forces from
Afghanistan. But the latest UN Security Council committee report alleging
some faction of the group still maintains links with Al Qaeda has raised
questions about the Taliban sticking to the agreement. The Taliban have
rejected the report as “based on false information”.

But the relentless violence involving transnational militant groups such as IS

has raised serious concerns over the post-US withdrawal situation in
Afghanistan. Most of the recent attacks have targeted civilian populations.
Dozens of students were killed in an IS-claimed attack on a school in Kabul
last month.

More disturbing for Pakistan is the report of splinter TTP groups based across
the border in Afghanistan being reunited, backed by some transnational
militant groups. The development has led to an increase in cross-border
attacks in the former tribal districts, particularly in North Waziristan where
Pakistan’s control remains tenuous.

Read: Afghanistan on the edge again

Such attacks have become increasingly frequent in other northwestern border

regions also with the growing instability in Afghanistan. The Afghan Taliban’s
strengthening its military control across the border may give a boost to their
supporters among right-wing groups in Pakistan.

Pakistan has long been a haven for Afghan Taliban fighting the occupation
forces that had given Islamabad some leverage to bring the insurgent group to
sit across the negotiating table with American officials. But that clout seems to
have diminished with the exit of the American forces.
The Taliban’s refusal to join the proposed US-sponsored intra-Afghan talks in
Istanbul and agree to a reduction in violence have also cast a shadow over the
already tense relations between Islamabad and Kabul. Afghan government
leaders have publicly accused Pakistan of aiding the Taliban’s offensive.

Some of the comments emanating from Kabul are outright abusive and have
crossed all diplomatic norms. This hostile attitude of the Afghan government
has complicated the situation further for Pakistan. The outburst of the
Pakistani foreign minister in response to the Afghan national security chief’s
anti-Pakistan comments should have been avoided. The point should have
been made when a foreign ministry spokesman said that Pakistan would not
interact with the Afghan national security adviser who is notorious for using
undiplomatic language.

It is apparent that the American exit plan has been as chaotic as its invasion of
Afghanistan was some 20 years ago. There was no clear objective when the
world’s most powerful superpower went to war and 20 years later it’s leaving
Afghanistan in a greater mess with warring Afghan groups fighting for
domination.

Many analysts see the present Afghan situation as a return to the late 1980s
after the withdrawal of Soviet forces. The looming civil war could have been
avoided if the Americans had shown greater seriousness in getting a political
settlement in place. But it’s too late now.

The Biden administration is reportedly thinking of a US intelligence presence

for counterterrorism action. A report published in the New York
Times reveals that the US is already engaged in negotiations with Pakistan and
some other regional countries for a base for the CIA surveillance operation.

Interestingly, there has not been any denial from Pakistani officials of the
reported negotiations. Although Pakistani leaders have categorically said
that no US military base will be allowed, the report suggested that Pakistan
could agree to give the US access to some facilities. The provision of any such
facility even with conditions attached would pull Pakistan into a deeper
quandary.

Pakistan needs to tread a very cautious path with the threat of Afghan civil war
extended to its own territory. It could have more serious repercussions for our
national security than in the past. The horror of the past four decades of
conflict in Afghanistan continues to haunt the entire region.
Ontario attack
IT is the stuff of nightmares. A Pakistani family that had moved to
Canada apparently to build a better life was mowed down by a hate-
filled, sick mind as they went out for their evening walk in the city
of London, Ontario. This gruesome crime has sent shockwaves
across Canada as well as Pakistan for its sheer barbarity. Four
members of the Afzaal family lost their lives in this clearly
Islamophobic attack, while a child survivor is receiving treatment.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has rightly termed it a “terrorist act”

while a local police official says the family was targeted “because of their
Islamic faith”. The attack in Ontario highlights the growing toxic nexus
between Islamophobia and white supremacy in Western states, and the need
for foreign governments to check this dangerous trend before more valuable
lives are lost.

Read: Canada mourns a 'model family' cut down on an evening stroll

In many Western states, far-right groups and individuals have begun to assert
themselves violently. Perhaps the bloodiest example of this was witnessed in
the New Zealand city of Christchurch in 2019, when an Australian extremist
went on a murderous rampage targeting some of the city’s mosques. Earlier,
in 2017, Canada had witnessed an outrage when a white supremacist
had targeted a Quebec City mosque. Moreover, hate crimes targeting Asian-
Americans have multiplied in the US during the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic,
while in March, US intelligence chiefs raised the alarm over possible domestic
mass-casualty attacks against civilians by white supremacists.

There are different reasons for the growth of white extremism and terrorism.
Much of this has been fuelled by conspiracy theories such as the ‘great
replacement’ idea which roughly states that immigrants, particularly Muslims
and people of colour, will ‘replace’ native Caucasians and Europeans. This
hateful rhetoric has found many takers as immigrants move to the West in
considerable numbers and in many cases, after years of hard work, establish
themselves successfully in their new homes. For the far right, these
immigrants are the perfect targets, as they are blamed for taking local jobs
during periods of economic stagnation and ‘sullying’ the local culture due to
their faith and practices.

The response of the Canadian government has been admirable, as Mr Trudeau

and senior members of the country’s political establishment have rushed to
the site of the tragedy to console Muslim citizens and condemn this act of
terrorism. In many ways, this mirrors New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda
Ardern’s impressive handling of the Christchurch tragedy. Leaders of Muslim
states, including Pakistan, should learn lessons from their foreign
counterparts on how to treat minorities with respect and compassion,
particularly after terrorist attacks. The child survivor of this outrage must be
provided the mental and emotional care he needs after witnessing such
massive trauma. Western states need to do some serious soul-searching to
counter the twin ogres of Islamophobia and white supremacist terrorism
before more damage is done.
Farm productivity
EditorialPublished June 10, 2021 - Updated about 14 hours ago
Facebook Count
Twitter Share
   
1

PRIME MINISTER Imran Khan says his government is enforcing

an agriculture emergency in the country to extend maximum
benefit to growers and eradicate cartelisation (by sugar mill
owners). “We are going for an agriculture emergency to boost agro-
yield that will help stabilise the economy. I firmly believe that the
country will rise through the agriculture sector,” he reportedly told
a group of farmers who had called on him the other day. It remains
unclear as to what he meant by ‘agriculture emergency’. Probably,
he was referring to the proposed interventions of Rs100bn
spanning a period of three years under the Agriculture
Transformation Plan recently announced to reduce farm input cost
to encourage crop value-addition, enhance milk production,
provide fertiliser subsidy, the construction of grain storage, and so
on. These interventions are important to support agriculture in the
short term. But they are not enough to make agriculture
competitive and profitable for growers. For a sustainable and
competitive farm sector, heavy investments are needed in research
and development to develop new, high-yield, drought- and disease-
resistant seed varieties, help farmers adopt modern technologies,
improve soil fertility and water efficiency, etc.

Although the share of agriculture in the economy has dropped to below 20pc
of GDP, it is still a very important source of livelihood for the rural populace
that accounts for over two-thirds of the population and provides employment
to 39pc of the entire national labour force. Additionally, Pakistan’s food
security and almost 75pc of its exports are dependent on this sector’s
performance. However, no effort or intervention will succeed in revitalising it
if the hundreds of thousands of subsistence farmers and smallholders are left
to continue working individually. If farm productivity is to be improved and
growers’ income increased, the government would have to design a new model
to support these small farmers by increasing their access to credit,
encouraging them to partner with one another through the formation of
cooperatives to improve their terms of trade and capacity to bargain and to
enhance their market linkages. These actions will help motivate them to
diversify, become competitive and move towards more profitable, value-added
crops for better profits. At present, subsistence growers, and most
smallholders, are not directly linked with the market and are reliant on
middlemen and speculators for credit to buy inputs by mortgaging a bigger
part of their crops. Government support and partnerships would not only
increase farmers’ incomes, they would also revive agriculture.
Afghanistan on the edge again
WITH the closing act of the American military withdrawal well
underway the situation in Afghanistan is at an inflection point.
Fast-moving events on the ground are outpacing efforts to ensure
an orderly transition to a post-America political dispensation
there. Intense uncertainty clouds the country’s future as concern
grows in Pakistan and elsewhere about the increasing danger of its
slide into chaos. Prime Minister Imran Khan’s comments in an
interview last week are the latest expression of those fears.

While the US pullout is proceeding ahead of schedule the Afghan peace

process remains in a state of deadlock and there is a significant surge in
violence. Another complicating factor injected into an already fraught
situation is the cooling in relations between Islamabad and Kabul.

There is no indication that the US-orchestrated international peace conference

in Istanbul aimed to accelerate the intra-Afghan dialogue will take place
anytime soon. The UN was supposed to convene the meeting in late April but
efforts to persuade the Taliban to attend have so far come to naught.

While the political stalemate continues, the US withdrawal has picked up pace.
There are credible reports that Washington wants to accelerate the withdrawal
to mitigate the risk to its troops and complete the pullout by early or mid-July
rather than the September deadline announced by President Joe Biden. Nato
forces are also said to be working on a July deadline with the drawdown
proceeding accordingly.

The spectre that looms is of chaos and more strife with grave implications
for Pakistan.

This should lend urgency to diplomatic efforts for peace talks to make
progress towards a political settlement. So far, despite some interaction
between the Afghan negotiating delegations in Doha, the intra-Afghan process
has all but come to a halt. What has not ceased is fighting between Afghan
National Security Forces and the Taliban. Violence has intensified and US
airpower has had come to the aid of ANSF in several places especially in the
south. US/Nato air support remains critical to Kabul’s ability to withstand
rising military pressure from the Taliban, who have however abided — so far
— by the agreement not to attack foreign forces.
US and Pakistani efforts to persuade the Taliban to agree to a reduction in
violence have met with little success. Washington sought this as a necessary
accompaniment to the peace plan it outlined a few months ago. But the
Taliban offensive has made it evident that they are not prepared to give up an
option that aims to bolster their negotiating position and test Kabul’s strength.
Their stance remains that the reduction of violence and a ceasefire have to
emerge from intra-Afghan talks and not before. Hopes that by the beginning
of June some reduction of violence would be achieved remain unfulfilled, for
now.

A top Pakistani official has been in Doha to persuade the Taliban to show
flexibility and resume the intra-Afghan dialogue and reduce violence. But the
Taliban don’t seem to be in a mood to listen at a time when Pakistan’s leverage
has been diminishing. The Taliban have been urged to put their peace plan on
the table, but again, there is no sign of this. US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad
is soon expected in the region for another round of shuttle diplomacy in a last-
ditch effort to achieve these goals.

The Taliban argue that their demands for the release of their prisoners and de-
listing from the UN sanctions regime have yet to be met and for which they
await a response. They also say that attending a peace conference without
knowing what obligations they will be expected to undertake would place them
in an unacceptable position. They have reportedly indicated conditional
acceptance to join the conference in Turkey provided they know in advance
what will happen as they won’t sign up to anything pre-cooked.

This may be a pretext to buy time and wait it out for US troops to depart
especially as the Taliban see themselves in an ascendent position. Taliban
leaders also continue to signal that they will not yield on their insistence that
the future Afghanistan should be an Islamic emirate and not a republic. Their
position on core issues seems to have hardened as the American withdrawal
has entered its end phase. Nevertheless, they continue to want to preserve the
international legitimacy they secured since the Doha agreement with the US.

This however has not deterred the Taliban from ramping up attacks across the
country despite international appeals to de-escalate violence. Their strategy
seems to be to encircle provincial capitals and seek to choke several key routes
to set the stage for the siege of cities later. Nine districts have already been
captured. Defections from Afghan forces at the local level are aiding them in
this strategy. The inevitable question this raises is how far ANSF will be able to
sustain itself once international forces leave Afghanistan and they are bereft of
crucial air cover.
Against this backdrop, the downturn in relations between Islamabad and
Kabul has come at a delicate time. Despite Pakistan’s efforts to strengthen ties
with President Ashraf Ghani’s government, as reflected most recently in army
chief Gen Qamar Bajwa’s May visit to Kabul, two developments have set back
relations between the two countries. Ghani’s gratuitously provocative remarks
against Pakistan in an interview with Der Spiegel and his national security
adviser, Hamdullah Mohib’s incendiary comments — just days after Gen
Bajwa’s visit.

This led to cancellation of a phone conversation planned between Prime

Minister Imran Khan and President Ghani. It also put on ice a statement
Islamabad was to issue supportive of the Afghan republic’s position on
preserving the gains of the last 20 years in Afghanistan and protection of
human rights.

Against the backdrop of intensified fighting, lack of movement on a political

settlement and the remaining American soldiers packing up to leave, the
spectre that looms in Afghanistan is of chaos and more strife and anarchy.
This has grave implications for Pakistan who for decades has suffered the
destabilising consequences of war, foreign interventions and conflict in its
western neighbor. The question now is whether anything can be done to avert
a 1989 or 1992 type scenario in Afghanistan, which can have such deleterious
repercussions for its long-suffering people and for regional peace and stability.
Houses of horror
OF all the many genocides that history has witnessed, perhaps the
most successful was the one perpetrated on Native Americans,
entailing as it did not just the physical elimination of the original
inhabitants of North and South America, but also the erasure and
commodification of their culture.

Exactly how many died remains a subject of debate, but a recent study
estimates that in 1492 the indigenous population of the Americas was around
60 million. This figure was arrived at by calculating the amount of agricultural
land needed to sustain one person and then applying that to the total area far-
med in the Americas. By way of comparison, Europe’s population at the time
was 70m to 88m.

Once the Europeans reached the Americas the situation changed and data
models tell us that by 1600, about 56m Native Americans had died. That
means the wholesale elimination of 90 per cent of the American population,
and about 10pc of the global population at the time. In absolute terms, this
slaughter is second only to that of the European power struggle known as
World War II, in which some 80m people died. The scale of this depopulation
was such that global cooling took place.

Death came in many forms for the Native Americans, who saw their
settlements and civilisations destroyed by murder, slavery and, most of all,
disease. Smallpox, measles and the bubonic plague cut a swathe through the
natives who, unlike the Europeans, had no immunity to such diseases. Once
the colonialists figured this out, smallpox especially was used as a weapon
against the natives in what is perhaps the first widespread modern usage of
biological warfare.

Death came in many forms for the Native Americans.

Those that survived were herded off to ‘reservations’ far from their ancestral
lands to eke out whatever existence they could, and thousands more died from
exposure, hunger and exhaustion during these treks.

But it’s not enough to simply murder a people, one must also break them by
erasing their very identity so that they can be recast in the mould of their
oppressors and made ‘useful’, and so was launched a massive campaign to
‘civilise’ these ‘savages’.

Across North America, native children were forcibly removed from their
parents and imprisoned in Indian Residential Schools where they were made
to convert to Christianity, wear only Western clothes and were forbidden to
speak their native languages. If they were to be caught speaking any language
other than English, punishments ranged from beatings to having pins stuck in
their tongues. These schools, run by the state and the church, were rife with
physical, sexual and psychological abuse and countless children who entered
them never came out again. In Canada, this continued until the mid-1970s.
Repeated claims of abduction, abuse and murder were ignored.

But truth does not stay buried for long. Recently, a mass grave containing the
remains of 215 children, some as young as three years, was discovered on the
grounds of what was once the largest such school in Canada, the Kamploops
school in British Columbia.

How many more are out there? In 2008, a truth and reconciliation committee
was founded to probe these accusations. It concluded that Canada’s abduction
and education policy amounted to “cultural genocide”. It estimated that in the
over 120-year history of this project, at least 3,200 children had died in these
mini-concentration camps for children and countless thousands had been
subjected to repeated sexual abuse.

But here’s the catch: the commission was only allowed to investigate 139 of the
over 1,300 such schools that existed across Canada. When it asked for funding
to probe allegations of mass graves, the government refused

and the commission was wrapped up after presenting its findings in 2015. The
commission’s report on Missing Children and Unmarked Burials reads: “The
most basic of questions about missing children — Who died? Why did they
die? Where are they buried? — have never been addressed or comprehensively
documented by the Canadian government.”

And the genocide of the native population, both physical and cultural,
continues in other, more subtle ways. Broken and bleeding after centuries of
state-sponsored abuse, rates of crime and alcoholism are far higher in
indigenous communities than any other ethnic group in Canada. Also consider
that while indigenous children make up less than 8pc of Canada’s child
population (according to 2016 census data), they make up a staggering 52pc of
all children in foster care. The murder and disappearance rate for indigenous
women (twice marginalised by their ethnicity and gender) is 12 times that of
other women in Canada thanks to entrenched systemic white supremacy and a
police force that looks the other way when indigenous women and abducted,
raped and murdered. All too often the police themselves are the abusers, a
logical outcome when it comes to a state that was founded on genocide. The
past isn’t another country; all too often, the past isn’t even past.
Unfulfilled mandate
THE Charter of the United Nations was drafted and approved in
1945. Its stated objectives are to prevent war, forced occupation,
and promote global justice. This vision is beautifully captured in a
sculpture in the court of the UN building which consists of a pistol
whose muzzle has been tied in a knot.

However, the UN has not been able to fulfil its mandate. Since its creation
war, famine, illegal occupation, and inequity between nations and classes have
increased. This failure of the UN is built into its structure.

Five members of the Security Council can, and have consistently, vetoed
resolutions against injustice, occupation, and war. These five nations are the
richest and/or most powerful nations on earth. All five of them are also major
manufacturers of small and large arms and all of them are exporters in the
global market. The purchasers of these arms are by and large countries that
suppress their people, like Saudi Arabia, or seek to impose their will on the
region in which they exist, like India. When not directly involved, they develop
proxies to destabilise the region. The guns and ammunition manufactured by
these powers have been used in Yemen, Syria, Libya, various regions in Africa,
and, for the last 40 years, in Afghanistan. They have killed women and
children indiscriminately and justified it as collateral damage. They have been
used to take away Palestinian land and give it to Israel through massive
military aid of $18 billion yearly that they provide to the Zionist state.

In addition, it has been well established that some of these countries smuggle
arms to warring factions in their zones of influence through a network of
contractors (60 per cent of this trade is from the US and 25pc from Europe).
Global spending on the manufacture of arms is $3 trillion of which 39pc is
America’s share. China’s share is 13pc and UK, France, and Russia,
collectively, add up to 8.8pc. This also shows the imbalance in power within
the Security Council.

The failure of the UN is built into its structure.

Thirty-seven per cent of all arms export is from the US, 20pc from Russia, and
16.7pc from the other members of the Security Council. Meanwhile, Israel is
also becoming a major manufacturer of arms and its exports between 2016
and 2020 increased by 59pc. This has major implications for the Middle East.
The big importers of arms, on the other hand, are Saudi Arabia (11pc), India
(9.5pc), Egypt (5.8pc), UAE (3pc), and Pakistan (2.7pc).

These figures give us some idea of the interests the members of the Security
Council have in promoting a state of war. Their economies are heavily
dependent on arms production and sale and this has expanded phenomenally
from $95bn in 2017 to $3tr in 2020.

The figures also point to the fact that the UN is all but dead and survives only
because it has become a part of the larger global system to maintain the
present status quo of which a proliferating arms economy is an integral part.

The UN employs 37,000 permanent staff and has an annual budget of

$3.231bn (2021 figure). This does not include its special programmes like
peacekeeping (last year’s budget for peacekeeping was $6.58bn) or projects
related to famine relief. Much of this expense is provided by the five powers.
For instance, the US contribution to UN expenses is 22pc of the UN’s total
budget. To add insult to injury, these five powers and their allies are
collectively known as the ‘international community’.

The UN has a close working relationship with international financial

institutions (IFI) whose political and economic agendas, such as neoliberalism
and global trade treaties, it promotes despite being discretely critical of them
at times. Enough has been written about these organisations, in the case of
Pakistan as well, to show that they are not interested in development but in
creating dependence and pushing their loans. The World Bank, the Asian
Development Bank and DFID combined employ 23,857 full-time staff and
have a combined budget of $5.4bn. In addition, both the UN and these
agencies support thousands of NGOs and consultants in developing data,
evaluating programmes, and implementing small and medium projects that
serve the various programmes that they promote. This huge bank of human
resources, the power it creates, and the interests it generates, collectively
manage to prevent the UN from dying formally. They are happy to keep it on a
ventilator so that they can also survive.

There is a need for a global network of organisations and individuals to be

created, nurtured, and formalised to push for UN reform or/and to non-
violently agitate collectively against injustice to prevent the consolidation of an
anti-poor status quo. If this does not take place, there will be many more
Palestines, leading to global anarchy, and we will watch helplessly.
Restoring & protecting ecosystems
WORLD Environment Day today has kick-started a decade of
ecosystem restoration. As a global host for World Environment
Day, 2021, it is an important opportunity for Pakistan to revisit
environmental priorities that it has followed for the last 50 years
and reset the direction for the decade ahead.

The 1972 Stockholm Declaration inspired Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to begin

Pakistan’s environmental journey. The Declaration laid down the principle
that the earth’s carrying capacity must be protected. Within two years, the
Environment and Urban Affairs Division was established. Instead of focusing
on the 26 principles adopted in Stockholm, however, the Urban Affairs
Division focused primarily on the ‘brown’ environment agenda that included
building environmental standards for industrial discharges and effluents,
ambient air quality, and solid waste management. Success in this required
developing standards, legislation, regulatory institutions, tribunals and the
capacity to monitor compliance by the private sector. The government, on its
part, has rarely submitted its conduct to environmental scrutiny. This is where
we have been standing for the last half century — brown sahibs penalising the
non-compliant weaker players.

The ‘brown’ agenda focused mostly on urban priorities — water and air
pollution, sanitation, industrial effluents and discharges, waste, and recycling
— and failed miserably on almost all counts notwithstanding some important
successes. Mostly overlooked was the ‘green’ environment that typically
protects ecosystems by focusing on species, wildlife, biodiversity, water
bodies, soils, and other natural resources to provide municipal or
environmental services by way of drinking water, sewerage systems, waste
collection and parks and other community spaces.

We instead allowed the regenerative capacity of ecosystems to deteriorate and

economic value to dissipate. The country’s first environmental legislation by
Gen Zia in 1983 deepened the divide when the Pakistan Environment
Protection Ordinance formally separated the nation’s development and
environment agendas. This fragmentation deepened as successive
governments shelved most environmental ambitions one after the other.

Read | Pakistan not at fault but most at risk due to climate change: PM
Imran
The Ministry of Environment and its successor the Ministry of Climate Change
until very recently rarely attended to ‘green’ environment issues despite a
powerful argument in 1992 by the National Conservation Strategy to focus on
14 programme areas for action centred on the health of ecosystems. It urged
the government to also pay attention to maintaining the soil in croplands,
increasing efficiency of irrigation, protecting watersheds, supporting forestry
and plantations, restoring rangelands and improving livestock, protecting
water bodies and sustaining fisheries, conserving biodiversity, increasing
energy efficiency, managing population growth, developing and deploying
renewable resources, supporting institutions to manage common resources
and preserving cultural heritage.

Successive governments shelved most environmental ambitions one after the

other

Successive governments failed to democratise environmental processes or

delve deep into these proposed green environmental issues. As a result, the
environment ministry did not engage in any of the key global processes and
social sector summits that informed the development of the Millennium
Development Goals and later the Sustainable Development Goals. The
country’s environmental ambition and impact continued to shrink. The
environment ministry was the focal ministry for several multilateral
environmental agreements and numerous protocols, but did not succeed in
mainstreaming any of them despite their elaborate action plans.

After the mid-1990s, the interest in green environment issues waned further
even though the environmental agenda had become visibly more complex and
the country’s physical environment had deteriorated. The environment
ministry ignored agriculture and land use, land-use change, and forestry
(collectively known as LULUCF in climate change negotiations) that together
are now responsible for half of Pakistan’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The 18th Constitutional Amendment formally devolved the mandate on

environmental issues in 2010 to the provinces, resulting in the dissolution of
the environment ministry later reincarnated as the Ministry of Climate
Change. The lopsided focus on urban issues further skewed and constrained
the priorities of provincial governments. It impaired their ability to
mainstream environmental action. They failed to recognise the fact that
improvements in urban human health would be for the most part a by-product
of healthy ecosystems.

Read: The case for environmental governance

Even though climate adaptation became a declared priority, the National
Adaptation Plan or the sectoral and provincial adaptation plans were never
developed. Instead, the environment departments that were initially legislated
as Environment Protection Departments and charged to develop and ensure
compliance, took it upon themselves to become policymakers as well as the
regulators.

This blurred vision has continued to cloud Pakistan’s environmental direction.

The National Climate Change Policy did not explicitly recognise the primacy
that ecosystems hold for the slow onset of climate change or how land-
degraded ecosystems make societies prone to climate-induced disasters.
Instead, it offered a laundry list of scores of un-prioritised policy actions.
Following NCCP, the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) as well as
many provincial policies fell short of recognising the central importance of
healthy ecosystems for the well-being of our rapidly growing population.
Except for the National Water Policy, proudly developed by the previous
government and silently shelved by the present one, none of the approved or
draft provincial climate, water, agriculture, disaster risk reduction or
environment policies recognised the importance of prioritising ecosystem
restoration. By ignoring ecosystem-based approaches, we have unnecessarily
created a dual challenge for ourselves: integrating environment and
development on the one hand and ‘mainstreaming’ environment in policy
planning on the other.

The government has committed itself to an impressive agenda that seeks

ecosystem restoration and protecting nature in order to generate positive
spillovers in the economy, health, livelihoods and the quality of life. The list of
new initiatives is long and constantly growing. Their sustainability, however,
demands that the NCCP, NDC and provincial policy instruments are revised to
anchor and embed ecosystem-based solutions and set the direction for the
decade ahead. To rectify this critical lapse, the federal government should
allocate necessary resources from the Rs900 billion PSDP budget earmarked
for FY 2021-22.

Finally, the ecosystem-based approaches stem from democratic norms and the
principles of sustainable development. They must firmly be based on direct
engagement and ownership of communities. Let’s recognise that it is only the
local governments who can have abiding stakes in protecting local
environmental assets. Rather than outsourcing ecosystems to land grabbers
and mafias, Pakistan has to find ecosystem champions at the local level by
reviving local governments.
Israel must stop attacks, evictions: UNSC
members
Underline need for a two-state solution
• Palestinian FM rebukes US, other powers for defending Israel

UNITED NATIONS: All members of the United Nations Security Council

(UNSC), who participated in an emergency meeting on the situation in
Palestine on Sunday, urged Israel not to make demographic and territorial
changes in the occupied territory and immediately cease its hostilities.

The UNSC members also underlined the need for a two-state solution, with
Palestinians having an independent state with internationally recognised
borders.

“What has happened proves once again that an enduring settlement can only
be achieved on the basis of the two-state solution,” said Foreign Minister
Wang Yi of China, which holds the council’s rotating presidency for the month
of May.

All members also urged Hamas to immediately stop rocket attacks into Israel,
reminding both sides that nothing could justify targeting civilians.

This was the 3rd Security Council meeting on Palestine convened this week.
On Wednesday, the United States blocked the council from issuing a
statement that expressed “deep concern over the latest situation in Gaza and
called for an immediate cessation of hostilities”.

Mr Wang chaired the debate, which showed a growing alarm at the possibility
of this conflict turning into an all-out war in the region. “We urge Israel to
honestly fulfil its obligations under international law, promptly and fully lift
the blockade on and besiege of Gaza and guarantee the security and rights of
the civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” he said.

The Security Council, Mr Wang said, shouldered the primary responsibility for
safeguarding international peace and security. But “regrettably, simply
because of the obstruction by one country, the council hasn’t been able to
speak with one voice”, said the chief Chinese delegate, taking a dig at the US
for blocking a statement condemning Israel.
Reminding the world body that it needs to resolve the Palestinian issues now,
Mr Wang said: “Justice is already running late, but it must not be forever
absent.”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres, who was the first of nearly two dozen
speakers, warned that the latest round of violence “only perpetuates the cycles
of death, destruction and despair, and pushes farther to the horizon any hopes
of coexistence and peace”.

Appealing to all parties to heed his call for peace, Mr Guterres said: “Fighting
must stop. It must stop immediately.”

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Al Maliki used the meeting to vent his
community’s longstanding grievances, reminding the world that Israel has
always been allowed to get away excesses and atrocities it committed against
the people of Palestine. He implicitly rebuked the United States and other
powers for defending Israel, which “further emboldened it to continue
murdering entire families in their sleep”.

Gilad Erdan, Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations, who spoke after Mr
Maliki, blamed Palestinians for attacking Israeli citizens.

Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US Ambassador to the United Nations, said

President Joe Biden had spoken with Israeli and Palestinian leaders, while
Secretary of State Antony Blinken had also been engaging with his
counterparts in the region. She called on Hamas to stop its rocket-barrage
against Israel, expressed concern over inter-communal violence and warned
against incitement on both sides.

“The human toll of this past week has been devastating,” she said, adding: “It’s
time to end the cycle of violence.”

Riad Al Maliki thanked China for convening this meeting, saying: “No words
can describe the horrors our people are enduring. Entire families being killed,
including children as young as five and pregnant women.” Israel, he said, was
working on a deliberate plan to uproot Palestinians from Jerusalem and kill
them in Gaza, one family at a time.
He urged the UN members to ponder over two questions: what are
Palestinians entitled to do to defend themselves? Should their actions be seen
as self-defence, or terrorism?

Mr Maliki also urged the international community to decide how they were
going to stop the Israeli aggression: sanctions, military intervention, further
talks or by doing nothing. “Israel keeps telling you to put yourselves in their
shoes, but they are not wearing shoes, they are wearing military boots,” he
said.

Talking about the eviction of Palestinian families from their homes, Mr Maliki
asked: “How can real estate agents steal what does not belong to them?”

The Israeli envoy, however, claimed that property dispute in Sheikh Jarrah did
not cause the Hamas retaliation, it’s a political design, representing “internal
Palestinian political maneuverings. Israel, he said, had decided to “stop the
aggression once and for all”.

The Norwegian foreign minister noted that the situation in the region had
deteriorated significantly and risked further escalation. “As long as there is no
peace, no two-state solution, there will be no lasting peace,” warned the chief
Norwegian diplomat.

Ireland also participated in the debate, underlining the need for

“proportionality, and accountability for the actions of the Israeli security
forces”.

Both Norway and Ireland condemned the Israeli attack on the media tower,
calling it an attack on press freedom. Both also called for an end to the
expansion of illegal settlements and eviction of Palestinians.

“Unacknowledged grievances for many years are the main source of the
frustration of the Palestinian people,” said the Irish envoy.

US ambassador Greenfield told both sides that now was the time to end this
“cycle of violence, halt rocket attacks and ongoing inter-communal violence in
Israel. She also called for ending evictions, illegal settlements, including from
Jerusalem. She said the ongoing violence would hurt the talks for a two-state
solution.

Ms Greenfield spoke of a future when Israel and Palestinian states could live
“side by side in peace, within internationally recognised borders”. “We need to
 do everything we can for the day when Israelis and Palestinians can live in
peace and dignity.”

The Russian representative said the main cause of this new escalation was the
absence of a negotiation process on all fundamental issues. “We condemn
attempts to change the historic and territorial status of the region,” he said.

Warping: Synonyms: Noun

 base, basis, bedrock, bottom, cornerstone,

deceit: (the act or practice of deceiving)

 Synonyms:
artifice, cheating, cozenage, craft, craftiness, crookedness,

Antonyms

 artlessness, forthrightness , good faith, guilelessness , 

impunity: (exemption or freedom from punishment, harm, or loss)

 synonyms: exemption,

 cessation
: a temporary or final ceasing

Synonyms: arrest, arrestment, cease,

Antonyms: continuance, continuation
Israel vows to continue strikes despite Biden’s call for truce
GAZA CITY: While US President Joe Biden told Israel that he
expects a “significant” reduction in the military confrontation with
Palestinians, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on
Wednesday he was determined to continue this operation until its
aim is met.

“The president conveyed to the prime minister that he expected a significant

de-escalation today on the path to a ceasefire,” according to a statement
released after what the White House said was the two leaders’ fourth call since
the crisis began.

The statement marked a sharpening of public tone from the White House
toward the close US ally. It was Biden’s toughest public pressure so far on
Israel, as pressure has been mounting on Biden, too, to do more as the death
toll in the Palestine conflict has topped 200.

Foreign ministers from three European countries expected to arrive in Israel

today

Responding to the Biden statement, Netanyahu said he greatly appreciated the

support of the American president, but said Israel would push ahead to
“return the calm and security to you, citizens of Israel”.

“To express their solidarity and support for Israel during its campaign against
Palestinian fighters in the Gaza Strip”, foreign ministers from Germany, the
Czech Republic, and Slovakia would arrive in Israel on Thursday, the Israeli
foreign ministry said, explaining that the diplomats had been invited by
Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi.

The German foreign ministry has confirmed that the nation’s top diplomat
would make a one-day trip to Israel and the West Bank on Thursday for talks
with senior Israeli and Palestinian officials. The ministry said that Foreign
Minister Heiko Maas would meet the Israeli foreign and defense ministers as
well as President Reuven Rivlin. He would also meet the Palestinian prime
minister in Ramallah, the statement added.

While the Egyptian ceasefire offer was also rejected by Israel, an Egyptian
diplomat said some of the country’s top officials expect amendments to their
proposal. He said they hope France increasing efforts could spur the US to
exert its influence on Israel and PM Netanyahu to agree to stop the fighting as
soon as possible.

He added that if that didn’t happen, there are some discussions among Arab
and Islamic nations, along with China, to put the issue before the UN General
Assembly in an effort to bypass the Security Council and the US veto power
there.

In his televised speech on Wednesday, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas

addressed Arab delegates, calling Jerusalem the “essence of the Palestinian
national identity”.

Abbas said Israel was carrying out organized state terrorism and war crimes in
Gaza that are punishable under international law. He said the Palestinians
would not hesitate to pursue those who committed such crimes in front of
international courts.

The Arab League Parliament also convened an extraordinary meeting in Cairo

to express solidarity with the Palestinians and condemn Israeli strikes on the
Gaza Strip. Those in attendance at the meeting on Wednesday wore traditional
Palestinian black-and-white scarves in a sign of support.

'Time to say enough': FM Qureshi asks UNSC to

issue call for an end to Israeli violence
Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi on Thursday urged the
UN Security Council (UNSC) to issue a call for an end to
Israel's devastating violence against the Palestinians in Gaza,
saying "it is time to say enough."

Addressing an emergency meeting of the United Nations General Assembly

(UNGA) called to discuss the situation in Gaza, Qureshi said Israel had
mounted a "relentless onslaught" on the people of Palestine, resulting in
scores of deaths and limited access to food, water, hygiene and health services.

Hospitals and hygiene services depended on electricity but fuel for the power
plants had almost run out, he pointed out.
"As we speak, people in Palestine are being killed with impunity. Death echoes
in every home in Gaza. [The enclave] is plunged in darkness literally and
metaphorically; the only light is of Israeli explosions.

"This is Palestine where, in full view of the world, Israeli air strikes bring down
entire buildings to kill and terrorise innocent Palestinians and even silence the
media," he said while referring to Israel's destruction of a high-rise building in
Gaza City that housed the offices of The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and
other media outlets on Saturday.

"It is time to say enough. The voice of the Palestinian people cannot and will
not be silenced. We, the representatives of the Islamic world, are here to speak
with them and for them."

The foreign minister said it was "appalling" that the UN Security Council had
been "unable to exercise its primary responsibility" of maintaining
international peace and security, adding that it had "failed to demand even a
cessation of hostilities".

The countries preventing the UN from putting forth a resolution demanding

an end to the violence bore a heavy responsibility, Qureshi said.

"We must not fail the Palestinian people at this critical juncture," he said and
expressed the hope that the UNSC would issue a call for the cessation of Israeli
attacks.

"Let us be clear, there is no more room for military equivalence between the
beleaguered and occupied Palestinian people who have no army, no navy and
no air force, and the Israeli war machine — one of the most powerful in the
world.

"This is a war between a military occupier and an occupied people. It is a war

between an illegal occupation and a legitimate struggle for self-
determination," he said, pointing to UNGA Resolution 2649 which he said
affirmed the legitimacy of the struggle of people under colonial and illegal
domination to fight for their right to self-determination using any means at
their disposal.

"We should mobilise all possible humanitarian help for the devastated
Palestinian population in Gaza and other parts of the occupied territories," he
said, urging the global body to arrange a comprehensive humanitarian
assistance programme.
Qureshi said it was necessary to send medical teams, medicines, food and
other supplies to Palestine. He called for an international force to be deployed
for protection and for Israel to open all access points to Gaza so aid could
reach the enclave.

"If the Security Council cannot agree to send the protection force, a coalition
of the willing can be formed to provide at least civilian observers to monitor a
cessation of hostilities and supervise the provision of humanitarian help to the
Palestinians."

He also called on the UNGA to "condemn Israel's forced and illegal eviction of
Palestinians, including in the district of Sheikh Jarrah and the construction of
Jewish settlements", stressing Israel's "crimes against humanity should not
escape accountability".

"There should be no immunity for violating international law, including the

Fourth Geneva Convention," he said and asked for the activation of UN
Human Rights Council, International Criminal Court (ICC) and International
Court of Justice (ICJ) to ensure that Israel was held accountable for its "war
crimes".

Qureshi said the UN should also revive "concrete efforts to end Israeli
occupation of Palestinian territories and to dismantle the illegal settlements
and apartheid-like regime Israel has imposed in the occupied territories".

He asked the UNGA to secure unconditional implementation of Resolution

242 in which the UNSC demanded that Israel withdraw its armed forces from
territories occupied in the 1967 war.

"It is imperative to initiate bold steps to secure the implementation of the

Security Council and General Assembly resolutions calling for the
establishment of a viable, independent and contiguous Palestinian state with
Al-Quds Al-Sharif as its capital.

"Pakistan endorses [Palestinian] President Abbas' call for an international

conference to secure a peaceful settlement," he added.

The foreign minister termed the Palestine issue as the reason behind the
turmoil and conflicts in the Middle East and the "principle root cause of the
humiliation and anger in the Arab and Muslim world".
He said the onus for restoring peace was on Israel which needed to end its
occupation of Palestinian land. "This General Assembly session must send a
clear message to Israel and the Palestinian people," he added.

"It is only through determined and decisive action that this Assembly can
restore the credibility of the Unted Nations and demonstrate its effective role
in maintaining global peace and world order based on equity and justice," he
concluded.

'Genocide'
In his speech at the UNGA meeting, the top Palestinian diplomat accused
Israel of committing “genocide” against Palestinian families and urged the
international community to protect the Palestinian people until their freedom
was assured.

Foreign Minister Riad Al-Malki emphasised that “every country in the world
has a responsibility to ensure that peace, justice and freedom prevail.”

He urged the assembly to ensure that Israel was held accountable for killing
innocent Palestinians and was not provided with arms. He said the presence of
a dozen ministers, almost all from Arab and Islamic countries, sent a clear
message: “Stop the violence.”

The Palestinian minister responded to Israel’s claims of acting in self-defence

by saying: “How can an occupying power have the right to defend itself when a
whole people under occupation is deprived of the very same rights?”

Al-Malki said the Palestinians had informed the Biden administration and the
Quartet of Mideast mediators — the US, UN, European Union and Russia —
that “ending occupation against our people and our holy sites should be
followed by a political process” that would lead to ending the Israeli
occupation of Palestine and its capital.

United stance
Foreign Minister Qureshi arrived in New York on Wednesday evening on a
Palestine peace mission and to attend the UNGA emergency meeting, called by
the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the Arab League.

Pakistan has joined hands with Palestine, Sudan and Turkey to take a united
stance at the UNGA session. This is the first UN meeting that has seen the
 physical presence of foreign ministers since the Covid-19 pandemic paralysed
the world. Prior to this, the UN had been holding virtual meetings in the wake
of the pandemic.

Soon after his arrival in New York, Qureshi hosted a working dinner of the
foreign ministers of OIC member states to discuss the situation in Palestine.

"We hope the UNGA meeting will send a strong message … to end the Israeli
aggression and to take concrete steps to find a solution to the Palestine issue,"
said the foreign minister while addressing the dinner.

A statement issued by Pakistan’s UN mission said that the foreign minister’s

visit to New York was part of Pakistan’s intensive diplomatic outreach to
mobilise international support for ending the ongoing Israeli aggression
against the Palestinians.

The UNGA session follows an intensive international effort to secure a

ceasefire in the occupied Palestinian territories after a week of deadly cross-
border violence.

Israeli strikes on Gaza have killed 230 Palestinians, including 65 children,

according to the Gaza health ministry, leaving vast areas in rubble and
displacing tens of thousands in the crowded territory.

Israel's army has meanwhile said Hamas and other Islamist armed groups in
Gaza have fired 4,070 rockets towards Israel, the overwhelming majority of
them intercepted by its Iron Dome air defences. The rockets have claimed 12
lives in Israel, including one child, with one Indian and two Thai nationals
among those killed, the police said.

Nemesis: an act or effect of retribution

Synonyms

 avenger, castigator, chastiser, punisher, scourge, vigilante

citadel: stronghold

synonyms: bastion, castle, fastness, fort, fortification

antonyms:
Revitalise: give new life

Synonyms: freshen, recharge, recreate, refresh

An

Antisemitic charge
FOREIGN Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi was recently
interviewed by CNN anchor Bianna Golodryga on ‘Amanpour’ after
the UN meeting on the latest Israel-Palestine emergency. In
Pakistan, this interview sparked a vigorous debate about whether
or not the foreign minister had been antisemitic in his remarks.
What exactly did he say that was so wrong?

During the brief interview, in which the foreign minister appeared jet-lagged,
but resolute, Qureshi spoke about the need for Israel to stop its aggression.
Then he said Israel was losing the media war in the eyes of the world.
Golodryga asked him what he meant by that; he responded that Israel had
“connections” to the media and then changed that to “they control the media”.
When Golodryga pushed back, he added, “Deep pockets.” Immediately,
Golodryga accused SMQ of antisemitism. After her accusation, our foreign
minister spent the rest of the interview trying to extricate himself.

Read: 'Anti-Semitic' remark or Western media's hypocrisy? — FM Qureshi's

CNN interview sparks debate

To Pakistanis, it may not be illogical to point out that Israel has a great deal of
influence on the world media. A 2018 study by 416labs.com showed that in
five major US newspapers, headlines mentioning Israel were four times more
prevalent than those mentioning Palestine; Israeli sources are 250 per cent
more likely to be quoted than Palestinian sources. But it is highly unlikely that
Israel is directly paying for this disproportionate coverage.

Unfortunately, to Jewish people, suggesting that Jews — or Israelis — control

the media, banking or Hollywood counts as antisemitism, as does active Jew-
hatred and comparing Jews to Nazis. Antisemitism is not religious prejudice,
but classified as racism and ethnic hatred. Legitimate criticism of Israel is not
antisemitism, according to many Jews who oppose Israel’s policies towards
Palestinians. Other Jews argue that even Jews who criticise Israel are
antisemitic.

How does the West define antisemitism?

Many Pakistanis do not give proper consideration to what it means to be
accused of antisemitism in the West. Yes, it has been weaponised in order to
silence people on the subject of the Palestinian occupation. But like the issue
of blasphemy, an accusation of antisemitism can ruin your professional
standing, if not your life. Although nobody has died after being accused of
being antisemitic, you can lose your job as a reporter, or be denied tenure at a
university. If you’re a politician accused of antisemitism, your political career
may never recover.

Golodryga, who misnamed Qureshi as ambassador twice instead of foreign

minister, could be blamed for using a variety of methods to shut him down on
the issue of Israel and Palestine. As well as the antisemitism accusation, she
also questioned Qureshi on Pakistan’s silence on China’s Uighurs. While it
may be reasonable that Pakistan be questioned on its support for Palestine but
its silence on human rights violations in China, Qureshi should have insisted
that she stick to the relevant topic and that that discussion could take place at
another time.

Rather than alluding to unsupported conspiracy theories on WhatsApp groups

and social media, he should have merely stated that media bias in favour of
Israel cannot change the fact that Israel is in violation of international law and
committing war crimes in its continued occupation of Palestine. Our political
representatives, instead of trying to expose a worldwide Zionist plot, must
educate themselves on what constitutes antisemitism in the international
arena and be utterly scrupulous about leaving it all out of any public discourse.

Recent tweets from a Pakistani actress and a freelance reporter (who was then
fired from CNN) misquoting Hitler were retweeted by many Israel supporters
as ‘evidence’ that Pakistan is a deeply antisemitic country. Once the word
‘antisemitism’ is mentioned, all our credibility as honest brokers goes out the
window in the eyes of the West, especially as we are a Muslim country. This
label would take away our ability to use our voice in international forums to
advocate for causes like Palestine and Kashmir; an antisemitic nation with
nuclear capabilities would not just be vilified but restricted on many levels. At
the very least, it could have negative repercussions for our attempts to get off
the FATF grey list.

Even the Palestinians who are grateful for our support have said that
antisemitism does not help them get out of the living nightmare they’re in. In
a world that is changing the discourse about the Israeli-Palestine conflict,
thanks to social media and the amplification of Palestinian voices, this is not
the right time for Pakistanis to revert to what are widely seen as antisemitic
tropes and stereotypes. Our spokespeople need intensive media coaching on
how to avoid them while still making valid points on international media and
at world fora. This will elevate the dialogue around peace and justice to the
benefit of the Palestinians and improve Pakistan’s standing in the eyes of the
world.

Supporting Palestine
THE violent dispossession of Palestinians’ homes in East
Jerusalem and the West Bank, the continuous harassment of
Palestinians and the apartheid imposed on them in occupied
Palestine, and the indiscriminate killing of Palestinians in Gaza by
Israel’s military for 11 days has elicited a rightful global outcry in
the past weeks, which is much louder this time thanks to the
convening power of the internet.

Practical steps must complement Pakistan’s solidarity protests and diplomatic

efforts at the UN and through the OIC to isolate the apartheid state of Israel.

The centring of the narrative around crimes against Palestinians was possible
due to independent Palestinian activists — not just the elite or foreign
correspondents — constantly updating people across the world on the
situation through social media, and giving direction as to the kind of solidarity
and support they needed. This is despite biased content moderation efforts by
companies like Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, and Google. The critical mass
created by important voices like Mohammed El Kurd, Marwa Fatafta, Omar
Ghareib, Yara Hawari amongst many others — and amplified by people across
the world — forced several mainstream international media outlets to take
Palestinian activists on air, contributing to an unprecedented shift in the
global narrative about Palestine.

Practical steps must accompany solidarity protests.

This momentum must continue. People must pressure their governments to

reassess their ties with Israel based on the gross violations of human rights the
state has been committing against Palestinian people in flagrant violation of
225 UN Security Council resolutions about Palestine. Freedom-loving people
across the world have spoken, with rallies attended by millions.

As a potent solution, the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divest, Sanctions (BDS)

movement advocates a financial boycott of Israel to pressure it into ending
violations of international human rights law in its violent treatment of
Palestinians. This includes pushing governments to boycott military relations
and deals with Israel, and consumer boycott of products made by Israeli and
other international companies that are complicit in profiting from Israeli
settlements on stolen Palestinian land.

The BDS website lists several companies, among them a technology company
that developed the biometric ID system that Israel uses to enforce apartheid
policies of restricting movement of Palestinians; a construction firm that has
produced customised bulldozers for Israel to demolish Palestinian homes and
infrastructure despite public calls for ending sales to Israel; a sports brand
that has sponsored Israeli football, including teams in illegal settlements; and
a firm that produces food products in factories on stolen Palestinian lands.

Several governments, companies, groups and individuals have taken BDS

action in solidarity with Palestinians. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund — the
largest in the world — has said it will divest from two firms linked to Israel’s
illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territories in the West Bank.
Maldives, one of the smallest countries, announced suspension of ties with
Israel amidst calls to bar Israeli tourists from visiting the island nation.

In the UK, activists shut down a factory of a subsidiary of Israeli arms

manufacturer Elbit which produces drones for use by the Israeli army. In Italy,
dockworkers as part of a union refused to load ships with weapons when they
learnt they were being exported to Israel. And in South Africa, dockworkers
refused to unload a ship that had arrived from Israel, with a worker’s union
vowing to make South Africa an ‘apartheid-free zone’ in line with requests by
the BDS movement. The boycott of South Africa ultimately forced an end of
the apartheid regime that had existed for 35 years, and similar calls are being
made against Israel for its apartheid policies to end.

Americans must force their government to cut the annual $3.8 billion aid to
Israel which has enabled the killing of more than 60 Palestinian children;
bombing of hospitals, the health ministry office, and the only Covid-19 testing
lab in Gaza. The US shifting its embassy to Jerusalem has emboldened Israeli
efforts to violently evict Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem as
seen in Sheikh Jarrah; and the continuation of parallel military courts for
Palestinians as opposed to civil courts reserved for Jewish citizens of Israel, a
typical apartheid policy.

As Pakistan calls for Palestinians’ ‘right to self-determination and

establishment of independent state with pre-1967 borders and Jerusalem as
capital’, the government must also work with its private sector to implement
an economic boycott of companies that Palestinian activists have listed as
being complicit in the oppression of Palestinians by the Israeli settler-colonial
apartheid state.

Obfuscate: to throw into shadow/ confuse

Synonyms1: becloud, befog, blur, cloud, confuse

Antonyms: clarify, clear up, illuminate

Legion: a very large number

Synonyms: army, cram, crowd, crush,drove, flock, herd

Antonyms: few

Battle of rival memories

THE Nakba is to the Palestinians what the Holocaust is to the Jews.
There is a difference though. Nobody in their senses would deny
the horrors inflicted on European Jews by Nazi Germany. The
Israeli state on the other hand has been doing its best to erase the
memory of the horrors inflicted on the Palestinians since May 15,
1948, the Nakba Day, when it drove out 700,000 Arabs, mostly
women, children from their homes. Palestinians observed the day
this past week amid a furious and largely unequal battle that raged
between the Hamas militants in Gaza and the Israeli military.

The Haaretz newspaper, possibly Israel’s most liberal daily, has pursued the

theme of Israeli denial of the Nakba as a significantly damning cover-up of a
heinous crime. Norman Finkelstein, a Jewish author and civil rights activist
whose parents were rare survivors from a large family that perished in the
ghettoes and concentration camps under Nazi occupation, has been a vocal
critic of what he sees as the exploitation of the Jewish tragedy by a stridently
right-wing Israeli state. His widely acclaimed book The Holocaust Industry is
devoted to a detailed recording of how the mass murder of six million Jews
became a commercially and politically exploitable event for Israel.

The US has ably assisted in this cynical endeavour, as Finkelstein notes. Only
the other day, the US State Department was accusing Turkish President
Tayyip Erdogan — by no means an innocent man on many counts — of anti-
Semitism because he chided the Jewish state for murdering Palestinian
children. It was the Turkish Jews who spoke up for Erdogan, and pointed out
that Erdogan’s criticism of Jewish attacks on Arab civilians in Israel and the
killings in Gaza by Israeli military didn’t spring from any racism.

The Haaretz newspaper, possibly Israel’s most liberal daily, has pursued the
theme of Israeli denial of the Nakba.

Finkelstein too had noted this tendency within the US establishment to readily
summon memories of the Holocaust to underscore any event it disapproved
of.

“The more revealing point, however, is when the US invokes the Holocaust.
Crimes of official enemies such as the Khmer Rouge bloodbath in Cambodia,
the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, and Serbian
ethnic cleansing in Kosovo recall the Holocaust; crimes in which the US is
complicit do not.”

In fact, just as the Khmer Rouge atrocities were unfolding in Cambodia, the
US-backed Indonesian government was slaughtering one-third of the
population in East Timor. “Yet unlike Cambodia, the East Timor genocide did
not rate comparison with the Holocaust; it didn’t even rate news coverage.
Just as the Soviet Union was committing what the Simon Wiesenthal Centre
called ‘another genocide’ in Afghanistan, the US-backed regime in Guatemala
was perpetrating what the Guatemalan Truth Commission (subsequently)
called a ‘genocide’ against the indigenous Mayan population.”

The Carter administration invoked the memory of the Holocaust as it sought a

haven for Vietnamese ‘boat people’ fleeing the communist regime. The Clinton
administration forgot the Holocaust as it forced back Haitian ‘boat people’
fleeing US-supported death squads. Examples of similar obfuscation are
legion.

The time is long past to open one’s heart to the rest of humanity’s sufferings,
says Finkelstein. “You can’t compare any two miserable people, as Plato
humanely observed, and say that one is happier than the other.” In the face of
the sufferings of African-Americans and Palestinians, Finkelstein says, citing
his mother’s credo: “We are all holocaust victims.”

The dictionary explains holocaust as a great or complete devastation or

destruction, especially by fire. It of course makes a more familiar reference to
the holocaust as “the systematic mass slaughter of European Jews in Nazi
concentration camps during World War II”. Holocaust also means any mass
slaughter or reckless destruction of life. Nakba in Arabic has similar
connotation — devastation or destruction.

The Haaretz is one of Israel’s liberal newspapers and thus inevitably more

balanced than many others that have surrendered their souls to the ascendant
right-wing Jewish state. In a write-up about the Nakba Day, the newspaper
carried a revealing piece a couple of years ago, titled ‘Burying the Nakba: How
Israel systematically hides evidence of 1948 expulsion of Arabs”.

Around 2015, Israeli historian Tamar Novick “was jolted by a document she
found in the file of Yosef Waschitz, from the Arab department of the left-wing
Mapam Party, in the Yad Yaari archive at Givat Haviva,” the Haaretz report
said. The document, which seemed to describe events that took place during
the 1948 war, began:

“Safsaf [former Palestinian village near Safed] — 52 men were caught, tied
them to one another, dug a pit and shot them. 10 were still twitching. Women
came, begged for mercy. Found bodies of 6 elderly men. There were 61 bodies.
3 cases of rape, one east of […] Safed, girl of 14, 4 men shot and killed. From
one they cut off his fingers with a knife to take the ring.”

The unidentified writer, according to the paper, goes on to describe additional

massacres, looting and abuse perpetrated by Israeli forces in Israel’s ‘war of
independence’.

The Upper Galilee village of Safsaf was captured by the Israel Defence Forces
in Operation Hiram towards the end of 1948. Moshav Safsufa was established
on its ruins. Allegations were made over the years that the Seventh Brigade
committed war crimes in the village. Those charges, said the Haaretz, are
supported by the document Novick found, which was not previously known to
scholars. It could also constitute additional evidence that the Israeli top brass
knew about what was going on in real time.

Other historians told her they too had come across similar documentation in
the past.

When Novick tried to return to the documents, she found they had
disappeared. Israel’s defence ministry teams have been scouring the country’s
archives and removing historic documents. “Hundreds of documents have
been concealed as part of a systematic effort to hide evidence of the Nakba,”
the Haaretz said in a telling reminder to the rest of us about the threat that
archives and libraries face under right-wing governments.
India policy revisited

PAKISTAN’S India policy has generally suffered from the constant

tussle between wishful thinking based on merely legal and moral
arguments, on the one hand, and the compulsions of power
realities at the national, regional and global levels, on the other.
Our actual policy has vacillated between these two extremes
creating the impression of confusion, inconsistency of purpose and
lack of a sense of direction.

Our official pronouncements on India and Kashmir, the core dispute, are
generally tactical and short-term in nature responding to day-to-day
developments. They do not reflect a well-crafted long-term policy which is
grounded in power realities and which weaves its political, economic, military
and diplomatic dimensions into a coherent whole within the framework of a
grand strategy. What we need is a long-term and strategic approach to give a
sense of direction and steadiness of purpose to our India policy.

We need a long-term and strategic approach in our India policy.

Our long-term India policy must be based on an accurate understanding of

India’s strategic goals in the region, the demands of Pakistan’s independence,
security and economic progress, and the regional and global strategic
environment. India’s main strategic goal is to establish its hegemony in South
Asia and the India Ocean region. It views an independent and strong Pakistan
as the biggest hurdle in the fulfilment of its hegemonic ambitions. According
to Indian security analyst C. Raja Mohan, the creation of Pakistan left India
with a persistent conflict with the former and an internal Hindu-Muslim
divide, separated India geographically from Afghanistan and Iran, and created
profound problems for India’s engagement with the Muslim Middle East.

India’s hegemonic ambitions in the region pose an enduring threat to

Pakistan’s independence, security and economic well-being over and above
the negative repercussions of Kashmir, Sir Creek, Siachen and Pakistan-India
water disputes. These factors are major obstacles in the way of good-
neighbourly relations between the two countries. There are no indications that
in the foreseeable future India will give up its hegemonic ambitions or agree to
a just settlement of the Kashmir dispute. The coming decades will witness
continued tensions and hostility between the two states.

The balance of power between Pakistan and India, more than anything else,
will determine the shape of their future relationship and the ultimate outcome
of their outstanding disputes, especially on Kashmir. So it is imperative for
Pakistan to build up its relative national power vis-à-vis India. On the other
hand, India can be expected to employ every instrument of policy, overtly and
covertly, to destabilise Pakistan politically and weaken it economically, to
bring it to its knees for the sake of establishing its hegemony in the region and
achieving the settlement of outstanding disputes on its own terms. It will not
desist even from fomenting terrorism in Pakistan as the arrest of Indian spy
Kulbhushan Jadhav in Balochistan in March 2016 conclusively proves.

Pakistan must formulate its long-term India policy keeping in view the
foregoing analysis and the growing strategic partnership between the US and
India to contain the expansion of China’s power and influence in South Asia
and the Indian Ocean region, which inevitably will push Pakistan closer to
China so as to maintain a strategic balance in South Asia. In the long run,
Pakistan’s security will be ensured primarily by its political stability, economic
and technological power, and a credible security deterrent.

Simultaneously, we should pursue a low-risk and non-adventurist foreign

policy to minimise chances of a major armed conflict, allowing the country to
allocate the lion’s share of its resources to economic development. Trade with
India should be conducted on a level playing field while promoting Pakistan’s
economic growth and well-being.

Within this framework, Pakistan should try to defuse tensions and adopt
confidence-building measures in its relations with India while maintaining a
principled position on outstanding disputes like Kashmir, Sir Creek and
Siachen. In view of India’s hegemonic ambitions and intransigence, any
breakthrough in the settlement of the Kashmir dispute can be safely ruled out
in the foreseeable future. The best that can be hoped for in the short term is
the cessation of hostilities across the Line of Control and efforts to safeguard
the human rights of Kashmiris in Indian-occupied Kashmir through
demilitarisation and local autonomy. For the long term, Pakistan should build
up its national power, especially its economic and technological strength, and
go for a final settlement at an opportune time.

The writer is a retired ambassador, an author and president of the Lahore

Council for World Affairs.
The trumpet of growth
Khurram HusainPublished June 3, 2021 –

IT’S always the same story, regardless of the government in power.

They enter, there is a crisis, they go to the IMF, a painful
adjustment follows in which the rupee is devalued, interest rates
are raised, growth plummets, and a rain of taxes falls upon the
people. This continues for a couple of years by when the
government has been skewered and raked over the coals by the
opposition for its anti-people policies. Once stability returns, the
fiscal and current account deficits shrink and reserves climb, the
government in power spends its way back to growth in its thirst to
show some tangible results. This causes the deficits to return, the
reserves to fall, and brings the country back to the IMF, but by then
the government is gone and another one is in power.

This cycle has repeated itself for over 30 years now, with some minor
differences between one cycle and the next. For example, the regime of Gen
Musharraf managed to ride the growth spurt for a few years more than most,
mainly because he was showered with dollars in massive quantities from
abroad as his reward for cooperating with the Americans and their war in
Afghanistan. His team denied all along that foreign funds had anything to do
with their growth story. They preferred to cast it as the fruits of their own
labours, saying it was underwritten by their reforms.

The first lesson is to never — ever — buy a growth story that is

unaccompanied by reforms.

In some cases growth has been accompanied by inflation, but in others it has
not. Some growth cycles have impacted the rural areas and the agricultural
economy more than the urban, industrial one. Some have been spurred by
large government spending on massive infrastructure projects, financed
through the development budget or via FDI as the CPEC inflows were
classified, while others have utilised government resources through other
means to spur growth.

But it never fails. A few years’ worth of an adjustment is all anybody can take
over here and as soon as the deficits are curbed and reserves have risen, they
want to get on with the business of spending it all away. This is why our
growth spurts are always short-lived. It is also why they always end in a crash.
This same story is repeating itself one more time as the government and its
minions get busy with extolling the return of growth. Never mind disputing
the four per cent figure they have projected for GDP growth for this fiscal year.
We can dispute government data all we want, but at the end of the day that is
all we have to work with. Besides there is plenty of corroboration from
industry that the wheels of the economy have begun to move again and are
gathering speed.

But the wheels of the economy are not the only thing spinning these days. The
return of growth is being hailed by the government in triumphalist tones that
are almost identical to those used by everybody before them. In some cases, a
few among their ranks are seen going overboard. One particularly committed
soul with close ties to the prime minister was seen congratulating everyone on
social media on the growth in banking-sector deposits, taking the dance of
growth to absurd levels.

But the past has taught us a few lessons about how to view economic growth in
Pakistan. First among these lessons is to never — ever — buy a growth story
that is unaccompanied by reforms. And reforms does not mean incentive
packages. They mean broadening the tax base and export base, increases in
productivity, improvement in the regulatory environment and such deeper
adjustments to the underpinnings of the economy.

Read: Economists divided on 3.94pc GDP growth rate projection

This government has no reform story. None whatsoever. They have started
down one road and abandoned it to start down another. Remember the base
broadening initiative by Shabbar Zaidi? Where does all that effort stand
today? What reforms have been brought in the power sector? The
amendments to the State Bank Act lie dead in the water with nobody to
champion them anymore.

Fact is this growth spurt is nothing more than the effects of a massive
stimulus that the government administered to the economy around summer of
last year. All governments administered a stimulus to boost their economies
during the Covid months, but in many of those the effect of the stimulus was
diluted by the aggressive mitigation measures they were forced to take as
pandemic-related fatalities were mounting.

The size of the stimulus can be debated. The interest rate cut alone, for
example, gave a stimulus equal to 5pc of GDP, which is larger than anything I
can remember. Add up to this all the other measures via government spending
 and other SBP actions, and you are talking of an unprecedented boost given by
government to the economy in Pakistan’s recent history. It is not very
surprising that it has given us 4pc growth so far with more to come.

The question to always ask when this sort of thing happens is “can it last?”
Usually whenever growth begins the vulnerabilities that will swamp it down
the road start appearing at the same time. You see it this time too. The
government tells you exports have risen more than 11pc in the months
running from January to March. But you won’t hear them tell you that the
trade deficit in the same period has risen by 29pc. They will argue some of this
increase is one-off due to imports of food in December. But all signs at the
moment are pointing towards a rising trade deficit since almost all raw
materials used in our industry are imported, with a few important exceptions
like cotton, which had to be imported this year due to a crop failure.

I have said it before and it bears repeating. Investment without savings,

expenditures without revenues are like a drug for any economy. What we are
seeing today is not growth as much as the rush that comes with the injection of
a stimulant.

 Burgeoning: growing, expanding, or developing rapidly

 Thirsting:  to feel thirsty : suffer thirst
 appetency, appetite, craving, desire, drive, hankering,

vengeance: punishment inflicted in retaliation for an injury or offense 

Synonyms

 payback, reprisal, requital, retaliation, retribution, revenge

Semites: a
member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern
Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs

Muslim-Jewish ties
Muhammad Ali SiddiqiPublished June 2, 2021 - Updated a day ago
Facebook Count
Twitter Share
   
7

THROUGHOUT history, Muslims and Jews have lived in peace, in

sharp contrast to the persecution the followers of Judaism suffered
during the 2,000 years of their life in Europe’s ghettoes. That Arabs
and Jews were Semites only partly explains the reason for Muslim
tolerance; Turks and Persians aren’t Semites, but they treated the
Jews with respect.

One major reason why the Arabs valued and sought Jewish cooperation was
the financial problem faced by the Umayyad caliphate stretching from Iberia
to Sindh. Lacking experience in governance, the Arabs had to rely on the Jews
and Persians because of their vast experience in the collection and
management of revenues. The caliphate didn’t have a coinage of its own, and
all official transactions were done in Roman and Persian (and partly
Ethiopian) coins. It was on Jewish commendation that the Arabs moved in
that direction, and the first Arab coin was minted during the reign of Abdul
Malik bin Marwan (ruled 685-705). That the coin, called ‘dinar’ (derived from
Roman denarius) had Jewish symbols, including the menorah, shows their
influence with Arab rulers.

As Abba Eban in his fascinating book, My People, remarks, under Muslim rule
“world Jewry entered into a new period of physical and intellectual expansion.
[…T]he Jews not only retained their ancestors’ creed but gained new strength
in the land of Muslim conquest”.

Financial problems often led the Arabs to seek Jewish cooperation.

The change in power structure from the Arabs to the various Turkic tribes
didn’t affect the Jewish people. When the first Crusade took Palestine (1099) it
had a Christian majority, but the European knights slaughtered the Jews as
well, and it was Saladin who brought them back. Also at Saladin’s court was
the greatest Jewish thinker, Maimonides (Moses ben Maimon), who was born
in Spain. The finest account of Moorish Spain as a joint Arab-Jewish
enterprise is given by Eban, whose book dwells at length on Spanish society
and the cultural activity of the elite of which the Jews were an integral part.

As in Palestine, so in Spain, as theReconquista began, Jews, too, had their

throats slit. When he heard of this genocide, Ottoman sultan Bayazit II
wondered how Ferdinand and Isabella could kill the goose that laid the golden
egg. Bayazit then offered asylum to the persecuted Jews in his empire. Today’s
Bulgarian Jews are the descendants of the Spanish Jews who the Ottoman
sultan had offered asylum.

Throughout the Middle Ages and right up to the modern times, the periodic
massacre of Jews was a regular feature of European life. In his book, The First
Crusade, Thomas Asbridge quotes an eyewitness as saying that Jews were
“killed like oxen and dragged through the marketplaces and streets like sheep
to the slaughter”. As Crusaders planned to go to the holy land, a Jewish
chronicler summed up their feelings in these words: “here are the Jews
dwelling among us, whose ancestors killed [Jesus Christ] and crucified him
groundlessly. Let’s take vengeance upon them. Let us wipe them out as a
nation. Israel’s name will be mentioned no more. Or else let them be like us
and acknowledge [Christ]”.

Such was the ‘sadistic persecution’ of the Jews and the geographical expanse
of the flames of death and destruction that Asbridge quoting other authorities
calls it “the first holocaust”. As Barbara Tuchman points out in her book Bible
and Sword, by the Third Crusade (1190) “the association of Crusade and
pogrom was automatic”.

The coming of modern times made no difference to the plight of European

Jews. In the 1890s, Theodor Herzl, covering the trial of Alfred Dreyfus, a
French Jew accused of spying for Prussia, heard the crowd shouting: “à mort
les, Juifs!” (“Death to the Jews!)

In Russia in 1881, writes Tuchman, “a mass savagery on a scale and to a

degree of brutality unknowns since the Middle Ages exploded upon the Jews”.
Hitler, she says, “added the concentration camps and the gas chambers but
otherwise he invented nothing. It had all been done before in Czarist Russia.”

How have a section of descendants of the European Jews responded to the

Muslim goodwill mentioned above? Here are two quotes: Menachem Begin,
one of Zionism’s ruthless murderers, told the New York Times Palestinians
would be crushed “like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders
and walls”, while Rafael Eitan, chief of staff of the Israeli Defence Forces
(1978-83), expressed himself thus: “When we have settled the land, all the
Arabs will be able to do about will be to scurry around like drugged
cockroaches in a bottle.” And here is Robert Fisk at Sabra-Chatila: “Women
lying … with their skirts torn up their waists […], children with their throats
cut, rows of young men shot in the back […]. There were babies — blackened
babies because they had been slaughtered more than 24 hours earlier… .”
Empiricism:  the
practice of relying on observation and experiment especially in
the natural sciences
 to make much of : PROMOTE, TALK UP

Redefining Pak-US relations

Zahid HussainPublished June 2, 2021 - Updated a day ago
Facebook Count
Twitter Share
   
32

The writer is the author of No-Win War — The Paradox of US-Pakistan

Relations in Afghanistan’s Shadow.
WITH the last of the American soldiers packing to leave
Afghanistan, post-9/11 US-Pakistan relations have come full circle.
Originally touted as a strategic alliance, it morphed into a
transactional one over the years. With American forces leaving
Afghanistan, there is now a move to reset the alignment. There is,
however, no indication yet of the relationship moving away from
the Afghan pivot.

While the foreign policy priorities of the Biden administration are more or less
defined, there is no likelihood of any major shift in its policy towards Pakistan.
For the past several years, Washington has seen Pakistan purely from the
Afghan prism and there is no indication that the Biden administration will be
deviating from that policy approach.

Read: US talking to Pakistan, others for maintaining access to Afghanistan

Relations are likely to remain largely transactional with some convergence of

interest between the two in the Afghan peace process. Pakistan’s support
remains critical for America’s exit from Afghanistan and to bring to an end the
two-decade-long war in the region. Fast-changing regional geopolitics
including Pakistan’s growing strategic nexus with China may also cast a
shadow over the Biden administration’s policy towards Islamabad.

There is no likelihood of any major shift in American policy towards

Pakistan.

It has been six months since the Biden administration took over, but there has
not been any contact between the two erstwhile allies at the highest level.
Except for a few telephonic conversations between senior American officials
and the Pakistani civil and military leadership that largely revolved around
Afghan conflict, there have not been any serious negotiations that could define
the framework of the future course of bilateral ties.

Lot of importance has been attached to the recent meeting between US

National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and his Pakistani counterpart Moeed
Yusuf in Geneva. It was the first face-to-face high-level official contact
between the two governments. The meeting was reportedly held at very short
notice. Jack Sullivan was attending a conference in the Swiss city.

A short joint statement issued after the talks said: “Both sides discussed a
range of bilateral, regional, and global issues of mutual interest and discussed
ways to advance practical cooperation.” There is, however, no indication yet of
the Biden administration willing to redefine its relationship with Pakistan
beyond America’s regional security prism.

Pakistan is not only still important for the US for a smooth exit from
Afghanistan but also for its post-withdrawal security plans in the region. In a
recent statement, a Pentagon spokesman said that the Biden administration is
in negotiations with Pakistan and other regional countries on the option of
having US bases there.

Apparently, the US wants a presence in the region as part of its efforts to

counter the global terrorist groups making Afghanistan the centre of their
activities after the withdrawal of foreign forces. Washington also wants
Pakistan to continue providing the US overflight access to Afghanistan after
the troops’ withdrawal. Surely after entering into an alliance with the US after
9/11 Pakistan did allow the use of its airbases for US planes in the invasion of
Afghanistan. But those were closed down several years ago.

Pakistan has also provided ground and air lines of communication for supplies
to Nato forces operating in Afghanistan. But they were closed for the supply of
weapons. Pakistani officials have denied that any negotiation on military bases
is being held with Washington. But the controversy over the issue refuses to
die.

It remains unclear whether or not US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin raised

the issue of bases in his last telephonic conversation with army chief Gen
Qamar Bajwa. The US officials would not comment on whether any serious
negotiations on a ‘possible basing agreement’ is underway.

But it is very clear that the US wants to ‘stay in the game’ in Afghanistan and
sees a role for Pakistan in this game. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken in a
recent interview to BBC declared that it was in Pakistan’s own interest to do
so. He made it very clear that the US was only withdrawing its troops from the
country and was not leaving Afghanistan.

This makes Pakistan’s predicament more serious. The Afghan endgame

remains tricky with the postponement of the peace conference in Istanbul
after the Afghan Taliban’s refusal to attend it. This has jeopardised the
possibility of the Afghan government and the insurgent group reaching an
agreement on the future political set-up in Afghanistan before the American
withdrawal. The situation has become more complicated with the insurgents
continuing their military offensive as the US is expected to complete the
withdrawal of forces by July 4, weeks before the Sept 11 deadline.
Inevitably, the withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan will have a
huge impact on regional geopolitics. The country’s strategic location has
historically made it vulnerable to the involvement of outside powers and proxy
battles.

A major concern has been that the American military withdrawal could lead
Afghanistan to further descend into chaos fuelling a full-scale civil war with
India, Russia and Iran backing different factions and dragging Pakistan into a
protracted conflict. The spillover effects of spiralling instability and conflict in
Afghanistan could be disastrous.

Meanwhile, changing regional geopolitics have created a new alignment of

forces. The growing strategic alliance between the US and India and the
China-Pakistan axis reflect these emerging geopolitics. Pakistan needs to tread
a cautious path as it seeks to reset its relations with the United States.

Surely we must cooperate with the US in achieving peace in Afghanistan but

it’s not in our interest to become part of any new US ‘game’ in the region. The
use of Pakistani soil for America’s post-withdrawal counter-insurgency
strategy could suck the country into yet another conflict.

We certainly need to have a broad-based relationship with the US but should

not get pulled into any new ‘game’ on America’s behalf. The resetting of our
relationship with America will certainly not be easy. We need to be extremely
clear about our interests and priorities when negotiating the terms of the
relationship.