The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Syria on the edge
India must play its due role

Syrian strongman Bashar Al-Assad’s days in power, it seems, are numbered. Syrian capital Damascus witnessed one of the biggest demonstrations on Sunday following the killing of a pro-democracy activist a day before. China and Russia, the two major supporters of the beleaguered regime, must have realised by now that they are on the losing side. Bashar has very little support within the country and the region. He suffered a major jolt last week when the UN General Assembly adopted an Arab League-sponsored resolution strongly condemning human rights violations in Syria since March last year, when the pro-democracy movement began there. India was among the 137 countries which voted in favour of the resolution. The negative vote by China and Russia has little meaning as they will not be able to stand by the Baathist regime once the situation goes beyond control, as was seen in Libya.

Bashar has, perhaps, read the writing on the wall — his government cannot survive for long. His major financial backer, Iran, itself is in trouble. His announcement for a referendum on the amended constitution of Syria on February 26 appears to be part of a new game plan. The new constitution says that no one can hold the President’s position for more than two terms (14 years). This means that Bashar cannot contest a Presidential election as he has already held the top post for over 14 years. He has also offered to hold parliamentary elections within 90 days after the referendum.

But those behind the pro-democracy movement refuse to take his word seriously. They want him to leave power immediately so that an election can be held under the supervision of the UN or the Arab League. Two powerful opposition groups — the Syrian National Council and the Muslim Brotherhood — have expressed the view that Bashar’s referendum idea is a ploy to somehow control the levers of power. Now that India has openly come out in support of the Arab League drive for peaceful transfer of power, New Delhi must get more active to play its rightful role. After all, the happenings in West Asia are affecting the lives of a large Indian diaspora in the region.

Politics over rape
Empathy is woefully lacking

In a strange way the state government of West Bengal admits of its own fragility. For, it is finding fault with others for maligning it over what it terms as a ‘fabricated’ rape case, even before the law enforcing agencies could come to some conclusion. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee made a mockery of a woman’s humiliation, raped under gun point in the posh Park Street area of Kolkata, when she called it ‘a concocted story.’ Adding insult to injury, she raised questions about the woman’s integrity, suggesting that she is separated from her husband, is a mother of two children and, to top it, she quizzed: what was she doing so late in a night club? She also maintained a tacit silence when the Transport Minister of her government went a step further to declare that the victim had liquor before the incident, as though rape of a tipsy woman was justified under the law! While ordinary people felt flabbergasted by the stance of the law enforcers, they missed no opportunity to politicise the issue — a helpless woman’s rape — and tried to get political mileage out of it.

The victim, who is an Anglo-Indian, was right when she observed the absurdity of her situation. She said she was the one who was assaulted, raped and victimised by the criminals, and for being at the receiving end, she was once again being victimised by the state. Unfortunately, she is not the only one who finds herself in this bizarre state, many women who resist men’s uncalled for advances are victimised by the patriarchal mindset that gives license to men to have ‘fun.’ Ruchika’s case is a living example of this mindset.

Significantly, didi is not alone in publicising her insensitivity towards women’s issues. The Chief Minster of Delhi had created a furore when she said women invite trouble by being adventurous at night in the context of a call- centre employee’s murder. Instead of feeding a patriarchal mindset, at least women politicians should empathise with victimised women.

Thought for the Day

Take care to sell your horse before he dies. The art of life is passing losses on. — Robert Frost

ARTICLE

Fukushima nuclear crisis
No early sign of a solution
by Rajaram Panda

Fukushima is in the news again. The news that Fukushima's Daiichi nuclear plant's Reactor-2 is getting reheated at an alarming rate has created fresh concern about the safety aspect of nuclear energy in Japan. It has been reported that the temperature in Reactor-2 reached 91.2 degrees Celsius (196 degrees F) whereas other two thermometers showed a more reassuring 33 degrees. This led to the site's operator — the Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) — increasing the flow of cooling water to 15 tonnes an hour in an attempt to reduce the temperature. Tepco insists that the situation is not critical, arguing that there has been no detection of xenon gas, a byproduct of nuclear reaction, inside the containment vessel.

Though Tepco engineers are racing to avoid catastrophic meltdowns at the nuclear plants in Japan, in public relations terms, it is much like oil giant BP which found itself at the centre of a storm in May 2010 when a blast at a rig killed 11 people and caused the worst oil spill in US history off the Gulf of Mexico. So far as Tepco is concerned, even as it battles to bring the reactor under control, communications ranks low on the list of its priorities. This leads to public anger and suspicions.

Tepco is the largest power utility in Japan, and in normal times it supplies about a third of the country's electricity. Tepco supplies the bulk of its power to some of Japan's mostly densely populated and economically strategic areas, including the capital city of Tokyo. But Tepco has lost half its market value as its track record of failing to properly divulge failures in safety standards remains poor.

When Kan Naoto was Japan's Prime Minister, he was critical of Tepco's dubious information disclosure system. In March 2011, he showed his anger when the company failed to inform him of an important development, a new fire breaking out at one of the affected nuclear plants, until an hour after it happened.

Tepco's record in power generation remained unquestionable until the accident that happened in March 2011. It ranked as the world's fourth largest commercial power utility after three European operators — EON of Germany, Electricite de France and Germany's RWE. In 2010, Tepco made a profit of $1.66 billion on a turnover of $62 billion.

Tepco was one of the nine Japanese regional electricity providers set up in 1951. It was established with the initial task of creating a reliable power infrastructure for a country rebuilding its economy from the ground up after World War II. Employing 38,000 people, it is one of the world's most experienced operators of nuclear power stations. Electricity generation began at the Fukushima complex in March 1970. This was because Japan saw nuclear power as a major part of the solution to keep the lights on and the factories running. It was when Japan was an emerging economic superpower and needed sufficient indigenous power generation capacity to meet the increasing demand from its industries.

Being a resource-deficient country, Japan was keen to develop nuclear power to offset its dependence on imported oil and coal. More recently, expanding its nuclear power capacity got priority for achieving targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Following the March 2011 accident, Tepco stated last April to bring the reactors and spent fuel pools to a stable cooling condition and mitigating the release of radioactive materials. It also promised to take the necessary steps so that the evacuees returned to their homes. The plan had two phases — "Radiation dose in steady decline, to be achieved within three months”; and "release of radioactive material under control and radiation dose being significantly held down" — to be completed within the following six months.

The idea was to bring the three stricken reactors into a "cold shutdown condition" — a state defined by Tepco where the temperature inside the core of the reactors is below 100 degrees C. But as the margin of error associated with the thermometers is up to 20 degrees C, it must remain under 80 degrees C.

This proved to be wishful thinking as the task takes decades, not months. Yet, the progress made since the roadmap was published is commendable, as it helped in developing better understanding of what actually happened. Though a new cover has been built over Reactor-1 to withstand snow and high winds, nitrogen was pumped into the reactors to make sure that there were no more hydrogen explosions, and air filters were introduced to allow workers to get into the buildings. As it transpired, fresh nuclear activity occurred in February and, therefore, the danger of occasional leaks near the plant remains.

Irrespective of what is happening at the nuclear plant site, Tepco has erred in failing to accurately report the cracks at its nuclear reactors. In September 2002, Tepco admitted this, leading to the resignation of its then President and Vice-President. The BBC reported that Tepco conceded that information had been falsified on over 200 occasions between 1977 and 2002.

The mystery is that the Japanese government has been turning a blind eye to all this. Najmedin Mashkati, a University of Southern California engineering professor, has been critical of Tepco's transparency and truthfulness for over a decade. Mashkati is sceptical of the nuclear utility's history of "lack of transparency" and accuses it of "deception".

It is suspected that the Japanese government has always been showing complicity with the nuclear industry. But with Tepco and its doomed Fukushima reactors under the world's microscope, perhaps it will lead to ensuring transparency through information disclosure. Such a decision, if translated into action, might assuage some of the public feelings of being cheated.

The writer is a former Senior Fellow, Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi.

MIDDLE

Kindness, or is it cruelty?
by Ram Varma

There was a time, years ago, when I used to take my dog, Winston, out on a leash early morning for a brisk walk on the lake in Chandigarh. I lived in the vicinity of the lake at the time. I believe dogs are no longer allowed on the lake.

Winston was a true blood Labrador. I had procured him from the Haryana police for my daughter when he was only a few months old, just a handful of soft shiny black hair!

I am no dog lover, never had one for a pet. But when my daughters were small, I had thought of bringing one. They would be delighted, I imagined, to have a little doggie for a pet. I had seen a film in which a man would steal dogs for his kids as he couldn’t afford to buy them toys. But my wife, Savitri, shot down the idea by a curt comment: “Raising three daughters is trouble enough!” she had remarked. So, my daughters grew up in a dreary dog-less house.

But later on when my daughter, Jyotsana, joined the Bihar cadre and was posted in Bihar Sharif as ADC, she asked me to get her a little pup. She took him to Bihar and named him Sir Winston Churchill! Within six months he grew into a majestic specimen. I am sure Sir Winston wouldn’t have taken offence if he had seen Winston’s royal mien.

But soon Jyotsana was transferred to Patna Secretariat, and began living in the Circuit House there, where Winston couldn’t live. She brought him to Chandigarh and left him with us.

He was not tall like others of his race whom we see doing service in the bomb squads. He was plump, his face was broad and awe inspiring, but he was gentle to a fault, truly loveable. Little boys and girls would stop by me and wished to touch him.

Along with Winston, a stray dog, Raja, would also accompany me to the lake. Raja would come to feed at our house in the day, but was a wild spirit and refused to wear a leash. He would go ahead of us like my self-appointed bodyguard. While Winston loved swimming in the lake, would jump in and bring back the danda I threw in the lake to the merriment of onlookers, Raja avoided going near water. Many times Raja would come, wounded and bruised, dripping blood, after a fierce brawl with fellow pariahs. The two dogs were an antithesis of each other.

We never saw Raja after we moved to Panchkula on my retirement. I don’t know if Winston missed the lake, but I surely did. He survived my wife, but died soon after her.

Dog has been a natural ally and companion of man from the earliest times when he hunted for food. He must have been the first animal to be domesticated, followed by the cow, horse and elephant. Now dogs are the most favoured pets and come in all shapes and sizes with fancy price tags. Years of captivity have robbed them of their essential doggedness (which I saw in Raja) and they have become fashionable keeps or ornamental toys. Their owners profess to be dog lovers, but I wonder. Is it kindness or is it cruelty?

OPED NEIGHBOURS

Talk of change, fairness & welfare
Political parties are reading the mood of the people correctly. But what is not being realised is that the basic transformation needed in societal structures, institutions, sources of power and wealth/resources requires more than just changes in tax structures
Faisal Bari

IMRAN Khan has been talking of turning Pakistan into an Islamic welfare state and has invoked the example of some of the Scandinavian countries by way of explanation. The PML-N has also been promising change and saying that they have been thwarted from implementing change twice but they are going to do it this time.

Imran Khan, leader of the Tehrik-e-Insaf Party

The PPP insists they are already implementing the change that others are talking about. The religious parties, of all hues, are saying that they are the only ones that can bring about real change in Pakistan and all other parties are just parties of the status quo. The MQM is saying they have always stood for change, on principle, and have been against feudal people and feudal-thinking.

But what is the change that is being promised? Allow me to motivate the discussion via a few facts. Sweden’s, one of the Scandinavian examples that is quoted, tax revenues are 46-47 per cent of its GDP. Its taxation system, formed and reformed constantly over the last 100-plus years, charges around 48 per cent as income tax (32 per cent direct and the rest indirect from the employer), has a 25 per cent value-added tax, with lower rates for food and some other items, and a 30 per cent tax on capital.

Bear the comparison in mind: Pakistan raises 9 per cent of the GDP in tax, cannot get most people who have a high enough income in the tax net, cannot get people to even pay 15 per cent value-added tax and can hardly impose any tax on capital gains.

On the welfare side, the Swedish system is based on three areas/ministries: the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, the Ministry of Education and Research and the Ministry of Employment. Healthcare of good quality is available to all Swedes. Welfare payments are tied to specific programmes: children get support when parental income is not enough; parents can get money to stay home to take care of young children; there are cash transfers for those who cannot work and for those who do not earn enough.

Education is free for all until the age of 16, and even university education is subsidised heavily for those who cannot afford it. Unemployment benefits are quite generous and there are very strong programmes for skill training/retraining of workers.

Though there have been lots of concerns raised about the sustainability of the Swedish model, and with time there have been systemic changes to make it more efficient and sometimes to even cut some benefits, the model seems to work well for the country and the Swedes continues to enjoy one of the highest standards of living in the world.

Do these facts give an idea of the scale of change that is needed in Pakistan to move to a welfare state? If the Pakistanis are to fund the welfare state, given the poverty, illiteracy, lack of skills and lack of basic amenities in Pakistan, through taxation, there will be need for a lot more money than Sweden requires, as a percentage of the GDP, as Pakistan has to address some basic deprivations that the Swedish government does not.

The deficits in nutrition, health, education, skills, infrastructure availability and provision are very large in Pakistan. Given the inequality in Pakistan, the burden of this welfare state will have to be borne by the middle class and the rich in Pakistan; so the burden per person will be a lot more than in Sweden.

Pakistan will not only have to bring every person, above a certain income/wealth threshold, in the tax net, it will also have to have fairly steep levels of taxation to extract the needed amounts. And this will be true even if Pakistan scales down the extent of the welfare state and does not offer the level of facilities/incomes that Sweden offers.

Even the provision of decent quality basic health, education, training programmes, insurance against income/employment shocks, and investments in infrastructure will require the significant extension/revamping of the taxation system. Are parties going to do that? So far none of the parties have shared any plans as to how they will even start reforming the tax system, except for making vague promises or conversation on extending the net and taxing all incomes.

It should also be borne in mind that the tax system alone will not be able to deliver the kind of revenues Pakistani are looking for. There is some evidence that argues that taxation systems can be made progressive, and they should be, but they are really not the right tool, nor should they be, for redistribution. Taxation systems are for generating resources for what the people feel their government should be doing but redistribution should not be a part of the taxation agenda.

Redistribution, if there is a need for any, based on issues of historical wrongs, notions of fairness and/or requirements of social contract between citizens, should be more direct.

The kind of change that parties are promising and that we need in Pakistan, to renew its promise and reactivate its social contract, requires a basic redistribution as well: a redistribution of power which clearly cannot be done without a redistribution of wealth.

Giving people access to assets, in the form of education, skills, livestock and land, might be a pre-requisite for setting up the kind of welfare state that people are thinking of. Are the parties ready for that? Will the vanguard of these parties, whether they be Sharifs, Zardaris, Chaudhries, Legharis, Khans, Gilanis, Qureshis and/or Tareens be willing to lead this change?

Will urban estates of 300 kanals or 600 acres be volunteered? Will people still owning thousands of acres give them up? Will the military, probably the largest landowner in Pakistan, directly and through holdings of officers and ex-officers, be willing to play ball? Will the judges and bureaucrats give up their plots? Nobody is talking of these. And this is a strong indication that such change is not on the cards.

But if that is not the case, then bringing about change through taxation is not going to be possible. If 80 per cent- odd Pakistanis live around or below $2 a day, what sort of taxation potential is there for a basic transformation? Cutting off a dog’s tail to feed him meat is not transformational.

Change is the need of the hour. Political parties are reading the mood of the people correctly. But what is not being realised is that the basic transformation needed in societal structures, institutions, sources of power and wealth/resources requires more than just changes in tax structures, though those are going to be substantial and difficult too. The people who seem to be promising change are the ones sitting on the resources. Will they be able to impose things on themselves? It might take a few more rounds of disappointments, in parties, leaders and promises, for people to be able to reach there. But if Pakistan is to have a progressive future that is the direction it has to go in.

The writer is senior adviser, Pakistan, at Open Society Foundations, and Associate Professor of Economics, LUMS, Lahore.

By arrangement with Dawn, Islamabad.

Non-interference: Will Pakistan honour its word?
Syed Nooruzzaman

Islamabad seems to be working on highlighting its role in the region so that the US and its Western allies find it difficult to ignore it while devising any scheme for Af-Pak and the surrounding areas. This inference can be drawn from the deliberations at the trilateral summit involving Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran held last week in Islamabad. However, officially, it was sought to be conveyed to the outside world that the three participating countries were working on a strategy to tackle the situation after the US-led multinational troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.

The participants declared that the responsibility for managing regional affairs was of the countries in the region and not of those in the western part of the globe. It was also pointed out that any interference in the internal affairs of either of the three participating nations would not be tolerated.

No one can challenge the intentions expressed during the conference, but there are significant questions that come to one’s mind. Will Pakistan really keep itself away from the developments in Afghanistan in view of the stated policy of non-interference? Will Pakistan abandon the Taliban factions it has been propping up for a long time in search of illusive strategic depth in Afghanistan? And if Islamabad's links with the friendly Taliban remain intact, all the talk of non-interference in each other's internal affairs becomes meaningless.

Can Pakistan afford to dissociate itself from the Jundullah outfit of the Iranian Sunnis if Saudi Arabia expresses its desire not to do so? The Saudi-led Sunni lobby in the West Asia-Persian Gulf region will never approve of any plan to starve off the Jundullah, which has been used for containing Iran. Since Pakistan's economic lifeline is virtually in the hands of Riyadh after the US has started distancing itself from Islamabad, can Pakistan go ahead with a policy that does not suit Saudi interests?

Pakistan developing close relations with Iran will also come in the way of the Saudi grand plan that in the wake of Tehran acquiring nuclear weapon capability --- though a remote possibility — Riyadh may increase its assistance to Islamabad with a view to helping it to expand its nuclear weapon programme.

Thus, Pakistan seems to be faced with a serious challenge of how not to anger the Saudis while taking advantage of the offers from Iran in the shape of assured and increased gas and oil supplies from the Persian Gulf nation. Viewed against this backdrop, Pakistan's apparent readiness to make the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline a reality is questionable. That the US too is opposed to the IPI project, besides any plan to weaken the Jundullah in Iran, is another matter.

So far as Afghanistan is concerned, President Hamid Karzai, perhaps, believes that his country's cordial relations with Pakistan may help him in sending a strong message to the Taliban factions that they cannot afford to continue with their policy of non-cooperation with the present Kabul regime. Here it must be mentioned that the Taliban rebuffed Mr Karzai recently by denying that his government was in anyway associated with the US-Taliban dialogue process going on in Qatar. The Taliban denial came following Mr Karzai's statement in the course of a media interview that his government was involved in the Qatar dialogue for ending the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan.

It is also unthinkable that Iran will snap its links with the Shia outfits in Afghanistan at least so long as the US presence is there in Afghanistan. Iran's main problem today is how to meet the economic challenge it is faced with after the US and the European Union imposed their sanctions on it. That is why it has floated the idea of barter trade with Pakistan and other countries. Iran is prepared to increase its petroleum supplies to Pakistan and accept in return the goods and services it needs from Islamabad. The same scheme Iran has offered to India too and is ready to accept payments in the Indian and Pakistani currencies — the rupee.

It is true that the cause of peace in the region demands that no country should try to poke its nose in the internal affairs of any other sovereign nation. In the case of an extraordinary situation where humanitarian issues are involved, there are international institutions like the UN which should play their role.

However, there is the fear that in Afghanistan, after the international troop withdrawal will be over in 2014, both Pakistan and Iran may try to influence the course of events through their proxies, their protestations of non-interference notwithstanding. This must be prevented by having a strong mechanism for the purpose.