The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Criminals at large
Robbers strike in Kapurthala

The two incidents of robbery in two villages of Kapurthala district that left 16 persons injured have again shown how ordinary people are no longer safe in Punjab. The incidents in Kamalpur Bhatha and Mothanwala villages were particularly savage insofar as the robbers injured the victims seriously. The two attacks appear to have been carried out by the same gang which preyed on houses located at a distance from the villages.

While the police will maintain that such robberies are rare, there is no doubt that even one such case is enough to undermine people’s confidence, more so when it comes in the wake of an increasing number of incidents in which people take the law into their own hands, as a result of which even murders are committed. It was not too long ago that a father, a police officer, no less, was killed in full public view in Amritsar. He had confronted young men who were harassing his daughter. There have been other cases in which police officers have been victims of violence too. On the other hand, the heavy hand of the police could be seen in the video of the constable beating a woman complainant in Tarn Taran which went viral. It sparked revulsion wherever it was seen and even evoked a strong rebuke from the Supreme Court, which said: "We are bothered about what happens daily on the streets — helpless women are beaten up mercilessly."

There has been a rise in the level of violence in the run-up to the zila parishad polls, including cases of shooting, and accusations of political interference in the functioning of the police. The government must realise that the police needs to function independently and efficiently. The two robberies in Kapurthala district need to be investigated and the police should identify and arrest the criminals soon. The Punjab government and the police would be well advised to also look inwards and identify and address the causes that are allowing such lawlessness to take place.

Centralised entrance test is fine
More medical seats needed

For the first batch of admissions in JIPMER (Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education), Puducherry, sixty-six thousand candidates appeared for a total of 141 seats available for the MBBS course. The middle class aspiration for a professional degree, and the huge gap between the demand and supply chain for professional courses gave birth to a new regime of capitation fee in medical and engineering institutions. Private colleges charged exorbitant sums of money in the name of capitation fee to ensure a seat in these colleges, especially in Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra. And people paid, despite the fact that the money charged was illegal. As such seats were limited, they became out of bounds for the general category candidates in the few government colleges due to several reserved categories.

A number of sting operations exposed how the money-making racket worked in the name of running professional courses over the last decade. This awakened the system and a need was felt to reform the admission procedure in the private medical colleges that enjoy complete autonomy. The Medical Council of India then notified the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET), a centralised eligibility test, but the validity of NEET was challenged by a few private medical colleges. On December 13, 2012, in response to 115 petitions, the apex court gave an order by which it permitted various institutions and medical bodies to conduct the entrance examination for the courses but restrained them from declaring the results.

In order to safeguard students’ interests, the Supreme Court yesterday modified its previous order. It allowed private medical colleges and a consortium of colleges across the country to declare the results of the entrance examinations they conducted and on that basis make admissions to postgraduate, MBBS and dental courses for 2013-14. The court noted that it understood the urgent need for more medical professionals to be inducted in the system. As such, more seats need to be created in medical colleges to strengthen the weak spots of our over-burdened medical system.

Thought for the Day

A primitive artist is an amateur whose work sells. —Grandma Moses

ARTICLE

Expectations from Sharif
Real challenge lies in handling the Taliban
by S. Nihal Singh

Two aspects of the Pakistan election results are worthy of note. One is, of course, the return to power after 14 years of Mr Nawaz Sharif of the Muslim League (PML-N). The other is the hunger of the average Pakistani voter to have his say, despite threats and mayhem promised and often acted upon by the extremists.

No one can describe the elections as entirely free and fair because of a terror campaign aimed at the more liberal and secular parties such as the People’s Party of Pakistan, the National Awami Party and the MQM. They could campaign only furtively, if at all. On the other hand, the PML (N) and the newcomer PTI of the cricketer-turned politician Imran Khan had a free run.

Indeed, Mr Imran Khan’s electoral debut in national elections has been more than a footnote. He is nudging the PPP for second place and his call for “a new Pakistan” enthused many new young voters and considerable sections of women. His call for a “new Pakistan” was heard. He also did well in Khyber Pukhtunkhwa. Indeed, a regional split between the most populous Punjab province and the other provinces has been accentuated.

For Mr Sharif, his third stint as Prime Minister is a personal triumph because a man who was displaced in an Army coup, first imprisoned and then exiled for years in Saudi Arabia, is back in power. His nemesis, General Pervez Musharraf, was barred from contesting the election and is facing a string of serious charges in courts after his homecoming from self-exile. By the same token, Mr Sharif faces a mountain of challenges.

These challenges are primarily domestic, both in the economic field and in initiating a new policy towards the Taliban and in managing his relationship with the Army establishment. But the looming American withdrawal from Afghanistan next year imposes immediate priorities and he must balance the widespread anti-American sentiment in his country, particularly on the use of drones, with the obvious need for US money and support for receiving international financial help. If he makes the right moves towards India, it might help alleviate the acute power crisis crippling his country. In other words, Mr Sharif must hit the ground running.

The world will judge Mr Sharif’s opening gambit by how he approaches the Pakistani Taliban. It is all very well to pronounce, as he has, that the answer lies in talking to, not fighting, the extremists. There are several shades of the Taliban, a section rejecting the very concept of democracy Pakistani voters have chosen to endorse. While the Afghan Taliban have publicly refused to talk to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, dismissing him as a US puppet, how is the Pakistan variant to be induced to sit down to talk turkey?

Above all, Mr Sharif’s primary task is to build on the enthusiasm shown by voters in the democratic process, despite all the warts, to strengthen institutions. In a sense, the judiciary has been hyper-active, but other institutions a democratic state must rely on need to be strengthened. The civilian leadership’s equation with the Army establishment is still very much a work in progress and Mr Sharif’s own experience of the Kargil misadventure must serve as a warning. While the Army and its present chief, Gen Ashfaque Pervez Kayani, has allowed a change of leadership from one civilian dispensation to the other to happen for the first time, they are keen on guarding their dominant voice in relation to nuclear policy and in dealings with Afghanistan and India.

Mr Sharif has been making the right noises after proclaiming victory, promising to look ahead, rather than back, but his real test will come in being credible on the Pakistani Taliban and signalling a new beginning in putting his economic house in order. His strong suit is his reputation for getting things done, as a business magnate, and his centre-right leanings seem to chime with the mood of his people. He has sought to reach out to his political opponents, but Mr Imran Khan is less than satisfied with the conduct of the election.

There seems to be a realisation among large sections of Pakistanis that terrorist outfits encouraged and used by arms of the state such as the spy agency ISI and elements in the Army are biting the hand that has fed it. The difficulty is two-fold: you cannot suddenly put an end to the menace by turning off a tap as it were and there remain elements in the power centres still bent on employing extremists to needle India.

On balance, Mr Sharif’s return to power is a good omen, despite his somewhat ambiguous role over Kargil. For one thing, he is a known quantity and his basic instincts in seeking good trade relations with India predispose him towards a friendly trajectory. But in dealing with the complicated relationships in the post-divided subcontinent, there are no easy answers to questions burdened by the historical baggage peoples on the two sides of the dividing line carry. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh did well in congratulating Mr Sharif and inviting him to India to set the scene for the future.

Pakistanis will find it interesting to explore how deep the yearning for democratic processes is for their people. Those in the cities and towns in the youth group and women obviously are for a liberal dispensation. But how real is democracy’s urge for the bulk of the rural voters? Whatever their standing and circumstances, few would find arbitrariness in the conduct of those who govern attractive. But it would be foolish to underestimate the lure of extremist religious teachings and their ability to brainwash otherwise decent men and women. It is well established that madrasas of a certain kind breed tomorrow’s terrorists.

Mr Sharif’s challenges are as formidable as are the opportunities. He has had more than his share of suffering after he was inducted into politics by General Zia ul-Haq. If he can now become the redeemer for his country, he would have carved out an enviable place in his country’s history. Perhaps, he will be third time lucky.

MIDDLE

“Hunooz Dilli door ast!”
by Robin Gupta

During the launch of my book, close to the tomb of Humayun, in Delhi, I recalled India’s timeless civilization thus: my assignments in the IAS allowed me the opportunity to travel to distant outposts in this beautiful subcontinent and be of some use in alleviating distress in a sorrowing civilization amidst which I encountered the ruins of Nalanda, the oldest university in the world; the most ancient centre of learning in human history.

I then raised a toast to the imperial city of Delhi, my home town, capital of the Mughal Empire about which it has been said, “There never was and will never be another age quite like the Mughal. Everything about it was big, larger than life, extravagant. From the majesty of the emperor to the pomp of the Imperial Court; from the splendour of its architecture to the sublimity of its art and music; from debauchery and cruelty on an unprecedented scale to wisdom and tolerance rarely exhibited before; from the prosperity it engendered to the anarchy it left behind: in the history of the world, the Mughal Expire is rivalled only by the Roman.”

And strangely, I also recalled the words of Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar, who, on noticing a railway engine close to the royal palaces in the Red Fort, negotiating indestructible lines of steel, reportedly declared, “Is manhoos janwar ko dafa kar do — sada ke liye”. The poet in him had the clairvoyance to see the destruction of India’s civilization by the John Company; the drying up of the marble fountains in the imperial gardens, fashioned to cool the summer air.

And while referring to my career, I mentioned that I had dwelt upon the role of absurdity as well as the interchangeability of reality as driving forces in man’s quest for life; that in my public dealings, my interest in the theatre of life made it possible for me to understand aberrant, even criminal, behaviour and make allowance for apparently curious and cruel circumstance. Perhaps owing to my solitude, I listened carefully to petitioners and sympathetically went through their representations. For long years, I was posted as a quasi-judicial officer. During these postings, I often rejoiced on hearing a sigh of relief from the litigants, who stood before me, with fear-stricken eyes. I tried to understand rather than judge.

The book was launched by renowned author and columnist Rahul Singh. Rameshinder, former Chief Secretary Punjab, Nirupama Dutt, litterateur, and Manpreet Badal, former Finance Minister, were among the eminent speakers to address a large gathering of the city’s glitterati.

While my memoirs were being rapidly acquired and were being thoughtfully autographed, the guests were invited to cocktails; scotch, vodka, white wine and red, hors d’oeuvres and canapés that had been neatly laid out on beautiful white linen. But while pleasantries were bring exchanged by the old world, well-dressed thugs epitomising the new world, professional gate-crashers, in fact, advanced in single file and surrounded the victuals, and as a band of locusts would do, left behind a wasteland of empty platters and broken crockery.

Again I recalled Bahadur Shah Zafar, “Yeh majboor hath; yeh jhuki hui gardan!” (These helpless hands; this hapless vision.)

OPED PAKISTAN

TURNING POINT: Foreign policy overhaul
Pakistan is a country bedevilled by internal strife, a lot of which has roots in its relations with the neighbours. Raj Chengappa,
Editor-in-Chief, The Tribune Group of Newspapers, speaks to two foreign policy experts in Pakistan to find out what to expect from the new government regarding its approach to the US, Afghanistan and, more particularly, India. Excerpts:

‘Cross-border interference against Sharif’s policy’"
— Tariq Fatemi, former Pakistan diplomat and PML-N adviser

Tariq Fatemi, 69, is a former Pakistani career diplomat, currently working as a political analyst. He is a foreign policy ideologue of the PML-N and has helped draft the party manifesto.

What are the key foreign policy challenges the new government faces?

The ongoing war in Afghanistan, how it is resolved, what happens between now and 2014, when the Americans are scheduled to pullout — the conflict in Afghanistan and its future is directly relevant to Pakistan, in fact the entire region. The party believes that only a regional approach to this problem, with global powers taken into consideration, can work.

Of course, the peace process should be Afghan led; after all they determining their own destiny. But there should be no foreign interference in Afghan affairs, and that would be the objective of the new government. How to go about it would depend on consultations with Mr Karzai, who has already called Mr Sharif on telephone and expressed a desire for an early meeting and recognised Mr Sharif's role earlier in promoting reconciliation.

What is your opinion about the way the PPP government handled the Afghan policy, and how different would be the approach now?

The new government’s approach would be to give greater confidence to Kabul and remove any doubts they may have regarding our support to the peace process. That we have no favourites in Afghanistan. It would be a pro-active role that will emerge after consultation with the regional countries. No one-sided effort is going to be successful.

Mr Sharif has a deep personal interest (in the peace process) because he has a sense of authorship, having initiated the process that led to the Lahore Declaration.

Does that include India?

We believe Afghanistan as a sovereign state has the right to determine its relationship with other powers that wish to have a role in its economic and commercial growth. Peace and stability in Afghanistan will also be helpful in the restoration of peace in Pakistan, and if Indian economic assistance promotes that objective, it should be welcome.

How do you see Pakistan approaching the peace process with India?

In this issue, Mr Sharif has a deep personal interest because he has a sense of authorship, having initiated the peace process that resulted in the first ever official visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Pakistan. It led to the Lahore Declaration, which contained a road map for resolution of differences through dialogue. He wishes to pick up the thread where it was abandoned, and see that the relationship does not get caught up in perceptions. Common areas of concern have to be identified to push the process and make its benefits visible to the people of Pakistan and India. Unless we have ground support in both counties, this would not be possible.

Is Mr Sharif’s approach going to be different on the 26/11 Mumbai attack?

We are not yet aware of the details of the incident, as the government has not briefed us. But Mr Sharif is convinced that interference and intervention in each other’s affairs should come to an end, so that there is no suspicion or recrimination, and the dialogue process must be so instituted that it is not subject to the tremors in the relationship. As one of your leaders said, the process should continue uninterrupted.

On Kashmir, since 1999 there was a Musharraf process, there was talk of making borders irrelevant, and then there was a breakdown. What will be the approach now?

First let me point out we are not privy to whatever happened between India and Pakistan on the issue of Kashmir after October 1999. The PPP itself states they did not have much knowledge of what transpired during General Musharraf’s regime. We first have to educate ourselves from the documents available with institutions as to what happened. But Kashmir would need to be looked at because unless the issue is resolved, the desire of both countries to bring a qualitative change in the relations will not happen. However, the resolution should be through peaceful negotiations in which Kashmiris should be a party, as their destiny is to be decided. The approach is what Mr Sharif took in Lahore — that given the goodwill and mutual resolve on the two sides, it should be possible to consider measures that promote peaceful resolution of problems.

As I understand, it would not be a ‘Kashmir first’ policy.

No. We had decided many years ago that we have to identify the various issues and take them up at the same time. Obviously, it would not be possible to have equal and measurable progress on all issues.

Pakistan has been holding back on the Most Favoured Nation status for India. Is the new government going to move on this?

Mr Sharif and the PML-N believe trade opens up tremendous possibilities not only for economic benefits but also to create the right atmosphere for dialogue. So we are in favour of it, but we have yet to study whether it has been delayed because of politics or fear of non-tariff barriers in India.

Given the US drone attacks, questions of sovereignty, and the angst that Imran Khan and others have tried to whip up, what is going to be the approach to the US?

The US is the world’s biggest economy, and Pakistan would want to work closely with it. As for drone attacks, US officials have claimed these happened with the approval of the Pakistan government, which has denied this. So we do not know the reality. But the party has stated in its manifesto that a comprehensive review will take place of any concessions that may have been afforded to some powers that impinge on Pakistan's independence. The agreements will be brought before Parliament.

Is there going to be any move by Mr Sharif to have a Kargil commission to address concerns India might have on his role in permitting the attack?

I am not aware of the details, though I do know that Mr Sharif had absolutely nothing to do with the Kargil adventure. He was not in the know of it. He could countenance no such action at any time, and certainly not when he was reaching out to the Indian Prime Minister.

‘National strategy needed to deal with militancy’
— Ahmed Rashid, foreign policy expert

Ahmed Rashid, 65, is a journalist and best-selling foreign policy author of several books on Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia. Rashid’s 2000 book, "Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia," was translated into 22 languages and sold 1.5 million copies after the 9/11 attacks. His latest book, "Pakistan on the Brink: The Future of America, Pakistan, and Afghanistan," was published in 2012.

What are the key challenges that Nawaz Sharif faces?

Sharif has come in at a very difficult time. There are two immediate concerns he has to address. The first is getting an economic package from the IMF and initiating economic reforms. The second issue is improving relations with India. That will be welcomed in the region as well as the West. Sharif also has to lay the ground to tackle problems vis-a-vis drone attacks and Pakistan being seen as enemy by the US. Pakistan has to change policies and improve its image.

What has Sharif to do in Afghanistan, and how should he move on the US?

There has to be a national security strategy to deal with the Afghan Taliban, Pakistan Taliban and the whole group of extremists and Punjabis fighting in Kashmir. Essentially, he has to persuade the military to get the Taliban to Doha, to talk to the Americans and Karzai. For the first time, there is a strong civilian figure with a mandate. Zardari had essentially handed over all security issues to the army. Now the US as well the army has to reckon with a new player, and I hope Sharif will persuade everybody to talk.

At the moment the army controls foreign policy, but there would be pressure on it to accommodate civilian power. After all, Sharif has come with a mandate. The army also realises how bad the internal situation is

Do you see any difference in the Pakistan Army under General Kayani, or do they still want to have complete control of foreign policy in relation to Afghanistan?

At the moment they have control over the foreign policy, but there would be a lot of pressure on the army to accommodate civilian power. After all, Sharif has come with a mandate; it also depends on who is appointed Foreign Minister. Sharif’s initiative on India in the past 24 hours has shaken the subcontinent. I am sure he is talking to the army through back channels. He cannot go ahead without the army’s nod. The army also realises how bad the internal situation is.

What is your own assessment of General Kayani going when his retirement is due? How has he changed the approach of the Army?

He has not changed the approach of the army; the army has changed its own approach because of the internal situation—the losses it has taken from the Pakistan Taliban, terrorism, economic collapse, etc. Where will the army’s salaries come from? I hope there will be a new chief in a few months, and not of the Musharraf, Kayani or Kargil generation, and will be able to strike a better relationship with the Prime Minister.

What has been the attitude change of the Army?

I think the Army is looking for a solution to the Afghan problem and wants to help America and Karzai talk to the Afghan Taliban. Secondly, we have improved our relations with India in the past nine months, notwithstanding the setbacks from a few incidents of violence and terrorism in recent months. In the long term, the army did give Zardari the go-ahead to push trade and improve the visa regime. Sharif has a good start.

On Kashmir, Sharif firstly needs to dispel the notion that he was responsible for Kargil. The Kashmir problem has also not thrown up new solutions, with minor issues interrupting the peace process. Where can the breakthrough come from?

I am sure Sharif is going to ask the Indian Prime Minister to resume political dialogue on the differences, and Kashmir is No. 1. Indians are probably going to ask Pakistan to do something about Mumbai. I think for India 26/11 and the trial of those involved is more important than Kashmir. So there will have to be action on both fronts. India will have to accept the idea of Foreign Ministry-level talks on these issues. You can start with water, or something else, if not Kashmir. Pakistan will have to take steps too, like the trial of these people — but there has to reciprocity from the Indian side also so that it does not look one-sided or surrender for Pakistan.

You think the UPA currently is capable of doing that?

We are reading about India’s foreign policy courage. I think the Congress government has taken a very hard line on Pakistan. But I hope that in the last year before the Indian elections, the Congress might see it as a good opportunity to put a big feather in their cap, if they can be seen as developing a deeper relationship with Pakistan. They have done business with Sharif before.

You think a ‘Kargil commission’, as proposed by Sharif at one stage, is still a good idea?

I think we will see Kargil being quietly dropped from the agenda. It is too sensitive an issue in Pakistan and will revive the military-civilian conflict. I don’t think Sharif would want to revive it.

Sharif wanted to assert civil authority over the army, but he was thrown out in 1999. What do you see happening now?

We should not see this black-and-white in terms. This is an evolution, not revolution. The army has to gradually accept this. I would call it civilian sharing of decision-making in foreign policy. And a lot will depend on Sharif’s personal relationship with Kayani and the next army chief. The fundamental breaking point in Pakistan always has been the lack of civil-military relationship.

Is Pakistan still on the brink, as the title of your latest book suggests?

The result of the elections shows we will have a stable government, and not a weak coalition. It will not be subjected as much to blackmail by smaller partners. And if Sharif can do one or two major things in the first couple of months, I think we are on our way.

What is the big message from the elections this time?

The message is to the Taliban, military and to everyone else — that democracy works, and there is no other way to go except through democracy.